Dragonwrought Kobolds: True Dragons? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

mootoall

2011-09-20, 04:34 PM

The Dragonwrought feat says that the kobold who takes it is a dragon instead of a humanoid.
The MM1 says that true dragons are either metallic or chromatic (and a dragonwrought kobold is one of these).

There are other factors too but my brain isn't working because I'm sick and I can't voice them properly.

Can somebody clarify this for me? Do dragonwrought kobolds gain breath weapons, natural attacks, blindsense, and the like because they're dragons? Can a dragonwrought kobold advance its dragon hit dice instead of class hit dice and gain d12 HD with good saves, full BaB, and 6+Int skill points?

There's a difference between Traits and Features of being a dragon. Features, such as 12 sided HD, all good saves and full BAB rely on having Dragon HD, which Dragonwrought Kobolds do not have. Traits, meaning immunities, proficiencies and vision, rely only on having the Dragon type. Everything else is specific to the monster entry.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 04:40 PM

Yes, but can a dragonwrought kobold choose to advance its dragon hit dice in order to gain the full BaB and saves instead of taking class levels?

Raendyn

2011-09-20, 04:41 PM

In short & RAI,

"NO they are not true dragons"

MM has a monster entry "Dragons,True" since dragonwrought doesn't say it belongs in this category it is not.

however, as i have been told before in this threads a weird interpretation of the definition of "True Dragon" from draconomicon, can make them count as true dragons. This of course requires a DM that has poor judgement of the rules & also requires heavy rules lawering. Also note that this also takes the fluf inside the mechanics, so it basicaly needs even more rules lawering...

mootoall

2011-09-20, 04:46 PM

Yes, but can a dragonwrought kobold choose to advance its dragon hit dice in order to gain the full BaB and saves instead of taking class levels?

No, it cannot. Advancing monster HD is not something that can be done by a Player Character.

"Increased Hit Dice

Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape, and nonintelligent monsters, can advance by increasing their Hit Dice. Creatures with increased Hit Dice are usually superior specimens of their race, bigger and more powerful than their run-of-the-mill fellows."

"Increasing Hit Dice

As its Hit Dice increase, a creature’s attack bonuses and saving throw modifiers might improve. It gains more feats and skills, depending on its type, as shown on Table: Creature Improvement by Type.

Note that if a creature acquires a character class, it improves according to its class, not its type."

Both from the SRD's section on Improving Monsters.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 04:50 PM

Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape, and nonintelligent monsters, can advance by increasing their Hit Dice. Creatures with increased Hit Dice are usually superior specimens of their race, bigger and more powerful than their run-of-the-mill fellows.

Note that a dragonwrought kobold isn't "humanoid". It's a dragon with the reptile subtype.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 04:53 PM

"Intelligent creatures that are not humanoid in shape,"

"Note that if a creature acquires a character class, it improves according to its class, not its type."

Note that a dragonwrought kobold isn't "humanoid". It's a dragon with the reptile subtype.

It's still shaped like a kobold.

Toliudar

2011-09-20, 04:53 PM

It doesn't say "of the Humanoid type", but "humanoid in shape". Which kobolds are.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 04:55 PM

But that's so incredibly vague.

Edit: What about giants? Don't they typically advance by monster HD? Try telling me a giant isn't "humanoid in shape".

mootoall

2011-09-20, 04:57 PM

But that's so incredibly vague.

Edit: What about giants? Don't they typically advance by monster HD? Try telling me a giant isn't "humanoid in shape".

It's not. It's shaped like a giant, which is a monstrous humanoid.

Scratch that. Check out the giant entries in the SRD. They *do* advance by character class.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 05:03 PM

It's not. It's shaped like a giant, which is a monstrous humanoid.

A humanoid is something that has an appearance resembling a human being.

You can find other definitions if you like, but the one I go by is "a head, two (or sometimes more) limbs at the upper end of the torso, two legs at the bottom of the torso". Giants look exactly like large humans, just in different colors.
The description for the storm giant in the MM1 even says "This giant resembles a well-formed human...", and the description of the cloud giant says "This giant has a muscular humanoid build...".

Edit: Darn it, the MM1 giants do "advance by character class". I guess the ones in the books are Warriors?

mootoall

2011-09-20, 05:05 PM

You can find other definitions if you like, but the one I go by is "a head, two (or sometimes more) limbs at the upper end of the torso, two legs at the bottom of the torso". Giants look exactly like large humans, just in different colors.
The description for the storm giant in the MM1 even says "This giant resembles a well-formed human...", and the description of the cloud giant says "This giant has a muscular humanoid build...".

And the entry also says "Advancement: By character class"

Edit: Actually, as put in the book they have no character classes. They just start with that many Giant type HD. If you want to *advance* them, it is by character class.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 05:11 PM

Well...I have a paper to write or I would go through every single book I own tonight in order to find something human in shape that advances by monster HD.

Never mind; while I was waiting for my 60 second cool-down period between posts to pass I cracked open the MM1 again.
Angels. Angels are human-shaped. "A beautiful, extremely tall, humanlike creature..." or "This creature resembles a massively muscular and tall human..." or "This creature resembles a towering, powerfully built human...", and angels advance by racial hit dice.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 05:20 PM

Toliudar

2011-09-20, 05:21 PM

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 05:23 PM

Right now I'm trying to figure out why they can't. I don't personally want to try this, but a friend was going to play a dragonwrought kobold with only racial hit dice.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 05:25 PM

Right now I'm trying to figure out why they can't. I don't personally want to try this, but a friend was going to play a dragonwrought kobold with only racial hit dice.

Because they're specifically called out as being unable to, as they're humanoid in shape, and the monster entry doesn't show them as having racial hit dice to advance at any rate.

Jack_Simth

2011-09-20, 05:26 PM

Noparlpf, it seems like you're twisting every way you can to allow a kobold to advance dragon hit dice, although I would certainly argue that RAI work against this. Finding one example of a humanoid-shaped creature that advances by hit dice doesn't suggest that any humanoid-shaped creature can advance by racial dice.
Well... really, even Dragon or Outsider hit dice (the cream of the crop, as far as racial hit dice go) are not really worth class levels. It's not going to harm game balance to let a dragonwrought kobold take "levels" in dragon hit dice, even if it's not strictly against the rules.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 05:28 PM

I still think "humanoid in shape" is poorly defined, but okay.

I'd also kind of like to see someone arguing that dragonwrought kobolds are true dragons just because I've never seen the argument about the Draconomicon before and would like to see it shot down properly.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn

2011-09-20, 05:28 PM

rofl?

obvious tro

mootoall

2011-09-20, 05:30 PM

Well... really, even Dragon or Outsider hit dice (the cream of the crop, as far as racial hit dice go) are not really worth class levels. It's not going to harm game balance to let a dragonwrought kobold take "levels" in dragon hit dice, even if it's not strictly against the rules.

Completely agree here, as well. I'd always rather have Warblade 1 than Dragon HD 1.

I still think "humanoid in shape" is poorly defined, but okay.

I'd also kind of like to see someone arguing that dragonwrought kobolds are true dragons just because I've never seen the argument about the Draconomicon before and would like to see it shot down properly.

It's something silly about "If it gains power as it ages, and has dragon age categories, it's a dragon." RAW correct, RAI silly, and too abusable.

Drelua

2011-09-20, 05:40 PM

It seems to me that advancing by Dragon HD would be really easy to abuse. Remember, it takes two Dragon or Outsider HD to go up a CR, their max skill ranks would shoot up, and at CR 10, with 20 HD, they could start taking non-associated class levels, and the first 10 would count as +1/2 a CR each. He'd also have a tonne of HP and gain feats at twice the normal rate, though the lack of class features would probably make it okay if he left the thing about non-associated class levels out of it. Although if he took a bunch of cross-class skills, his max would be roughly the same as it would be with the normal amount of HD for his CR. The ability point every four HD would come every 2 CR though, which could be problematic, especially if he finds a fairly SAD way to build his character. I could be wrong about all this, but I think the DM should consider it carefully before deciding whether to allow it or not.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 05:43 PM

Drelua

2011-09-20, 05:46 PM

CR has nothing to do with ECL. The ECL will always be 1 ECL: 1 HD, and require regular XP gain.

Oh, well then he'd be screwing himself over. He'd be like a ranger with no class features, spells or many class skills and a better will save. I always hated how CR can be so far from ECL, I had forgotten about that.

Raendyn

2011-09-20, 06:02 PM

It's something silly about "If it gains power as it ages, and has dragon age categories, it's a dragon." RAW correct, RAI silly, and too abusable.

That's what I said, it's ridiculous...

Oh, well then he'd be screwing himself over. He'd be like a ranger with no class features, spells or many class skills and a better will save. I always hated how CR can be so far from ECL, I had forgotten about that.

I smell Dragon Archetype Abuse from Eberron.
Also I ave seen this before, Player arguing that he must take Sorc spellcasting progresion etc blah blah..

mootoall

2011-09-20, 06:12 PM

That's what I said, it's ridiculous...

I smell Dragon Archetype Abuse from Eberron.
Also I ave seen this before, Player arguing that he must take Sorc spellcasting progresion etc blah blah..

Dragon Archetype abuse can happen without Dragon HD.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 06:39 PM

Nah, this guy's a casual gamer. He wants to play a dragonwrought kobold with dragon hit dice a. for fun and b. for RP opportunities.

Cog

2011-09-20, 06:55 PM

Nah, this guy's a casual gamer. He wants to play a dragonwrought kobold with dragon hit dice a. for fun and b. for RP opportunities.
I fail to see what RP opportunities not having class features provides over having class features.

Keld Denar

2011-09-20, 07:01 PM

It would qualify you for a few things. Awaken Frightening Presense and Awaken Spell Resistance, IIRC. Still, nothing to write home about.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 07:03 PM

You can play a commoner and have interesting RP opportunities. RP doesn't have to be designed around class features.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 07:06 PM

I suppose RPing "Oh god there's a dragon run away no wait there's a housecat in the way *schlikt*" is fun to roleplay. [/Snark]

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-20, 07:09 PM

The known varieties of true dragons (as opposed to other creatures that have the dragon type) fall into two broad categories: chromatic and metallic. The chromatic dragons are black, blue, green, red, and white; they are all evil and extremely fierce. The metallic dragons are brass, bronze, copper, gold, and silver; they are all good, usually noble, and highly respected by the wise.

All true dragons gain more abilities and greater power as they age. (Other creatures that have the dragon type do not.) They range in length from several feet upon hatching to more than 100 feet after attaining the status of great wyrm. The size of a particular dragon varies according to age and variety.

First we find that the 'known varieties' fall into the chromatic and metallic categories, but this is not an all-inclusive list, as we have gem dragons in MM2, various other types in the Draconomicon and Dragons of Faerun, etc. The list of 'known varieties' was indeed all-inclusive at the time the Monster Manual was first published, but since then there have been many more outside of those two categories added.

Then you have the second paragraph, which basically says that true dragons are those who advance in power as they age according to the age categories, while other creatures that just have the dragon type do not. Advancing according to the age categories is the deciding factor in whether or not a creature of the dragon type is a true dragon. Dragonwrought knobolds do advance according to age categories, thus they fit this criteria for being considered true dragons.

Finally, you have the following from the Draconomicon, page 4:

THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF DRAGONS
In the D&D game, the term “dragon” encompasses a number
of different creatures, some of which bear little resemblance to
the great flying creatures with breath weapons that we commonly
think of as dragons.

For the most part, this book concerns itself with the ten
varieties of true dragon described in the Monster Manual—
the five chromatic dragons (black, blue, green, red, white) and
the five metallic dragons (brass, bronze, copper, gold, silver).
True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful
as they grow older.

A number of other true dragons are described in Chapter 4
of this book. In addition, Appendix 2: Index of Dragons provides
a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in
official sources.

Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance
through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons (which
should not be taken to mean that they are necessarily less
formidable than true dragons).

The three kinds of lesser dragon described in the Monster
Manual are the dragon turtle, the pseudodragon, and the
wyvern. Chapter 4 of this book contains a number of descriptions
of other lesser dragons, and Appendix 2 lists every lesser
dragon that has been described in a DUNGEONS & DRAGONS rulebook
or accessory.
As you can see, advancement according to age categories is the only factor which determines whether or not a creature is a true dragon. Note that its mention of the all-inclusive list of true dragons is only a list of those appearing before the Draconomicon was published.

noparlpf

2011-09-20, 07:11 PM

Exactly what aspect of the dragonwrought kobold advances through age categories?

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-20, 07:16 PM

Exactly what aspect of the dragonwrought kobold advances through age categories?

Races of the Dragon page 39, that they advance according to age categories is enough to qualify, regardless of how little power they gain at any given age category. (They do gain mental ability score increases at Very Old, Ancient, and Great Wyrm, thus they do increase in power as they age.)

lesser_minion

2011-09-20, 08:06 PM

As you can see, advancement according to age categories is the only factor which determines whether or not a creature is a true dragon. Note that its mention of the all-inclusive list of true dragons is only a list of those appearing before the Draconomicon was published.

It's a concrete rule, ergo it is valid. The fact that conflicts may arise in future is irrelevant -- we have rules for resolving rules conflicts. The list of true dragons given in the draconomicon lists every true dragon. For another creature to be a true dragon, that rule must be overridden by another rule.

And no, "True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older" can't qualify, because it's overridden by the list, which is more specific.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 08:13 PM

It's a concrete rule, ergo it is valid. The fact that conficts may arise in future is irrelevant -- we have rules for resolving rules conflicts. Nothing can be a true dragon unless another rule overrides that rule for that case.

And, being more specific, it takes precedence over the only other rules that could apply -- the one you're trying to apply, that "True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older".

Technically Draconomicon is the primary source for all things dragon.

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-20, 08:20 PM

It's a concrete rule, ergo it is valid. The fact that conflicts may arise in future is irrelevant -- we have rules for resolving rules conflicts. The list of true dragons given in the draconomicon lists every true dragon. For another creature to be a true dragon, that rule must be overridden by another rule.

And no, "True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older" can't qualify, because it's overridden by the list, which is more specific.

The Draconomicon was printed November 2003. Sandstorm was printed March 2005, and contains the Sand Dragon, which is a true dragon but is not included on that list. Races of the Dragon was printed January 2006, and contains Dragonwrought Kobolds, which are also true dragons but are not included on that list. It is exactly that, a list, which is automatically overridden by text, including the text you cited which you claim gets overridden by the list; it does not.

"Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons." As long as a creature is of the dragon type and ages according to true dragon age categories, it is a true dragon. Text rules always override tables when there is a conflict, and in this case the obsolete table gets overridden and dragonwrought kobolds are indeed true dragons.

lesser_minion

2011-09-20, 08:27 PM

Technically Draconomicon is the primary source for all things dragon.

Irrelevant. Both rules come from that book. Moreover, the primary source rules as they originally appeared have been superseded.

The difference is that the "this is a list of all true dragons that have been published" rule is more specific than "true dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older". Ergo, it has precedence.

It is exactly that, a list, which is automatically overridden by text, including the text you cited which you claim gets overridden by the list; it does not.

Incorrect. The text asserts that that list is complete. This takes precedence over "text trumps table", and because the table is more specific than "true dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older", it takes precedence over that.

mootoall

2011-09-20, 08:33 PM

... So there are no other True Dragons than the ones on that list? Including Prismatic, Force, Gem, etc.? And by that logic, there are no more base classes than the ones in the PHB. Flawed reasoning.

lesser_minion

2011-09-20, 08:36 PM

... So there are no other True Dragons than the ones on that list? Including Prismatic, Force, Gem, etc.? And by that logic, there are no more base classes than the ones in the PHB. Flawed reasoning.

Not at all. There can be true dragons that aren't on that list -- they simply have to have a rule that overrides that one (for example, their descriptions could call them out explicitly as being true dragons).

In fact, the same rule applies in the same way to base classes, feats, and so on. A base class not in the PHB is a base class because it's described as one.

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-20, 09:02 PM

A Sand Dragon in Sandstorm is not specifically called out as a true dragon, yet there it is.

As per DMG/PHB/MM errata (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a):

Errata Rule: Primary Sources
When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules
sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the
primary source is correct. One example of a
primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a
table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence
when the short description in the beginning of the spells
chapter disagrees.
Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves
book and topic precedence. The Player’s Handbook, for
example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for PC
races, and the base class descriptions. If you find something
on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master’s Guide or
the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player’s
Handbook, you should assume the Player’s Handbook is the
primary source. The Dungeon Master’s Guide is the primary
source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special
material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual
is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and
supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

Appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a table. The text of the sidebar on page 4 specifies that a dragon which advances according to age categories is a true dragon. With regards to the Sand Dragon, Dragonwrought Kobolds, and numerous other creatures, there is a conflict here. Therefore, the text overrides the table and those creatures which advance according to age categories are considered true dragons, despite being absent from that table.

AMFV

2011-09-20, 09:03 PM

RAW as per the Draconomicon itself they become True Dragons. The list being published at an earlier date makes it not all inclusive, and therefore overridden by later material. A dragonwrought kobold does advance in power by age categories and is a dragon, therefore as per the Draconomicon it is a true dragon. This does allow mild abuse, although it's certain draconic templates that are the real sources of abuse and power, such as Loredrake. These should be watched as they are more likely to be abused than simply being a true dragon.

generalcharon

2011-09-20, 09:19 PM

AzazelSephiroth

2011-09-20, 09:21 PM

Be warned however that if you allow Dragonwrought Kobolds to be true dragons... a flawed and silly idea IMO then that means any Humaniod creature with the dragon type is actually a true dragon as all humaniods gain bonuses, however small to WIS INT and so forth with age...

I do not however see an issue with the OPs friend playing a Dragonwrought Kobold and taking Dragon HD... They do not however gain the breathweapons, special attacks and so forth associated with a Dragon as it is stated they are humaniod creatures and do not have these abilities... I am pretty sure they do have Darkvision, low light vision etc however. However the Draconomicon mentions that Dragons only gain HD through age unless it is a class level so this character would have to (according to my understanding) age drastically quickly in order to keep up with the party...

edit: If someone knows for sure about the HD and age catagory situation please enlighten me:smallsmile:

mootoall

2011-09-20, 09:26 PM

I do not however see an issue with the OPs friend playing a Dragonwrought Kobold and taking Dragon HD... They do not however gain the breathweapons, special attacks and so forth associated with a Dragon as it is stated they are humaniod creatures and do not have these abilities... I am pretty sure they do have Darkvision, low light vision etc however. However the Draconomicon mentions that Dragons only gain HD through age unless it is a class level so this character would have to (according to my understanding) age drastically quickly in order to keep up with the party...

edit: If someone knows for sure about the HD and age catagory situation please enlighten me:smallsmile:

The issue of whether or not he can take Dragon HD has been discussed quite thoroughly in the first few posts, concluding with a definitive "No."

AMFV

2011-09-20, 09:28 PM

AzazelSephiroth

2011-09-20, 09:36 PM

The issue of whether or not he can take Dragon HD has been discussed quite thoroughly in the first few posts, concluding with a definitive "No."

I did not see this. I saw many discussions about it but as far as I can tell the decision of whether or not he can is up to him and his DM. I just gave my opinion of what I would allow in a game I ran. I think it is pretty obvious that RAW and RAI are muddied concerning the Dragonwrought Kobold and it is really whether or not the players and DM will have fun with it. :smallbiggrin:

AzazelSephiroth

2011-09-20, 09:40 PM

I'm pretty sure that Dragonwrought Kobolds are the ONLY dragon type human-shaped things. Also a humanoid creature cannot by definition be of the dragon type as you can only have one type. Dragonblood is a subtype and therefore doesn't count as being of the dragon type.

Hmm that seems accurate... it seems to me that the original intent of the race may have been a Draconic Creature similar to the Dragonborn. I do not have my books handy, is a Half-Dragon considered dragon type? It seems that they would also qualify as true dragon then... perhaps not on topic but just as clarification.

Cog

2011-09-20, 09:40 PM

AzazelSephiroth

2011-09-20, 09:48 PM

@Cog
I did not see that... I feel silly. But that is interesting. Oh well, most of my players have an extreme dislike for the Kobold race so it have never come up yet. :smallsmile:

tyckspoon

2011-09-20, 09:52 PM

AMFV

2011-09-20, 09:56 PM

Hmm that seems accurate... it seems to me that the original intent of the race may have been a Draconic Creature similar to the Dragonborn. I do not have my books handy, is a Half-Dragon considered dragon type? It seems that they would also qualify as true dragon then... perhaps not on topic but just as clarification.

Technically they still age but do not advance by age category as dragons do. It is possible that you could make that argument but it's a lot less RAW secure than dragonwrought is. Also their LA is pretty high for TO or PO purposes and is rarely worth it. LA : +0 and 1 feat to be a True Dragon is worth it, LA: +3 and that same feat is not.

Infernalbargain

2011-09-20, 11:40 PM

Because they're specifically called out as being unable to, as they're humanoid in shape, and the monster entry doesn't show them as having racial hit dice to advance at any rate.

He is pointing out a contradiction. Either the rule must be incorrect, or angels advance through classes.

Tar Palantir

2011-09-20, 11:41 PM

Technically they still age but do not advance by age category as dragons do. It is possible that you could make that argument but it's a lot less RAW secure than dragonwrought is. Also their LA is pretty high for TO or PO purposes and is rarely worth it. LA : +0 and 1 feat to be a True Dragon is worth it, LA: +3 and that same feat is not.

Very true, but the lack of class features does not itself contribute any RP opportunities. Any RP you would want to do with a RHD-advancing kobold could be done by a kobold with class levels.

Grendus

2011-09-20, 11:54 PM

As you're probably able to tell OP, "Are Kobolds True Dragons" has been debated back and forth across every D&D message board, and frankly the answer is "Maybe".
People on both sides of the argument can cite plenty of things that say their view is correct and Wizards have never provided an official answer (and now that 3.5 is dead to them they never will).
Each GM needs to decide for themself if they'll allow Kobolds to count as True Dragons or not :)

Hmm, I always thought the general consensus was "yes, but allowing some of the more broken things (Loredrake and Greater Draconic Rite of Passage are ok for high op games, cheesing your way into epic feats early is not) into the game is in the same league as Candle of Invocation abuse, chain gating, and anything involving Pazuzu x 3. Don't do it unless you're prepared for the consequences".

That said, I see no reason not to let him advance with dragon hit dice. You get full saves, full BAB, and d12 hit dice iirc, but no class features. Unless he starts to stack draconic feats that scale with hit dice (and even then, those are mediocre at best), it shouldn't be a problem.

AMFV

2011-09-21, 12:18 AM

Very true, but the lack of class features does not itself contribute any RP opportunities. Any RP you would want to do with a RHD-advancing kobold could be done by a kobold with class levels.

I'm confused, I didn't mention class features. I only said +3 LA (for half-dragons) wasn't worth it, and that Dragonwrought Kobolds were true dragons RAW, while half-dragons were on more dubious ground (thus making them less desirable LA notwithstanding). PCs should not be able to advance using RHD, up to the minimum level of the creature. For example Nymphs need 6 RHD. Class levels are in virtually all ways vastly superior to RHD and I would strongly discourage my players from taking RHD if they could avoid it, as the class levels are dramatically superior.

Runestar

2011-09-21, 02:21 AM

You can play a commoner and have interesting RP opportunities. RP doesn't have to be designed around class features.

It certainly helps if your RP attempts are backed up by hard cold stats though. For example, if you want to rp a fencing-type character, then you may well want to ensure he can do exactly what you say he is capable of doing. If he boasts of being quick enough to dodge that dragon's breath, then crunchwise, you need evasion and a high reflex save.

That said, I find it interesting that as dragons, dragonwrought kobold qualify for a few of the dragon prcs in draconomicon. Kobold full bab class18/disciple of ashardalon anyone? :smallcool:

Raendyn

2011-09-21, 03:40 AM

Appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a table. The text of the sidebar on page 4 specifies that a dragon which advances according to age categories is a true dragon. With regards to the Sand Dragon, Dragonwrought Kobolds, and numerous other creatures, there is a conflict here. Therefore, the text overrides the table and those creatures which advance according to age categories are considered true dragons, despite being absent from that table.

Sand dragon might not have the "Dragon,True" entry, but it is obvious when reading the whole monster description that it is one & we have a typo here.

The whole draconomicon thing was made because they wanted a more loose interpretation of the dragon so they can publish new true dragons later.

So, they advance in the age categories & become stronger... How? I never saw a CR entry for kobolds: Wyrmling CR:2,..., Great wwyrm CR:10. If you count the +3 to mental stats as a fulfillment of " they grow in power as they advance in the age categories" then, i have no more comments...

Since dragon as most monsters gain HD only as they grow up & not just because today's encounter gave the enough XP, It pretty obvious that this is what the Draconomicon means IMO...

If the WotC wanted dragonwrought to be true dragons they would have put the damn "true" word next the the "dragon" one. They are not @sholes that expect players to make a connection between MM, Dragonomicon & their new material in order to play it as the authors had it in their minds.

P.S.Biffoniacus mate, I just want to mention that my reply is not a personal offence against you, I agree & respect your opinios in general but here I happen to disagree.:smallwink: You of all should know, that when something needs rules lawering to get an "OK" from a DM then, 99% it is not RAI.

noparlpf

2011-09-21, 03:59 AM

edit: If someone knows for sure about the HD and age catagory situation please enlighten me:smallsmile:

One of the Magazines made "classes" for dragon PCs to advance by, so I don't see why the same idea couldn't apply to a kobold if the DM allowed it.

I'm pretty sure that Dragonwrought Kobolds are the ONLY dragon type human-shaped things. Also a humanoid creature cannot by definition be of the dragon type as you can only have one type. Dragonblood is a subtype and therefore doesn't count as being of the dragon type.

Dragonwrought kobolds are dragons with the reptilian subtype. They're not humanoid; they lose that type when they take Dragonwrought.

So, they advance in the age categories & become stronger... How? I never saw a CR entry for kobolds: Wyrmling CR:2,..., Great wwyrm CR:10. If you count the +3 to mental stats as a fulfillment of " they grow in power as they advance in the age categories" then, i have no more comments...

A wyrmling kobold being CR 2 would be horrifying. Adult kobolds barely make it up to CR 1, even with the web enhancement.

Raendyn

2011-09-21, 04:07 AM

A wyrmling kobold being CR 2 would be horrifying. Adult kobolds barely make it up to CR 1, even with the web enhancement.

It was an "on purpose" rise in the numbers to emphasize.:smallwink:

TheJake

2011-09-21, 05:24 AM

Noparlpf -
You can't. It's established in the rules for reasons already discussed. You're not asking for everyone's opinion, you're seeking validation for your own. I suggest you troll somewhere else.

Yes, it isn't as well explained as it could be - I give you that. But you can't advance Racial Hit Dice. That's it. Taking the mechanical specification of Tru Dragon for a Dragonwrought out of the equation for a moment - how would you even determine Dragonwrought's (True) Dragons age when the standard humanoid Age chart doesn't even align?

- J.

noparlpf

2011-09-21, 05:50 AM

I apologise if you think I'm trolling you. I simply fail to understand why a humanoid or intelligent human-shaped creature cannot advance by its hit dice rather than by class levels. I realise that it says they can't in one of the books, but I don't get why. I guess that's not a question for you all but for the game designers.

What about (to be silly and cliche) a human raised by wolves? And don't tell me Barbarian, because they would have had no exposure to martial weapons or weapons training, or even simple manufactured weapons, the latter of which all humanoids are apparently automatically proficient with.
Oh, and how is it exactly that a humanoid is actually weaker as a Commoner than it would be if it were allowed to progress naturally and take racial hit dice?

Tyndmyr

2011-09-21, 06:50 AM

The Dragonwrought feat says that the kobold who takes it is a dragon instead of a humanoid.
The MM1 says that true dragons are either metallic or chromatic (and a dragonwrought kobold is one of these).

More importantly, Draconomicon has the definition of true dragons. And it's the primary source. DW Kobolds meet these criteria. So, yes. They are true dragons.

There are other factors too but my brain isn't working because I'm sick and I can't voice them properly.

Can somebody clarify this for me? Do dragonwrought kobolds gain breath weapons, natural attacks, blindsense, and the like because they're dragons? Can a dragonwrought kobold advance its dragon hit dice instead of class hit dice and gain d12 HD with good saves, full BaB, and 6+Int skill points?

Negative on the special abilities. Those are not granted by the type, but are common to MM1s true dragons. True dragons have been printed elsewhere, and they do not invariably have all of these.

However, you can take templates, classes, etc that require you to be a true dragon(or just a dragon). The advantage is mostly in prerequisites.

AMFV

2011-09-21, 07:20 AM

Dragonwrought kobolds are dragons with the reptilian subtype. They're not humanoid; they lose that type when they take Dragonwrought.

A wyrmling kobold being CR 2 would be horrifying. Adult kobolds barely make it up to CR 1, even with the web enhancement.

Hence the reason I said human shaped not humanoid. Giants are also human shaped. A cR 2 wyrmling kobold would have no additional special abilities, save for those stated under dragon hit dice which makes them inferior in most respects to a kobold with class levels.

lesser_minion

2011-09-21, 08:14 AM

A Sand Dragon in Sandstorm is not specifically called out as a true dragon, yet there it is.

No, it simply isn't a true dragon. It just looks like one.

Snipped rules quote.

That rule is overridden by the text in the same sidebar you quote that states that the table is a comprehensive list. Because it references the table, that text is more specific than anything else presented in that sidebar, hence it is the only valid reading. Anything else is wishful thinking, not RAW.

Appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a table. The text of the sidebar on page 4 specifies that a dragon which advances according to age categories is a true dragon.

That piece of text superseded by the text in the same sidebar that states that appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a comprehensive list of all true dragons.

With regards to the Sand Dragon, Dragonwrought Kobolds, and numerous other creatures, there is a conflict here. Therefore, the text overrides the table and those creatures which advance according to age categories are considered true dragons, despite being absent from that table.

I understood you the first time, and you were wrong then. Repeating yourself doesn't change anything.

By RAW, the sand dragon is not a true dragon any more than the dragonwrought kobold is. Maybe the sand dragon 'should be' a true dragon, but what 'should be' the case has no relevance to what is.

ThiefInTheNight

2011-09-21, 08:15 AM

I simply fail to understand why a humanoid or intelligent human-shaped creature cannot advance by its hit dice rather than by class levels. I realise that it says they can't in one of the books, but I don't get why. I guess that's not a question for you all but for the game designers.
Because that would be a trap too large even for WotC. RHD are intentionally weak; they don't want to list them as an option because as an option, they would be a trap.

What about (to be silly and cliche) a human raised by wolves? And don't tell me Barbarian, because they would have had no exposure to martial weapons or weapons training, or even simple manufactured weapons, the latter of which all humanoids are apparently automatically proficient with.
The game lacks a class for that. RHD would not cover it, at all — you'd have Hide, Move Silently, Survival, probably Craft, maybe Know (Nature) all as class skills. You'd have a good Fortitude save, most likely. You should have some relevant class features. If you want that, homebrew something up; don't stick a person with useless RHD.

hamishspence

2011-09-21, 09:16 AM

That piece of text superseded by the text in the same sidebar that states that appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a comprehensive list of all true dragons.

...as of the time of publishing. More true dragons came along after that- and the writers of Draconomicon could not be expected to forsee this.

Tyndmyr

2011-09-21, 10:17 AM

JaronK

2011-09-21, 10:43 AM

Short and simple: In three places there are definitions of True Dragons. One is in Dragon Magic (a Dragon with 12 age categories). One is in Dragons of Krynn (A Dragon with age categories). And one is in Draconomicon (A true dragon is one that gets more powerful as it ages, a lesser dragon is one that lacks age categories).

These are the only times there's actually a definition (as opposed to the MM, which says it's talking about descriptions of known dragons... that's not all inclusive at all. Other than the side bar Draconomicon definition, the rest of Draconomicon is talking about the 10 MM Dragons, and says as much). And all of them fit for Dragonwrought Kobolds. Why? Because they get the 12 Draconic Age Categories (Races of the Dragon) and they get more powerful as they get older (Also from Races of the Dragon, they get the normal aging mental benefits but do not get the penalties as normal). It's actually quite clear cut. Yes, they're True Dragons. And before anyone tries to claim that getting +3 to all mental stats doesn't count as growing "more powerful" I'd remind them that the DMG specifically states that having higher stats makes you "more powerful." It's in the section on stat generation. Plus, the way Draconomicon is written there'd be a huge contradiction if that didn't count... Kobolds would be not Lesser (they have age categories) and not True (not getting more powerful) which actually isn't allowed. You have to be one or the other.

And no, there's not any other possible definition of True Dragon that actually fits for all True Dragons (the ones above all do, though the Dragons of Kyrnn one is too inclusive as it would include Half Dragon Humans on a technicality... but Draconomicon's the primary source anyhow). All the other descriptions specifically state they're not talking about all of them anyhow, and include things that just aren't true for all of them (MM says they're all Chromatic or Metallic, but in fact most aren't. MM says they all have wings, but Brown Dragons don't. Etc). For those folks saying the fact that Kobolds look like humanoids matters, I'd point out Lung Dragons. They look even less like normal dragons than Kobolds do, yet are specifically called out as True Dragons in Draconomicon. And for anyone calling out the Draconomicon list, I will remind you Races of the Dragon was printed after that.

As for RAI? Well, we can only guess, but it seems to me that Races of the Dragon was indeed trying to give them a way to be True Dragons. It gives their lore, saying that they are formed from nothing but True Dragon blood at the same time as the rest of the True Dragons (the big ones formed from the limbs that had been ripped off, the Kobolds from the blood that spilled). No Lesser Dragons came from that event. And it talks about how deep down Kobolds are dragons. Plus, why else give them 12 age categories and the special note that makes them not get weaker as they age if they take the feat? But remember, at the time of writing Dragons of Eberron hadn't come out, so being a True Dragon didn't really matter (it put you on a different side of Dragon Pacts and had an effect on the Draconic Vampirism feat, that's it). So I'm quite sure nobody had intended for this to be a power thing... it was more of a "hey, Kobolds can run around saying how superior they are because they're really dragons!" sort of thing. But then Dragons of Eberron was written by a team that hadn't read Races of the Dragon and everything went straight to heck.

But I want to be clear... nobody's saying "Oh, Kobolds should all get to be Loredrakes." Letting Dragonwrought Kobolds use Sovereign Archetypes is like allowing Planar Binding Wish Loops or similar... sure, it's legal, but it shouldn't be allowed except in the most high powered of games.

JaronK

Infernalbargain

2011-09-21, 02:47 PM

That piece of text superseded by the text in the same sidebar that states that appendix 2 of the Draconomicon is a comprehensive list of all true dragons.\

Why does the appendix 2 text supersede the sidebar 4 text? I don't think that there's any rules regarding which of the two pieces of text from the same source supersede each other. Thus we are forced to choose between two pieces of text, one agrees with other sources, the other contradicts them. Why do you choose the one that contradicts other sources?

The Glyphstone

2011-09-21, 02:53 PM

But remember, at the time of writing Dragons of Eberron hadn't come out, so being a True Dragon didn't really matter (it put you on a different side of Dragon Pacts and had an effect on the Draconic Vampirism feat, that's it). So I'm quite sure nobody had intended for this to be a power thing... it was more of a "hey, Kobolds can run around saying how superior they are because they're really dragons!" sort of thing. But then Dragons of Eberron was written by a team that hadn't read Races of the Dragon and everything went straight to heck.

But I want to be clear... nobody's saying "Oh, Kobolds should all get to be Loredrakes." Letting Dragonwrought Kobolds use Sovereign Archetypes is like allowing Planar Binding Wish Loops or similar... sure, it's legal, but it shouldn't be allowed except in the most high powered of games.

JaronK

Don't forget the 'qualify for Epic feats automatically' bit. Granted, there's a very small number of Epic feats a non-Epic character can meet the prerequisites for, but it does have an effect.

sreservoir

2011-09-21, 03:09 PM

Don't forget the 'qualify for Epic feats automatically' bit. Granted, there's a very small number of Epic feats a non-Epic character can meet the prerequisites for, but it does have an effect.

well, qualifying automatically can also be read to mean that you can ignore all other prerequisites.

take a high sub level, like dragonblood cleric. you qualify automatically! (I don't think you even need to be a true dragon for that one, actually.)

JaronK

2011-09-21, 03:18 PM

Don't forget the 'qualify for Epic feats automatically' bit. Granted, there's a very small number of Epic feats a non-Epic character can meet the prerequisites for, but it does have an effect.

IIRC, all dragons get that, not just True Dragons. So, the True Dragon thing doesn't matter in that regard. And it's not qualifying automatically... they still have to qualify in other ways. They just don't need 21+ ECL/HD.

True Dragons do auto qualify for anything with the Dragonblood Subtype as part of the requirements, which is absolutely stupid, but IIRC that's also Races of the Dragon's fault.

JaronK

lesser_minion

2011-09-21, 03:19 PM

...as of the time of publishing. More true dragons came along after that- and the writers of Draconomicon could not be expected to forsee this.

Right, this is not the definitive list of all true dragons for the same reason that EVERY list of x is not the definitive list of all x. More books came later, and those expanded the options available.

Yes, this is exactly the point I brought up myself and addressed earlier in the thread.

Why does the appendix 2 text supersede the sidebar 4 text? I don't think that there's any rules regarding which of the two pieces of text from the same source supersede each other. Thus we are forced to choose between two pieces of text, one agrees with other sources, the other contradicts them. Why do you choose the one that contradicts other sources?

Both of the rules in question are in the sidebar on page 4.

Specific trumps general. A rule that "X is a list of all true dragons that have been published in official sources" is more specific than a rule that "a true dragon is a creature with property Y".

If a subsequent creature declared itself to be a true dragon, it would be, because that declaration overrides the draconomicon for that case.

This is, in fact, the principle that permits you to take feats, classes, and even skills that aren't printed in the PHB.

Now, are the rules good here? No. I don't think they actually justify some of the things that people claim can be done with them, but they certainly aren't good or well-written rules. Unfortunately, that describes far more of D&D than it should.

Raendyn

2011-09-21, 03:19 PM

And before anyone tries to claim that getting +3 to all mental stats doesn't count as growing "more powerful" I'd remind them that the DMG specifically states that having higher stats makes you "more powerful." It's in the section on stat generation. Plus, the way Draconomicon is written there'd be a huge contradiction if that didn't count... Kobolds would be not Lesser (they have age categories) and not True (not getting more powerful) which actually isn't allowed. You have to be one or the other.

Well you can rules lawering as much as you like my friend but I think that you are brighter than that.
What draconomicon means is that ALL True Dragons grow more powerfull as they grow up, That means that EVERY age category has to be more powerfull than the one before it. Since Kobolds gain stats upgrades only 3 times they don't meet this quolification.

Also (I have to repost this) True Dragons indeed become more powerfull just because they grew up. Each age category has a higher CR. If fact they can not advance RHD in any other way, so they can become more powerfull only via aging, unless of course they adventure & gain class lvls, but that has nothign to do with true dragons. Kobolds does not meet this requirment either. juvenile kobolds do not have lower CR than adult ones.

My last argument ( repeated too) is that WotC authors are not retards that they expect us to make the connection of definitions between 2 general & one campaign specific dnd rulebooks, in order to play their publish material as they had it in mind. So if they wanted Dragonwrought to be true dragons then they would have placed the damn word Treu in the description. Simple!

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-21, 03:32 PM

You said yourself, specific trumps general. There's a general 'rule' on page 4 of the Draconomicon that Appendix 2 is an all-inclusive list of every true dragon. There is a more specific statement at the beginning of that very appendix, as follows:

The lists in this appendix include all dragons published in
official DUNGEONS & DRAGONS products up to the publication
of this book. Indexed sources include the following titles:
Monster Manual (MM)
Monster Manual II (MMII)
Fiend Folio (FF)
Monsters of Faerûn (MoF)
Magic of Faerûn (MaF)
Oriental Adventures (OA)
Epic Level Handbook (Epic)
DRAGON® Magazine (Dragon issue number)
Draconomicon (Dra)
As you can see, Races of the Dragon is not listed there, so if there were any additional true dragons published in that book, then they would be absent from this allegedly all-inclusive list. As you can see, the more specific rules regarding this appendix clearly state that the list is only inclusive of those true dragons which appeared up to the publication of the Draconomicon.

That list does not include Dragonwrought Kobolds not because they aren't true dragons, but because they're from a book that was published after the Draconomicon. Therefore, Dragonwrought Kobolds are indeed true dragons, their absence from this list is completely irrelevant.

JaronK

2011-09-21, 03:47 PM

Well you can rules lawering as much as you like my friend but I think that you are brighter than that.

Ad Hominem.

What draconomicon means is that ALL True Dragons grow more powerfull as they grow up, That means that EVERY age category has to be more powerfull than the one before it.

False. This does not mean that. It only means they grow more powerful as they get older... NOT that they get more powerful with each individual step. If I say "I got better at rock climbing as I got older" does that mean each individual year I got better? No, maybe I took a break for a year. But overall, I got better.

Furthermore, if you check the page in the book, you'll also see the to be a Lesser Dragon (and all non True dragons are Lesser) you can't have age categories. Are you going to claim Dragonwrought Kobolds don't have age categories? Because if you're claiming they're not True, you must claim that.

Also (I have to repost this) True Dragons indeed become more powerfull just because they grew up. Each age category has a higher CR. If fact they can not advance RHD in any other way, so they can become more powerfull only via aging, unless of course they adventure & gain class lvls, but that has nothign to do with true dragons. Kobolds does not meet this requirment either. juvenile kobolds do not have lower CR than adult ones.

The DMG says having higher overall stats means you're more powerful. You've added this RHD and CR requirement, but that's not actually stated in the rules anywhere. So this is just stuff you're making up. Back it up with rules instead of stuff you're making up.

The fact is, if a Dragonwrought Kobold just sits there doing nothing for 100 years, he gets more powerful by the DMG's own definition.

My last argument ( repeated too) is that WotC authors are not retards that they expect us to make the connection of definitions between 2 general & one campaign specific dnd rulebooks, in order to play their publish material as they had it in mind.

They don't have to. Every single one makes it clear that all dragons with age categories (12, to be precise) are True Dragons, no matter what, no exceptions.

So if they wanted Dragonwrought to be true dragons then they would have placed the damn word Treu in the description. Simple!

They didn't put "True" in the description of the vast majority of True Dragons, including Lung Dragons, Planar Dragons, and Gem Dragons. So, simple but demonstrably false.

So, just to show how this is done, I'm going to actually quote the rules here:

Draconomicon Page 4

True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older... Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons

Dragon Magic Page 87

a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)

Dragons of Krynn

a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category).

Now, do Dragonwrought Kobolds possess age categories (12, to be precise)? Do they become more powerful as they grow older (note: it doesn't say at every age category, just "as they grow older")? The answer to both of these questions is found in Races of the Dragon, page 39, in the table called "Table 3-2: Kobold Age Categories." It lists all the usual True Dragon age categories (you know, the thing only True Dragons have), and then under Table 3-3: Aging Effects it says

Ability penalties due to age do not apply to dragonwrought kobolds.

Now, do you think +3 to all mental stats with no penalties is becoming "more powerful as they get older"? If not, DMG 170 describes characters with higher stats as "High-Powered Characters."

See how I used actual quotes, instead of unsupported assertions (such as that they have to get more powerful with each age category, instead of just "as they get older", or that "more powerful" necessarily means increased CR)? And note how I didn't have to ignore any sources. So, I'm just using the rules as written. And the rules as written necessarily require that Dragonwrought Kobolds be True Dragons.

@Biff: Note that page 4 of Draconomicon actually says "a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in official sources." So, even there it's clear that it's talking about the past only... there could be future sources that change it (which Races of the Dragon obviously does). This isn't even specific over general here. All sources agree.

JaronK

Infernalbargain

2011-09-21, 03:49 PM

Specific trumps general. A rule that "X is a list of all true dragons that have been published in official sources" is more specific than a rule that "a true dragon is a creature with property Y".

The lists in this appendix includes all dragons published in official Dungeons and Dragons products up to the publication of this book.

Emphasis mine. The appendix only claims to be comprehensive with respect to material published prior to draconomicon.

True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older.

A number of other true dragons are described in chapter 4 of this book. In addition, Appendix 2: Index of Dragons provides a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in official sources

Emphasis mine. Thus it is only a complete list of all true dragons in official sources prior to draconomicon. However, the statement that true dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older, is not predicated upon creature that were printed prior to the draconomicon and therefore is applicable to creatures printed after the draconomicon, including dragonwrought kobolds. QED.

lesser_minion

2011-09-21, 03:53 PM

As you can see, Races of the Dragon is not listed there, so if there were any additional true dragons published in that book, then they would be absent from this allegedly all-inclusive list. As you can see, the more specific rules regarding this appendix clearly state that the list is only inclusive of those true dragons which appeared up to the publication of the Draconomicon.

True but meaningless.

There is a mechanism in D&D by which new true dragons can be introduced after that list is published. Dragonwrought kobolds do not use that mechanism, ergo they are not true dragons.

Emphasis mine. Thus it is only a complete list of all true dragons in official sources prior to draconomicon.

Actually, no. That particular rule doesn't say that it only applied at the time of writing, ergo that's not the case. As far as that rule is concerned, the past is the past as of the time of reading, not as of the time of publication.

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-21, 04:23 PM

True but meaningless.

There is a mechanism in D&D by which new true dragons can be introduced after that list is published. Dragonwrought kobolds do not use that mechanism, ergo they are not true dragons.

Actually, no. That particular rule doesn't say that it only applied at the time of writing, ergo that's not the case.

[citation needed]

Your reference of Appendix 2 is meaningless. It is specifically spelled out that anything of the dragon creature type is either a true dragon, or it is a lesser dragon. It is also specifically spelled out that only true dragons use the age category system, and that only if it does not use those age categories, it is considered to be a lesser dragon. Therefore, dragonwrought kobolds are true dragons. Your reference to Appendix 2 is meaningless, it has been proven as such by your own prior arguments (specific > general).

Infernalbargain

2011-09-21, 04:25 PM

There is a mechanism in D&D by which new true dragons can be introduced after that list is published. Dragonwrought kobolds do not use that mechanism, ergo they are not true dragons.

Please, do tell.

Actually, no. That particular rule doesn't say that it only applied at the time of writing, ergo that's not the case.

Please enlighten me as to what meaning of "have been published" you are using that would allow for your interpretation to be true.

lesser_minion

2011-09-21, 04:41 PM

[citation needed]

Your reference of Appendix 2 is meaningless. It is specifically spelled out that anything of the dragon creature type is either a true dragon, or it is a lesser dragon.

And dragonwrought kobolds are lesser dragons.

It is also specifically spelled out that only true dragons use the age category system, and that only if it does not use those age categories, it is considered to be a lesser dragon.

This is a property of true dragons -- a general rule. It loses to the specific rule.

Therefore, dragonwrought kobolds are true dragons. Your reference to Appendix 2 is meaningless, it has been proven as such by your own prior arguments (specific > general).

Incorrect, because you have not presented any more specific rule that isn't trivial. A list is more specific than any statement of properties -- if the list says that it's only drawn from certain books, that means that subsequent books must present any additions as exceptions. This is how D&D works for feats, it's how it works for classes, it's how it works for skills, and it's how it works for dragons.

Please, do tell.

By providing an exception.

noparlpf

2011-09-21, 04:48 PM

Also (I have to repost this) True Dragons indeed become more powerfull just because they grew up. Each age category has a higher CR. If fact they can not advance RHD in any other way, so they can become more powerfull only via aging, unless of course they adventure & gain class lvls, but that has nothign to do with true dragons.

Actually, one of the Dragon Magazines gave out "class" versions of the chromatic dragons. So they can gain dragon powers by gaining XP. They're like prodigy dragons or something.

Biffoniacus_Furiou

2011-09-21, 04:51 PM

According to the sidebar on page 4 of the Draconomicon, the exception is that if a given dragon doesn't use the age category system of true dragons, then it is considered a lesser dragon rather than a true dragon. Thus, the default is that all dragons are true dragons, because not using the age category system causes an exception to this.

You are an avid defender of what you believe the rules to be, but sadly you have yet to reference any relevant rules to support your claims.

JaronK

2011-09-21, 05:01 PM

There is a mechanism in D&D by which new true dragons can be introduced after that list is published. Dragonwrought kobolds do not use that mechanism, ergo they are not true dragons.

Please, using rules sources (as opposed to just making stuff up) state the mechanism by which new true dragons can be introduced. Note that the vast majority of True Dragons do not have the word "True" anywhere in their entry, so it can't be that.

Actually, no. That particular rule doesn't say that it only applied at the time of writing, ergo that's not the case. As far as that rule is concerned, the past is the past as of the time of reading, not as of the time of publication.

Yes it does. "up to the publication of this book" and "complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in official sources" are quite clear. They only apply to what had been at the time of writing. See how I'm using actual rules?

And dragonwrought kobolds are lesser dragons.

Draconomicon page 4 states that lesser dragons are those that don't have age categories. Dragonwrought Kobolds have age categories (Races of the Dragon). Your statement is categorically false, as the rules clearly state.

Try again. Use rules quotes this time, instead of just making stuff up.

JaronK

Infernalbargain

2011-09-21, 05:02 PM

if the list says that it's only drawn from certain books

Yes that list is the list of books up to the publication of that book.

Philistine

2011-09-21, 06:03 PM

And dragonwrought kobolds are lesser dragons.

Are dragonwrought kobolds included on the all-inclusive list of lesser dragons in Appendix 2 of Draconomicon? No? Then by your argument, they can't be lesser dragons either. That's why the next bit is so critical:

The lists in this appendix include all dragons published in official Dungeons & Dragons products up to the publication of this book.
Seriously, what part of that isn't clear? It is self-evident that a book published in 2003 could not include dragons, True or otherwise, from another source book that was not published until 2006. Can you even make that claim with a straight face?

sreservoir

2011-09-21, 06:25 PM

Are dragonwrought kobolds included on the all-inclusive list of lesser dragons in Appendix 2 of Draconomicon? No? Then by your argument, they can't be lesser dragons either. That's why the next bit is so critical:

Seriously, what part of that isn't clear? It is self-evident that a book published in 2003 could not include dragons, True or otherwise, from another source book that was not published until 2006. Can you even make that claim with a straight face?

no dragons were published after the draconomnomicon. those monster entries labeled as dragons? nice try, but those aren't dragons.

2xMachina

2011-09-22, 07:05 AM

Gah! The Pedantry.

Tyndmyr

2011-09-22, 09:02 AM

For those folks saying the fact that Kobolds look like humanoids matters, I'd point out Lung Dragons. They look even less like normal dragons than Kobolds do, yet are specifically called out as True Dragons in Draconomicon. And for anyone calling out the Draconomicon list, I will remind you Races of the Dragon was printed after that.

It doesn't matter in the slightest for them being true dragons. They're DEFINITELY true dragons.

It just matters for if advancement by hit die is allowed. I agree they are humanoid in shape, and thus, cannot advance by hit die. I do not consider this a great problem, though. It is certainly not related to the true dragon argument.

Yes, this is exactly the point I brought up myself and addressed earlier in the thread.

Both of the rules in question are in the sidebar on page 4.

Specific trumps general. A rule that "X is a list of all true dragons that have been published in official sources" is more specific than a rule that "a true dragon is a creature with property Y".

If a subsequent creature declared itself to be a true dragon, it would be, because that declaration overrides the draconomicon for that case.

This is, in fact, the principle that permits you to take feats, classes, and even skills that aren't printed in the PHB.

Now, are the rules good here? No. I don't think they actually justify some of the things that people claim can be done with them, but they certainly aren't good or well-written rules. Unfortunately, that describes far more of D&D than it should.

Text trumps table. Always. Even though tables are more specific. The list is remarkably table like. But this is mostly irrelevant, as RoTD is published later. Therefore, you cannot reasonably expect the list to include DW kobolds. It's both RAW and RAI that lists need not include things published later.

Well you can rules lawering as much as you like my friend but I think that you are brighter than that.
What draconomicon means is that ALL True Dragons grow more powerfull as they grow up, That means that EVERY age category has to be more powerfull than the one before it. Since Kobolds gain stats upgrades only 3 times they don't meet this quolification.

No. It does not specify exactly how they grow more powerful. A good thing too, because some dragons lose certain thing at certain levels(touch AC decreasing is a common thing). However, they are still fairly clearly more powerful in general overall as a result of aging.

You just invented a qualification that doesn't exist, and that would kind of subject everything to a much more pedantic arguing over what exactly constitutes "growing more powerful".

noparlpf

2011-09-22, 09:32 AM

It just matters for if advancement by hit die is allowed. I agree they are humanoid in shape, and thus, cannot advance by hit die. I do not consider this a great problem, though. It is certainly not related to the true dragon argument.

I still maintain that if angels can advance by hit dice when they're described in the italic fluff text as being human-like then dragonwrought kobolds (which don't have any humanoid type) can too even if they're "human-shaped".

JaronK

2011-09-22, 10:15 AM

I still maintain that if angels can advance by hit dice when they're described in the italic fluff text as being human-like then dragonwrought kobolds (which don't have any humanoid type) can too even if they're "human-shaped".

Kobolds have "Advancement: by character class" next to their entry in the Monster Manual. Since this was never changed anywhere (including in the Dragonwrought entry) that's all they can do. Angels have a different entry there. I don't think shape is relevant here. Unless a spell or effect specifically gives someone racial hit dice, Kobolds aren't going to get any. That's probably for the best, considering Loredrake.

Also, this is entirely irrelevant.

JaronK

ThiefInTheNight

2011-09-22, 12:41 PM

"have been" is very much in the past tense. The list is not described as all-inclusive for things from later books. Even WotC was smart enough to realize that they might want to add more dragons after they published that book. The authors of Races of the Dragon decided to add at least one: the Dragonwrought Kobold. Whether or not this was an intelligent decision is debatable; the Epic Feat and the Loredrake things are... problematic. But it's not like things being a good idea was ever a particularly sound argument for RAW....

Anyway, as for this "RHD instead of class levels" and "humanoid-shaped" thing, I think a much better rule to use for this is just to use the monster entry. If the entry says "By character class", then it's by character class; if it says "X-Y (Size)", then it's by RHD. As simple as that. Kobolds say "By character class". Maybe WotC decided to put "By character class" because Kobolds are human-shaped, but if I ran into a monster that is human-shaped and listed HD in its advancement, I would assume that it advanced with RHD (i.e. the specific rule in the Advancement line trumps the general heuristic about being human-shaped). Similarly, a non-human-shaped monster that says "By character class" would not (IMO) be allowed to take RHD, since it advances by character class.

In general, the "general" rule (heuristic) about human-shaped is actually redundant: every single monster includes an Advancement line anyway, which as the specific rule for that monster, would trump the general rule. I think the general rule is, as I've said several times, less of a rule and more of a heuristic: a way of understanding why some monsters advance by RHD and others by class levels.

Am I missing something here? Is that general rule more important than I've made it out to be? Because it really seems to me that at the end of the day, the rule is meaningless because it will always be trumped by the more-specific Advancement entry.

JaronK

2011-09-22, 12:55 PM

In general, the "general" rule (heuristic) about human-shaped is actually redundant: every single monster includes an Advancement line anyway, which as the specific rule for that monster, would trump the general rule.

Pedantry: Humans have no monster entry, and thus do not have an advancement line despite being a monster (since all creatures are monsters, the words are interchangeable).

But your overall point is correct... we know the advancement of a creature by its entry where it says advancement, unless a specific rule says otherwise (for example, a creature that had Advancement: By Age but has an LA can take class levels).

Am I missing something here? Is that general rule more important than I've made it out to be? Because it really seems to me that at the end of the day, the rule is meaningless because it will always be trumped by the more-specific Advancement entry.

The general rule applies to Humans, who otherwise don't have an advancement entry. I think Spellscales might be in the same boat, but I'm not sure. Other than that, you're not missing anything.

JaronK

Raendyn

2011-09-22, 04:20 PM

close this thread already,

It has become:
"Yes they are true dragons" - "No they aren't"
&
"Yes they can take RHD" - "No they can't"

Rules lawyers remain as they, strongheaded remain as they are, players with critical though remain as they are.

Noone benefits from this thread.:smallmad:

ThiefInTheNight

2011-09-22, 05:36 PM

Pedantry: Humans have no monster entry, and thus do not have an advancement line despite being a monster (since all creatures are monsters, the words are interchangeable).
Haha, ok, so then maybe "human-shaped" just means "Human"!

But your overall point is correct... we know the advancement of a creature by its entry where it says advancement, unless a specific rule says otherwise (for example, a creature that had Advancement: By Age but has an LA can take class levels).
Which monsters use "By Age"? Even dragons use normal HD-based Advancement lines...

The general rule applies to Humans, who otherwise don't have an advancement entry. I think Spellscales might be in the same boat, but I'm not sure. Other than that, you're not missing anything.
Ah, yes, there is no monster chapter in Races of the Dragon, which means the new race (and the new template, which would normally have an entry in the monster section too) don't have a monster entry. Interesting. I hardly think PC races are ambiguous in this area, though; they wouldn't be a PC race if they couldn't take character classes.

Actually, well, really, doesn't seem that any of the Races of books.

JaronK

2011-09-22, 06:08 PM

Can't check right now, but I thought the MM True Dragons said "Advancement: By Age". Is that not correct?

Yuki Akuma

2011-09-22, 06:10 PM

Black Dragon:

Advancement: Wyrmling 5-6 HD; very young 8-9 HD; young 11-12 HD; juvenile 14-15 HD; young adult 17-18 HD; adult 20-21 HD; mature adult 23-24 HD; old 26-27 HD; very old 29-30 HD; ancient 32-33 HD; wyrm 35-36 HD; great wyrm 38+ HD

ThiefInTheNight

2011-09-22, 06:30 PM

Are there any monsters that state that they can advance by HD or by character class? Or is "by character class" always an option, even if the monster normally advances by HD?

JaronK

2011-09-22, 07:48 PM

Character class definitely isn't an option for things with too low of an Int (Animals, many Magical Beasts, Oozes, Mindless Undead, most Constructs, most Vermin, many Plants etc).

JaronK

Dr.Orpheus

2011-09-22, 10:08 PM

if a kobold does count as a true dragon then every 3 HD after 20 HD the kobald may gain virtual age categories because the ELH does not state these must be racial HD

JaronK

2011-09-22, 10:25 PM

Age Category

A standard dragon gains one “virtual age category” for every 3 Hit Dice it gains beyond the great wyrm stage. Abilities that function once per day per age category or otherwise use the dragon’s age category as part of a calculation use this adjusted number. Epic dragons gain one age category per 5 Hit Dice beyond great wyrm.

So, this only applies if you're already a Great Wyrm. Now, a Kobold can start as a Great Wyrm if you want (it's the same as being Venerable). There's some other silly stuff in those rules... since you're small when you're a Wyrmling, you'd become Colossal suddenly when you gain three hit dice, and then grow to Colossal+ at 15HD. You'd gain a bunch of other stuff too.

However, while it's technically RAW that this works, these rules are obviously referring to racial HD only, which Kobolds don't have. Note also that this works whether Kobolds are True Dragons or not... it applies to all Dragons with age categories (technically, that means true, but whatever).

JaronK

AMFV

2011-09-24, 01:38 PM

So, this only applies if you're already a Great Wyrm. Now, a Kobold can start as a Great Wyrm if you want (it's the same as being Venerable). There's some other silly stuff in those rules... since you're small when you're a Wyrmling, you'd become Colossal suddenly when you gain three hit dice, and then grow to Colossal+ at 15HD. You'd gain a bunch of other stuff too.

However, while it's technically RAW that this works, these rules are obviously referring to racial HD only, which Kobolds don't have. Note also that this works whether Kobolds are True Dragons or not... it applies to all Dragons with age categories (technically, that means true, but whatever).

JaronK

Wait, so you could make a literal CoD-Zilla...

That would be awesome!

Yuki Akuma

2011-09-24, 02:31 PM

Druids can already wildshape into dinosaurs, you know. 'Actual CoDzilla' isn't hard. :smallwink:

AMFV

2011-09-24, 03:16 PM

Druids can already wildshape into dinosaurs, you know. 'Actual CoDzilla' isn't hard. :smallwink:

But not colossal dinosaurs, and without being colossal eating Tokyo is really difficult.

JaronK

2011-09-24, 05:12 PM

If you use those rules (they obviously mean racial HD, but they don't SAY that), you can absolutely turn into Godzilla. I just threw together a build based on it... use the Dragonblooded qualification trick to get your BAB 5 higher than your level with Cleric 9, then go up higher with the Dragonblood Sorc level, be a Loredrake, and eventually take one of the draconomicon PrCs that trades arcane casting for more diving casting (with full BAB). Don't forget your caster level gets a +2 bump every three levels (in addition to all the other insanity, like +1 Natural Armor per level and the stat bumps). When your caster level exceeds 20 (not casting level, caster level) you get Improved Spell Capacity once for every three caster levels above 20, so that gives you crazy good spell slots. You should be getting that as soon as you take the dragon PrCs, if not sooner. Destroy all the things. And don't forget you can Alter Self into various True Dragon forms whenever you want, just to be insulting.

JaronK