PDA

View Full Version : Dragonwrought



Kuzimu
2010-03-19, 10:22 PM
What exactly does being a dragonwrought kobold get you? Could I get a full list? I'm making one and I just want to know exactly what it's good for. All I know is that it can be used for some major cheese, but what else does it get you?
:smalltongue:

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-19, 10:26 PM
1: Access to the Greater Rite of Passage feat.

2: Theoretical access to Loredrake.

3: Anywhere from +1 to +3 bonus to all Mental stats (Drawback: Shorter life span, but you don't take the Physical penalties).

4: Polymorph/Alter Self shenanigans.

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-19, 10:28 PM
I do believe this describes it quite accurately. :smallwink:


Hey, do you wanna feel so powerful? Try DRAGONWROUGHT! A feat for people who need gratuitous amounts of stats. With all new flavors like DESERT KOBOLD. Kobold without CON minuses, it’s like adding awesome to an awesome storm. Sound the alarm, you’re gonna be UNCOMFORTABLY POWERFUL!

What’s that? You want FREE SORCEROR LEVELS? Well how about DRAGONWROUGHT + LOREDRAKE!!! Made with DRAGONS, true DRAGONS. Magic! AAAAAAAHHHHH! You’ll be good at it. It’s a feat for kobolds. Koboldfeet! These aren’t your dad’s puns, these are Magic puns. POWERpuns.

Magic, power, magic, power, +3 INT, +3 WIS, +3 CHA, MORE STATS THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR!!! You’ll be so powerful, the DM will be like, “Sloooooowwww dooowwwwnn.” And you’ll be like, “**** you!” and kick him in the face with your natural weapons!

You’ll have so much power, POWER! AAAAAHHHH! just running all the time. Power spellcasting! Power skillpoints! Power Will saves! Power multiattacking! Power AC! Power gaming! Power spawning babies! You’ll have so many babies. 400 babies.

Give DRAGONWROUGHT to your babies and they’ll be as good at everything! Make your babies abnormally powerful. They’ll be as powerful as DRAGONS. People will watch them dungeoncrawling and think they’re DRAGONS. They’ll kill as fast as DRAAGONS, in a fight with actual DRAGONS, and it’ll be a tie, and they’ll get hunted down by Dragonslayers!

Hey, go with the sure thing. Don’t gamble on your Power (snake eyes!). Try DRAGONWROUGHT, the feat that will make you (aaahhh!) POWER(aaahhh!).

Kuzimu
2010-03-19, 10:39 PM
Ahhhh...Where's the greater rite of passage feat?

Where's Loredrake?

Thank you.

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-19, 10:42 PM
Ahhhh...Where's the greater rite of passage feat?

Where's Loredrake?

Thank you.

1. Web Enhancement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060420a)

2. It's an Eberron sovereign archetype. All true dragons get them at no cost. Much debate about whether this works.

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-19, 10:57 PM
2. It's an Eberron sovereign archetype. All true dragons get them at no cost. Much debate about whether this works.

Hence the "Theoretical" part.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-19, 11:20 PM
Dragonwrought gets you access to things that require the Dragon type (and immunity to effects that only work on humanoids), as well as the removal of aging penalties and a couple of skill bonuses.

Greater Draconic Rite of Passage does NOT require Dragonwrought.

There is the whole thing about Sovereign Archetypes, which are awesome sets of abilities true dragons can take (Dragons of Eberron; one gives +2 levels of Sorc casting, another gives a free feat every four levels, etcetera), but there's a massive debate over whether Dragonwrought Kobolds actually are true dragons. I'm in the "no" camp.

Besides the whole Sovereign Archetype thing, the main awesome things are the free bonuses to Int/Wis/Cha if you start as Venerable, and the Dragon type.

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-19, 11:21 PM
Hence the "Theoretical" part.

I know. Just saying it again seeing as I think it's ridiculous and doesn't even work by RAW.

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-19, 11:25 PM
There is the whole debate about Sovereign Archetypes, which are awesome sets of abilities true dragons can take (Dragons of Eberron), but there's a massive debate over whether Dragonwrought Kobolds actually are true dragons. I'm in the "no" camp.

Personally, if a player came up to me and said he wanted to play a Jade Phoenix Mage Wyrm of War Dragonwrought Kobold, I'd let him. He's giving up Sorcerer spells known for Tiger Claw maneuvers, hardly an equal trade.

Loredrake? No. Wyrm of War? Sure. A few of the others? Possibly.

Greenish
2010-03-19, 11:33 PM
What exactly does being a dragonwrought kobold get you? Could I get a full list? I'm making one and I just want to know exactly what it's good for. All I know is that it can be used for some major cheese, but what else does it get you?
:smalltongue:The bonuses are three-fold:

You don't take aging penalties to physical stats, so feel free to get +3 on all mental stats. (Aging yourself to Venerable [or to Great Wyrm, since you use dragon age categories].)
Your creature type changes to dragon: feel free to enjoy alter self, hold person won't work on you etc.
You might be able to take sovereign archetypes from Eberron, which will be free bonuses for you. This one is often debated, and unless you're running a very high-power campaign your DM will probably disallow this.
Also, you get to be an awesome kobold.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-19, 11:34 PM
Personally, if a player came up to me and said he wanted to play a Jade Phoenix Mage Wyrm of War Dragonwrought Kobold, I'd let him. He's giving up Sorcerer spells known for Tiger Claw maneuvers, hardly an equal trade.

Loredrake? No. Wyrm of War? Sure. A few of the others? Possibly.

"Wyrm of War swaps sorc spells for maneuvers/stances" is a variant, the normal one is just a straight power upgrade to the tune of a feat every 4 levels and proficiency with all armour/weapons (not that the latter's much use).

And Jade Phoenix Mage is pretty powerful itself.

BenTheJester
2010-03-20, 12:11 AM
Don't forget epic feats pre-epic

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-20, 12:23 AM
"Wyrm of War swaps sorc spells for maneuvers/stances" is a variant, the normal one is just a straight power upgrade to the tune of a feat every 4 levels and proficiency with all armour/weapons (not that the latter's much use).

And Jade Phoenix Mage is pretty powerful itself.

Both are Sovereign Archtypes. Technically, Loredrake does have a tradeoff: Lowering your racial HD from d12s to d10s. The thing is that this usually won't apply to a Kobold.


JPM isn't that powerful really. It's considered above EK, but it is below Sky Mage and Abjurant Champion (both of which are +2 PrCs; JPM is +1).


Don't forget epic feats pre-epic

This one is just plain cheating though. Epic feats all have an additional requirement: 21HD. Old Dragons usually do have that many HD, the text in the Draconomicon was reminding DMs that HD counts as Class Levels for the purposes of Epic feats. It was just worded horribly.

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-20, 12:41 AM
Both are Sovereign Archtypes. Technically, Loredrake does have a tradeoff: Lowering your racial HD from d12s to d10s. The thing is that this usually won't apply to a Kobold.


JPM isn't that powerful really. It's considered above EK, but it is below Sky Mage and Abjurant Champion (both of which are +2 PrCs; JPM is +1).



This one is just plain cheating though. Epic feats all have an additional requirement: 21HD. Old Dragons usually do have that many HD, the text in the Draconomicon was reminding DMs that HD counts as Class Levels for the purposes of Epic feats. It was just worded horribly.

Sky Mage? I haven't heard of it. Where is it from?

Sinfire Titan
2010-03-20, 01:17 AM
Sky Mage? I haven't heard of it. Where is it from?

That isn't the full name; the first part starts with a Z and isn't a word I remember off-hand. 3.0 FR material though.

TheMadLinguist
2010-03-20, 01:55 AM
I know. Just saying it again seeing as I think it's ridiculous and doesn't even work by RAW.

Why not? It's obvious the designer of RotD's intent was to make dragonwrought kobolds true dragons for bragging rights.

"BOW BEFORE THE MIGHT OF A TRUE DRAGON, SUCKERS!"


It's just bad luck that some other designer working for eberron didn't know about this, and decided "hey, this game is dungeons and dragons, right? Let's have some variant campaign options for dragons."

magic9mushroom
2010-03-20, 03:21 AM
That isn't the full name; the first part starts with a Z and isn't a word I remember off-hand. 3.0 FR material though.

Zhentarim.


Why not? It's obvious the designer of RotD's intent was to make dragonwrought kobolds true dragons for bragging rights.

"BOW BEFORE THE MIGHT OF A TRUE DRAGON, SUCKERS!"


It's just bad luck that some other designer working for eberron didn't know about this, and decided "hey, this game is dungeons and dragons, right? Let's have some variant campaign options for dragons."

Please produce a reference to this effect.

Radiun
2010-03-20, 02:14 PM
You could alter self into a

Wyrmling White Dragon (Tiny)
AC: +2natural +2size)
Land 60ft, Burrow 30ft, Fly 150ft (120) (Average), Swim 60ft
And have fun having every movement type

or a

Wyrmling Shadow Dragon (Tiny)
AC: +7natural +2size
Land 80ft(60), fly 150ft(120) (average)

For a useful bump to AC. Not to mention an other +1 size bonus on attacks, being able to squeeze into anywhere a cat could, size bonuses to hide and such, blah blah blah :-P

Greenish
2010-03-20, 02:30 PM
, being able to squeeze into anywhere a cat couldKobolds can already do that.

Demons_eye
2010-03-20, 02:40 PM
Please produce a reference to this effect.

Would it matter? Intent is not RAW.

Eloel
2010-03-20, 02:42 PM
For a useful bump to AC. Not to mention an other +1 size bonus on attacks, being able to squeeze into anywhere a rat could, size bonuses to hide and such, blah blah blah :-P

Fixed for you

Radiun
2010-03-20, 03:06 PM
Fixed for you

Do you keep the Slight Build quality?

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 04:26 AM
Would it matter? Intent is not RAW.

Indeed it isn't. You still need a reference for that intent, because anyone can make any claims they want about intent.

Eloel
2010-03-21, 04:51 AM
Do you keep the Slight Build quality?

You do with wildshape afaik, not sure on poly

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-03-21, 04:54 AM
Indeed it isn't. You still need a reference for that intent, because anyone can make any claims they want about intent.

We can guess at the intent, which, to be fair doesn't really get us anywhere overall. That being said, I vaguely recall that the Eberron book with the variant dragon options came out roughly around the same time that Races of the Dragon gave us the wonderful little joy that is Dragonwrought. Although different people worked on the two books, it's possible that whoever worked on RotD did intend for Dragonwrought Kobolds to be True Dragons due to what the other team was working on at the time. Or not, as it's difficult to get intent from someone without either a statement from them or contacting them to get said statement.


So, anyone up for getting a hold of Gwendolyn F.M. Kestrel, Jennifer Clarke Wilkes, and Kolja Raven Liquette?:smalltongue:

JaronK
2010-03-21, 06:09 AM
Please produce a reference to this effect.

All throughout the Races of the Dragon section on Kobolds, actually. They repeatedly state stuff to this effect. The Draconic Rituals are about awaking the dragon within, for example, and their origin story is that they are the blood that spilled from the first True Dragons. Dragonwrought specifically makes them count as your choice of Chromatic or Metallic.

And RAW? A true dragon is "any dragon with age catagories" according to Dragons of Kyrnn (it's in the feats section, in a feat that gives you special abilities against true dragons). Draconomicon backs this one up on page 4 or 6 in the sidebar on what a dragon is (saying that the difference between less and true dragons is that true dragons get more powerful as they get older and have age catagories while lesser dragons don't get more powerful as they get older and lack age catagories). Dragonwrought Kobolds are Dragons with Age Catagories who get more powerful as they get older. QED.

As for epic feats, yes, Draconomicon specifically states that old dragons (old or older) qualify for epic feats without needing 21+ HD. So no, it's not cheating, it's raw.

With all that said, I would hope most DMs wouldn't allow the Sovereign Archtypes from Dragons of Eberron. They're overpowered on Kobolds, as they're designed to be on races with LA and HD.

JaronK

2xMachina
2010-03-21, 06:13 AM
It's probably:

Nope, Eberron doesn't have Dragonwrought Kobolds.
Nope, this is not Eberron, so no Sovereign Archtypes.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 06:13 AM
All throughout the Races of the Dragon section on Kobolds, actually. They repeatedly state stuff to this effect. The Draconic Rituals are about awaking the dragon within, for example, and their origin story is that they are the blood that spilled from the first True Dragons. Dragonwrought specifically makes them count as your choice of Chromatic or Metallic.

And RAW? A true dragon is "any dragon with age catagories" according to Dragons of Kyrnn (it's in the feats section, in a feat that gives you special abilities against true dragons). Draconomicon backs this one up on page 4 or 6 in the sidebar on what a dragon is (saying that the difference between less and true dragons is that true dragons get more powerful as they get older and have age catagories while lesser dragons don't get more powerful as they get older and lack age catagories). Dragonwrought Kobolds are Dragons with Age Catagories who get more powerful as they get older. QED.

As for epic feats, yes, Draconomicon specifically states that old dragons (old or older) qualify for epic feats without needing 21+ HD. So no, it's not cheating, it's raw.

With all that said, I would hope most DMs wouldn't allow the Sovereign Archtypes from Dragons of Eberron. They're overpowered on Kobolds, as they're designed to be on races with LA and HD.

JaronK

My post in the last thread on this is relevant and you never got a chance to reply before the thread was locked, so I'll just quote it.


I have not read Dragons of Krynn, but Dragons of Krynn information presumably only applies to Dragonlance and is overruled in general by the primary source Draconomicon (just as the ECS rules about clerics not falling are not applicable to campaigns outside Eberron). I have read the relevant passage in Draconomicon multiple times, so please do not call my opinion "uninformed" - though I acknowledge that it is my opinion as there is AFAIK no official statement on the subject.

The passage in Draconomicon says that a True Dragon must:

a) Be a Dragon. I do not contest in any way, shape or form, that a Dragonwrought Kobold is a Dragon. This is fine.

b) Must "become more powerful as they grow older". I contest that Dragonwrought Kobolds fulfill this requirement, since the official (as opposed to practical) representation of power is CR, and Dragonwrought Kobolds do not gain CR automatically as they age (while all other True Dragons I'm aware of do). Obviously, they can gain class levels, which would make them more powerful, but to rule that this ability fulfills the requirement would make all Dragons with an Int of 3 or higher True Dragons, an absurd conclusion, as it is in conflict with the list of Lesser Dragons in Draconomicon itself. Neither do they gain HD or ECL, the other two representations of power that I'm aware of. Hence Dragonwrought Kobolds are not True Dragons, since they do not fit the definition.

c) Must not "not advance through age categories", as this is part of the definition of a lesser dragon. Obviously, this is the flip side of b) above. Again, there are different interpretations of "advance through age categories". The interpretation of "has age categories" again has an absurd conclusion, since it again results in no Dragons that aren't immortal being Lesser Dragons. The interpretation of "advances in CR through age categories" is the best mirror to b) that I can see. Which means that a Dragonwrought Kobold does "not advance through age categories", rendering Dragonwrought Kobolds Lesser Dragons.



I do not "not want it to be true because it's overpowered", and apparently neither does Irreverent Fool, so please do not misrepresent my argument. I've posted at least two threads about cheesy character builds I've created, in fact. I simply do not believe that Dragonwrought Kobolds fulfill the requirements to take Sovereign Archetypes, as they are not True Dragons by RAW.

JaronK
2010-03-21, 06:33 AM
I have not read Dragons of Krynn, but Dragons of Krynn information presumably only applies to Dragonlance and is overruled in general by the primary source Draconomicon (just as the ECS rules about clerics not falling are not applicable to campaigns outside Eberron). I have read the relevant passage in Draconomicon multiple times, so please do not call my opinion "uninformed" - though I acknowledge that it is my opinion as there is AFAIK no official statement on the subject.

Well, I can only say that if you read it it's very clear that it's talking about True Dragons in general, not just ones in Dragonlance, much like how the Artificer has abilities that deal with magic items in general, not just ones that are found in Eberron. However, Draconomicon is indeed the primary source on dragons (though Races of the Dragon is the primary source on Kobolds, where it matters).


The passage in Draconomicon says that a True Dragon must:

a) Be a Dragon. I do not contest in any way, shape or form, that a Dragonwrought Kobold is a Dragon. This is fine.

Good. A bunch of people were sure that this wasn't a requirement. One of the counter arguments I saw was that everything counts as a True Dragon, ignoring the fact that you must first off be a dragon.


b) Must "become more powerful as they grow older". I contest that Dragonwrought Kobolds fulfill this requirement, since the official (as opposed to practical) representation of power is CR, and Dragonwrought Kobolds do not gain CR automatically as they age (while all other True Dragons I'm aware of do).

Getting older, a Dragonwrought Kobold gets +3 to all mental stats with no penalties. If you can't see this as getting "more powerful" I'm not sure what to say to you about that. You arbitrarily claim that CR, HD, and ECL are the only measures of power in the game, but I'm not sure why. I've seen no game rule to claim that. I'd imagine if you'd ask most DMs to just gain +3 to all mental stats for free, they'd say no as it's overpowered, unless they thought you needed more power. That strongly suggests getting +3 to half your stats is an increase in power.

And that's all they get for getting older.


c) Must not "not advance through age categories", as this is part of the definition of a lesser dragon. Obviously, this is the flip side of b) above. Again, there are different interpretations of "advance through age categories". The interpretation of "has age categories" again has an absurd conclusion, since it again results in no Dragons that aren't immortal being Lesser Dragons. The interpretation of "advances in CR through age categories" is the best mirror to b) that I can see. Which means that a Dragonwrought Kobold does "not advance through age categories", rendering Dragonwrought Kobolds Lesser Dragons.

Once again, you're making unsupported claims. CR is not what "advances" means in any rule situation. Some creatures (including most True Dragons) have the line "Advancement: By Age" but that doesn't seem to be the same thing as it doesn't say "by age catagory" and the requirement in Draconomicon does not say "Advancement" but rather "advances." If they meant "Advancement: By Age" I imagine they'd have said that. If you look up the definition of "advances" in the dictionary you'd see that one of the acceptable definitions is "moves forward through." Kobolds do indeed move forward through age categories as they age. Note that this would mean that all dragons with age catagories are True Dragons... which is fine, because it agrees with our other source on the topic (Dragons of Kyrnn).

JaronK

Gametime
2010-03-21, 11:52 AM
It's probably:

Nope, Eberron doesn't have Dragonwrought Kobolds.
Nope, this is not Eberron, so no Sovereign Archtypes.

I can see the argument for keeping setting-specific material out of games that aren't in that setting (so no Sovereign Archetypes outside of Eberron).

Keeping setting-neutral material out of specific settings is bizarre, though, especially since Dragonwrought Kobolds make perfect sense in a world where dragons are so important.

2xMachina
2010-03-21, 12:01 PM
They're also quite famous for killing dragonlike things that are not dragons.

Half-dragons are killed. I'd assume they'd not start making dragon kobolds either.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-21, 12:03 PM
They're also quite famous for killing dragonlike things that are not dragons.

Half-dragons are killed. I'd assume they'd not start making dragon kobolds either.

So a Kobold Dragonwrought would be the Ur Priest of dragons: Stealin' draconic power?

Gametime
2010-03-21, 12:04 PM
b) Must "become more powerful as they grow older". I contest that Dragonwrought Kobolds fulfill this requirement, since the official (as opposed to practical) representation of power is CR, and Dragonwrought Kobolds do not gain CR automatically as they age (while all other True Dragons I'm aware of do). Obviously, they can gain class levels, which would make them more powerful, but to rule that this ability fulfills the requirement would make all Dragons with an Int of 3 or higher True Dragons, an absurd conclusion, as it is in conflict with the list of Lesser Dragons in Draconomicon itself. Neither do they gain HD or ECL, the other two representations of power that I'm aware of. Hence Dragonwrought Kobolds are not True Dragons, since they do not fit the definition.

This is fairly absurd sophistry. CR is obviously a measurement of power, but that hardly makes it the only one. It is certainly not the most reliable one. Does it strike you as odd that when dragons age, they gain not only CR but also stats and abilities? Clearly, CR is an imperfect representation of the power gained through these stats and abilities. To claim that stat bonuses without increased CR are not an increase in power is ridiculous.


c) Must not "not advance through age categories", as this is part of the definition of a lesser dragon. Obviously, this is the flip side of b) above. Again, there are different interpretations of "advance through age categories". The interpretation of "has age categories" again has an absurd conclusion, since it again results in no Dragons that aren't immortal being Lesser Dragons. The interpretation of "advances in CR through age categories" is the best mirror to b) that I can see. Which means that a Dragonwrought Kobold does "not advance through age categories", rendering Dragonwrought Kobolds Lesser Dragons.

Age categories are specifically defined. Dragons have age categories. A dragonwrought kobold (actually, all kobolds) have age categories. Other creatures, which have not been described as having age categories, do not. I'm not sure why this is a difficult point to cede.

"Age categories" doesn't mean "gets older" and nothing else. It means "having categories corresponding to different ages."

Kobolds being true dragons is pretty silly, and I can't imagine many DMs allow it. That hardly changes the fact that the rules are entirely in favor of true dragonhood for Dragonwrought kobolds.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 04:42 PM
Getting older, a Dragonwrought Kobold gets +3 to all mental stats with no penalties. If you can't see this as getting "more powerful" I'm not sure what to say to you about that. You arbitrarily claim that CR, HD, and ECL are the only measures of power in the game, but I'm not sure why. I've seen no game rule to claim that. I'd imagine if you'd ask most DMs to just gain +3 to all mental stats for free, they'd say no as it's overpowered, unless they thought you needed more power. That strongly suggests getting +3 to half your stats is an increase in power.

And that's all they get for getting older.

We're talking Rules As Written, not What Happens In Practice. By common sense, yes, they do get more powerful, but you can't both use common sense AND finagle the rules' specific wording. That's doublethink. If you want to go by RAW, use RAW all the way. Including the bits that say:


A Challenge Rating is a measure of how easy or difficult a monster or trap is to overcome.


The effective character level (ECL) of a creature determines how powerful it is as a character or a cohort.

That second quote completely demolishes your argument. Dragonwrought Kobolds do not gain ECL with age, ECL determines how powerful they are, they do not get more powerful. Case closed.


Once again, you're making unsupported claims. CR is not what "advances" means in any rule situation. Some creatures (including most True Dragons) have the line "Advancement: By Age" but that doesn't seem to be the same thing as it doesn't say "by age catagory" and the requirement in Draconomicon does not say "Advancement" but rather "advances." If they meant "Advancement: By Age" I imagine they'd have said that. If you look up the definition of "advances" in the dictionary you'd see that one of the acceptable definitions is "moves forward through." Kobolds do indeed move forward through age categories as they age. Note that this would mean that all dragons with age catagories are True Dragons... which is fine, because it agrees with our other source on the topic (Dragons of Kyrnn).

JaronK

Using dictionary definitions in a RAW argument? That's brave.

The problem is that you end up with situations where dragons explicitly defined as Lesser Dragons end up as True Dragons by that interpretation.


This is fairly absurd sophistry. CR is obviously a measurement of power, but that hardly makes it the only one. It is certainly not the most reliable one. Does it strike you as odd that when dragons age, they gain not only CR but also stats and abilities? Clearly, CR is an imperfect representation of the power gained through these stats and abilities. To claim that stat bonuses without increased CR are not an increase in power is ridiculous.

The rules are ridiculous. They're still the rules.

By the rules, the Adamantine Horror is less dangerous than two 18 HD skeletons. Is it that way in practice? No. Is it still less powerful according to the rules? Yes.

By the rules, a 20th level fighter is more powerful than a Binder 1/Beholder Mage 4/Tainted Scholar 2/Metaphysical Spellshaper 3. Is it that way in practice? No. Is it still more powerful according to the rules? Yes.

The entire argument that they're True Dragons by RAW is sophistry. What do you expect me to use to shoot down sophistry?


Age categories are specifically defined. Dragons have age categories. A dragonwrought kobold (actually, all kobolds) have age categories. Other creatures, which have not been described as having age categories, do not. I'm not sure why this is a difficult point to cede.

"Age categories" doesn't mean "gets older" and nothing else. It means "having categories corresponding to different ages."

Actually, "Adult", "Middle Age", "Old", and "Venerable" are age categories as well. These are not defined for most things, but they are IIRC assumed to exist for monsters as well (they're just not given).

If you say that "advances through age categories" means "has age categories", then a Human Half-Dragon is just as much a True Dragon as a Dragonwrought Kobold. Assuming Wyverns age, so are they. Despite explicit RAW to the contrary.

"Advance" has a specific meaning in D&D, and when you start applying it differently, you end up with weird stuff.

Gametime
2010-03-21, 04:49 PM
Actually, "Adult", "Middle Age", "Old", and "Venerable" are age categories as well. These are not defined for most things, but they are IIRC assumed to exist for monsters as well (they're just not given).

If you say that "advances through age categories" means "has age categories", then a Human Half-Dragon is just as much a True Dragon as a Dragonwrought Kobold. Assuming Wyverns age, so are they. Despite explicit RAW to the contrary.

"Advance" has a specific meaning in D&D, and when you start applying it differently, you end up with weird stuff.

I don't recall ever seeing a rule that states monsters without explicit age categories have age categories. I don't recall ever seeing a rule that says "age" is the same as "age categories," either.

If you can direct me to such a rule, I'll of course retract my argument, but without some such evidence all you're really doing is equating "age" with "age category." They aren't the same thing.

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 04:56 PM
I don't recall ever seeing a rule that states monsters without explicit age categories have age categories. I don't recall ever seeing a rule that says "age" is the same as "age categories," either.

If you can direct me to such a rule, I'll of course retract my argument, but without some such evidence all you're really doing is equating "age" with "age category." They aren't the same thing.

Hmm...

You have a point.

Still. Dragonwrought Kobolds, according to the rules, do not get more powerful as they age. Making this point not as relevant.

JaronK
2010-03-21, 04:59 PM
We're talking Rules As Written, not What Happens In Practice. By common sense, yes, they do get more powerful, but you can't both use common sense AND finagle the rules' specific wording. That's doublethink. If you want to go by RAW, use RAW all the way. Including the bits that say:

That second quote completely demolishes your argument. Dragonwrought Kobolds do not gain ECL with age, ECL determines how powerful they are, they do not get more powerful. Case closed.

No, that second part does nothing but demonstrate that ECL is A measure of power... it does not say it's the only measure of power. ECL is a measure of power. So is CL. But they are not the ONLY measure of power. That is what you have failed to prove, and it further more makes no sense as you yourself acknowledge.

Your stats are part of your power level. Free bonuses to stats are increases in power. You acknowledge this too. The definition for True Dragons does not say "increases in CL as it increases in age." It says "gets more powerful as it gets older." Gaining +3 to all mental stats and access to epic feats is an increase in power.


Using dictionary definitions in a RAW argument? That's brave.

It's accurate. And it's the only interpretation that matches up the two listed definitions of True Dragons in a way that makes sense. No other definition does that.


The problem is that you end up with situations where dragons explicitly defined as Lesser Dragons end up as True Dragons by that interpretation.

Demonstate one, please. We've been through this before. Demonstrate one dragon that is "explicitly defined as a Lesser Dragon" that ends up as a True Dragon by the interpretation that when Dragons of Kyrnn says "a True Dragon is a dragon that has age catagories" and Draconomicon says "A Lesser Dragon does not advance through age catagories"," they mean that the difference between a True and Lesser Dragon is age catagories.

In fact, the contradiction you claim only occurs if you claim D. Kobolds are Lesser Dragons. Claiming that makes them both True (by the Dragons of Kyrnn definition), and not Lesser (by the Draconomicon definition) and yet somehow still Lesser.


The entire argument that they're True Dragons by RAW is sophistry. What do you expect me to use to shoot down sophistry?

No, it's a literal reading of the rules. There is no way to read Draconomicon and Dragons of Krynn on the topic that actually matches up all the rules without contradictions without ruling that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons. No matter what you do, you're going to end up with rediculous contradictions if you rule otherwise.


Actually, "Adult", "Middle Age", "Old", and "Venerable" are age categories as well. These are not defined for most things, but they are IIRC assumed to exist for monsters as well (they're just not given).

Actually, they're not assumed that, unless you've got a ruling otherwise. Those particular groupings are for PC classed characters only. Check out the DMG on the topic. Meanwhile, we all know what the Age Categories in question here are: the Age Category tables that Kobolds are specifically pointed out as having (and that they're called out as being special for having in Races of the Dragon).


If you say that "advances through age categories" means "has age categories", then a Human Half-Dragon is just as much a True Dragon as a Dragonwrought Kobold.

False. Half Dragons do not have Age Categories in the way that True Dragons have Age Categories... that's a special rule found only in True Dragons Furthermore, they get weaker more than they get more powerful as they get older (-6 to all physical stats, +3 all mental stats). Dragonwrought Half Dragon Kobolds do, though.


Assuming Wyverns age, so are they. Despite explicit RAW to the contrary.

False assumption. Wyverns do not have age categories.

It's really quite simple. Look at a creature. Is it a dragon? Good. Now, does it have a specific "Age Categories" table somewhere in the entry? Awesome. If both are true, it's a True Dragon. It also has to get more powerful as it gets older of course, but all dragons that meet the first two qualifications meet the last. Notice that Human Half Dragons and Wyverns lack the second qualification.


"Advance" has a specific meaning in D&D, and when you start applying it differently, you end up with weird stuff.

Except that True Dragons do not have "Advancement: By Age Catagory." If we assume "advance through age catagories" means that, then nothing is a True Dragon. Most True Dragons instead have "Advancement: By Age" which is something else entirely.

JaronK

JaronK
2010-03-21, 05:01 PM
Still. Dragonwrought Kobolds, according to the rules, do not get more powerful as they age. Making this point not as relevant.

Actually from Dragons of Krynn we get that Age Catagories is sufficient. Also, ruling that gaining +3 to all mental stats is not growing "more powerful" leads to a contradiction, since it requires D. Kobolds to be both lesser and true by the Draconomicon definition. As written, that's impossible. If your logic leads to a contradiction, your logic is false. Since you yourself have admitted that Kobolds do grow more powerful (you just think that ECL is the sole measure of power by RAW for some reason) as they age, that would be the obvious logical flaw.

JaronK

CrazedPachyderm
2010-03-21, 05:06 PM
I don't recall ever seeing a rule that states monsters without explicit age categories have age categories. I don't recall ever seeing a rule that says "age" is the same as "age categories," either.

If you can direct me to such a rule, I'll of course retract my argument, but without some such evidence all you're really doing is equating "age" with "age category." They aren't the same thing.

PHB page 73, or the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/disguise.htm). It describes the disguise check modifier for being disguised as a different age category where it defines the age categories to be young, adulthood, middle age, old, and venerable.

Gametime
2010-03-21, 05:20 PM
PHB page 73, or the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/disguise.htm). It describes the disguise check modifier for being disguised as a different age category where it defines the age categories to be young, adulthood, middle age, old, and venerable.

Well, I stand half-corrected. Apparently PCs (and PC races) do have age categories.

Non-PC races, of course, still lack explicit age categories, since we have no idea what distinguishes (say) a venerable wyvern from an adult. And since non-dragons lose physical stats as they age, the argument for them gaining power doesn't work in the same way it does as for Dragonwrought kobolds.

JaronK
2010-03-21, 05:22 PM
PHB page 73, or the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/disguise.htm). It describes the disguise check modifier for being disguised as a different age category where it defines the age categories to be young, adulthood, middle age, old, and venerable.

The question then becomes, which is the primary source on dragons and age categories? The PHB, which in the disguise section refers to them as age categories, or the Monster Manual, Draconomicon, and Races of the Dragon, which refer to specific draconic age categories in every true dragon entry? Which age categories do you think Dragons of Krynn and Draconomicon are referring to? Note that one interpretation means that Human Half Dragons are True Dragons (as are all other PC Dragons) but that since they don't get more powerful as they get older they're also Lesser, and the other means that only Dragonwrought Kobolds and the dragons listed in Draconomicon are True.

One interpretation leads to nonsensical claims and contradictions, the other does not.

JaronK

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-21, 06:16 PM
I don't get how getting +3 to all mental stats is becoming more powerful. A Kobold barbarian isn't getting much use out of being smarter, more insightful, and more charismatic. ECL however is defined as power. Power defined by the rules of the game vs. situational power. What do you think they were referring to?

Starbuck_II
2010-03-21, 06:19 PM
More Int adds more skill points even to a Barbarian. More Wisdom adds more Will save providing more defense to mental attacks.
Plus, isn't Knowledge power?

I'd say everyone can benefit from +3 mental.

Lycanthromancer
2010-03-21, 06:20 PM
I don't get how getting +3 to all mental stats is becoming more powerful. A Kobold barbarian isn't getting much use out of being smarter, more insightful, and more charismatic. ECL however is defined as power. Power defined by the rules of the game vs. situational power. What do you think they were referring to?And if that same barbarian's brother (with the exact same stats) got an additional 7 billion gp in magic items, would he be stronger, weaker, or the same (remembering, of course, the fact that he has the same ECL)?

In the kobold's case, it's an actual part of his character (and for spellcasters and most tier 3s, and any character with uses for skill points and/or mental skill, as well as Will saves, those +'s translate to actual, measurable power).

Tinydwarfman
2010-03-21, 06:29 PM
More Int adds more skill points even to a Barbarian. More Wisdom adds more Will save providing more defense to mental attacks.
Plus, isn't Knowledge power?

I'd say everyone can benefit from +3 mental.

Obviously he benefits somewhat from it, but what would you say is a stricter definition of raw power, ECL or mental stats? Technically everything become more powerful as they advance through age categories. They start out young, and advance to Adulthood as they age, where they pick up class levels and increase their ECL. It only happens once though...

Demons_eye
2010-03-21, 06:50 PM
Obviously he benefits somewhat from it, but what would you say is a stricter definition of raw power, ECL or mental stats? Technically everything become more powerful as they advance through age categories. They start out young, and advance to Adulthood as they age, where they pick up class levels and increase their ECL. It only happens once though...

Well no. If a human lives to be 100 hes got -6 to all physical stats and +3 to all mental. DW kobold gains the +3 but not the penalties. I would say getting old sucks unless your a DW kobold.

Also about ECL. If I make a template of BADASS: +10 to all stats skill check and saves +0 CR and add it to a human wizard hes better then his brother who has the same starting stats, spells, skills, even though they are ECL 1.

JaronK
2010-03-21, 07:23 PM
I don't get how getting +3 to all mental stats is becoming more powerful.

If it's not more powerful at all, would you as a DM mind giving +100 to all mental stats to any character who wants it, even pure melees? No? Wouldn't that be overpowered? Thus, would giving just +3 still be an increase in power?

And is access to Epic Feats an increase in power too?


A Kobold barbarian isn't getting much use out of being smarter, more insightful, and more charismatic.

+1 or 2 (depending on whether the starting stat was even or odd) to will saves, skill points per level, and a variety of skills. Is that a huge increase? No. Is it an increase? Absolutely. Of course, he also qualifies for Epic Toughness as a feat if he's at least Old. If he's a first level Barbarian, that's pretty awesome.


ECL however is defined as power.

But power is not defined as ECL.


Power defined by the rules of the game vs. situational power.

Power is not defined anywhere, actually. All we have is that ECL is one measurement of power (CR is a completely different one, for example, and so is wealth).


What do you think they were referring to?

Anything that makes a character demonstrably more powerful in an absolute sense. A creature that gets a bonus to any stat without any penalty is more powerful. How much more powerful? Depends on the creature and the stat.

It should be noted that the place where it's noted that Dragonwrought removes aging penalties is actually in the very same table where they give Age Categories. They actually give every single qualifier for D. Kobolds as True Dragons in one handy table, right at the start of the Kobold section. It's almost like they were being as clear as possible. Remember also that if Dragonwrought Kobolds have age categories and do not get more powerful as they get older then they are both Lesser and True Dragons. That is an impossible situation according to Draconomicon. If your logic leads to a contradiction, your logic is flawed.

JaronK

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 07:31 PM
Power (as defined by the rules) =/= Power (as defined by how much a character or monster can accomplish).

The quote I provided does not say that ECL measures their power. It says that ECL DETERMINES their power.

That is, your power, according to the rules, in D&D, is entirely described by your ECL. All ECL 1 characters are equal in power. All ECL 20 characters are equal in power.

There is no room for interpretation here. Power = ECL = unchanged as a DwK ages.



Because something is "more powerful" in common parlance does not mean that it is considered to be an "increase in power" for the purposes of the rules. Power (as defined in the rules) is determined by ECL. Claiming otherwise is equivalent to the Commoner Railgun - you can't pick and choose where you want to follow the rules and where you don't.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-21, 07:34 PM
That is, your power, according to the rules, in D&D, is entirely described by your ECL. All ECL 1 characters are equal in power. All ECL 20 characters are equal in power.

There is no room for interpretation here. Power = ECL = unchanged as a DwK ages.



Because something is "more powerful" in common parlance does not mean that it is considered to be an "increase in power" for the purposes of the rules. Power (as defined in the rules) is determined by ECL. Claiming otherwise is equivalent to the Commoner Railgun - you can't pick and choose where you want to follow the rules and where you don't.

But that isn't exactly true.
A Barb 20 is less powerful in most cases than a Wiz 20. They aren't equal in power.
Why is commoner railgun not following rules?

JaronK
2010-03-21, 07:40 PM
Power (as defined by the rules) =/= Power (as defined by how much a character or monster can accomplish).

The quote I provided does not say that ECL measures their power. It says that ECL DETERMINES their power.

That is, your power, according to the rules, in D&D, is entirely described by your ECL. All ECL 1 characters are equal in power. All ECL 20 characters are equal in power.

There is no room for interpretation here. Power = ECL = unchanged as a DwK ages.

Gotcha. So in your interpretation of RAW, a Human with 10s in all stats has the same amount of power as a human with 100s in all stats, all other things being equal, and you can see no room for any other interpretation. Nothing but ECL represents an increase in power.

As such, D. Kobolds are neither Lesser Dragons (since they have Age Categories) nor True Dragons (they don't get more powerful as they get older) but they're also True Dragons (Dragons of Krynn, they have age categories). And you cannot see that there might be a flaw with that interpretation?

Luckily the DMG completely disagrees with your interpretation of what power is. Page 135 in fact, says this:

"As the campaign progresses, the PCs get more powerful through level advancement, the acquisition of money and magic items, and the establishment of their reputation."

That would be in the "Character Power Levels" section of the DMG (how appropriate). It seems the DMG finds many things measure power, including money and magic items and even reputation. A character who gets an extra Headband of Intellect (+2 Int) is, by the DMG, more powerful than one without (all other things being equal).

So, are you going to ignore that part of the DMG, which directly contradicts your claim that ECL is the only measurement of power? In doing so, are you going to make a situation where Kobolds do not match up to any category of Dragon in the Draconomicon? If so, I'll use your own quote on that:


you can't pick and choose where you want to follow the rules and where you don't.

JaronK

magic9mushroom
2010-03-21, 07:41 PM
But that isn't exactly true.
A Barb 20 is less powerful in most cases than a Wiz 20. They aren't equal in power.

According to the rules, they are. The rules definition is the only permissible one to use with other rules.


Why is commoner railgun not following rules?

Because no matter how far it's traveled, the last commoner still can't throw it very far.

Gametime
2010-03-21, 07:43 PM
Power (as defined by the rules) =/= Power (as defined by how much a character or monster can accomplish).

The quote I provided does not say that ECL measures their power. It says that ECL DETERMINES their power.

That is, your power, according to the rules, in D&D, is entirely described by your ECL. All ECL 1 characters are equal in power. All ECL 20 characters are equal in power.

There is no room for interpretation here. Power = ECL = unchanged as a DwK ages.



Because something is "more powerful" in common parlance does not mean that it is considered to be an "increase in power" for the purposes of the rules. Power (as defined in the rules) is determined by ECL. Claiming otherwise is equivalent to the Commoner Railgun - you can't pick and choose where you want to follow the rules and where you don't.

Technically, ECL is only an absolute measure of power for characters and cohorts, based on that quote.

I therefore propose that only kobold non-cohort NPCs are true dragons, and thus Dragonwrought cheese may be legally used only by the DM. You could even establish an order of mighty Dragonwrought kobold knights dedicated to preventing evil kobolds from seeking godhood through the power of Pazuzu!

JaronK
2010-03-21, 07:43 PM
The rules definition is the only permissible one to use with other rules.

Good. In that case, now that I've showed you what "the rules definition" is in the section on what "Character Power Levels" are in the DMG, we can stop this nonsense about ECL being the only measure of power, right?

JaronK