Aparently, Dragonwrought Kobolds are actually True Dragons. What am I missing?

[Arael666]

2. Dragonwrought Kobolds are true dragons, by the most current definition in Dragon Magic, which overrides previous definitions, and is actually in agreement with the most conclusive definition in the Draconomicon on page 4.

This statement above is really messing up my head, would someone be kind enough to thoroughly explain this to me?

[Milodiah]

Dragonwrought Kobolds. The "you count as a dragon for most intents and purposes" quality, which formed some of the infamous Pun-Pun build.

[Arael666]

Dragonwrought Kobolds. The "you count as a dragon for most intents and purposes" quality, which formed some of the infamous Pun-Pun build.

I'm ok with the dragon thing, and IIRC the pun-pun build relies on the rule that any dragon (not just true dragons) of old age or older can select epic feats. What I want to understand is this apparent understanding that Dragonwrought Kobolds are true dragons.

If someone could explain that to me or point me to the discussion where this was "decided", that would be great.

[Judge_Worm]

Dragonwrought makes Kobolds dragons as opposed to humanoids in type. Whether or not they're true dragons is a different story.

[EugeneVoid]

IIRC the pun-pun build relies on the rule that any dragon (not just true dragons) of old age or older can select epic feats.

Just as a side, Pun-Pun doesnt need dragonwrought... at all. In fact, Pun-Pun doesn't necessarily even need to be a kobold. It all hinges on the broken language at use in Manipulate Form. Anything that gets manipulate form can break the game.

[Crake]

The main thing about punpun was the fact that he was a "scaled one" which allowed for him to be the target of manipulate form.

As an aside, the "is a dragonwrought kobold a true dragon" argument has been going on for a long time, but I think the latest forum concensus was that they are not. Of course, people will interpret things in whatever way makes them happier, and will argue a point until their face goes red before admitting that their broken build with epic feats at level 1 isn't rules legal.

[WhamBamSam]

Pun-Pun is not a dragonwrought kobold. Whoever told you otherwise is mistaken. His ascent is entirely based on a) regular vanilla kobolds being scaled ones for the purposes of the Sarrukh's Manipulate Form, and b) being able to make a sufficiently high Knowledge (The Planes) check, to summon Pazzuzu, who will always grant a request to a Paladin.

I'm very much of the opinion that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons. The one piece of evidence against it (the table of "all True Dragons" in RotD) cannot possibly have any authority on the point. Either the Draconomicon (a 3.5 book, even if it doesn't seem like it sometimes) definition of "a dragon that gets stronger as it gets older" is the primary source rule, or the Dragon Magic definition of "a dragon with 12 age categories" takes precedence. The RotD table is the forgotten middle child in this controversy. More to the point, a Red Dragonwrought Kobold (or Silver, or what have you) is a Red Dragon (again, or a Silver Dragon, or whatever) for most purposes, so the fact that Dragonwrought Kobolds aren't on the table doesn't necessarily have any more meaning than the fact that wyrmling dragons aren't on there.

In addition, most Dragonwrought Kobold cheese has nothing to do with whether or not they're True Dragons. The lack of physical ability penalties for aging? That's written right there under the "Aging Effects" table on page 39 of Races of the Dragon. Getting to take Epic Feats? That only requires that they be Old Dragons, per page 66 of Draconomicon. Automatically qualifying for things requiring the dragonblood subtype? That's the case for all dragons according to page 4 of Races of the Dragon. The Draconic Rite of Passage and its greater version? Regular non-Dragonwrought Kobolds can use those. Alter Self cheese? Only cares about the Dragon type. And so on.

That's not to say that being a True Dragon doesn't have its benefits. Sovereign Archetypes are a big deal (two of them are actually broken enough to warrant banning in broad generality, and due to bad writing it's probably necessary to houserule the interaction of the ones that let you cast spells from other lists as arcane with fixed-list casters), and if Dragon Magazine is allowed, Dragon Psychoses are frequently more than a little sketchy (even for non-kobold use in some cases).

Most kobold cheese is flavorful and powerful without being broken (it is after all, tied to a race that has a number of shortcomings, not the least of which is the net -2 feats relative to a human). There are a few things that absolutely warrant banning.

[ShurikVch]

It all hinges on the broken language at use in Manipulate Form. Anything that gets manipulate form can break the game. Note: by RAW, Manipulate Form is completely harmless. All "insanely broken" stuff from it is just wishful thinking or/and humor


Most kobold cheese is flavorful and powerful without being broken (it is after all, tied to a race that has a number of shortcomings, not the least of which is the net -2 feats relative to a human). There are a few things that absolutely warrant banning. Why -2? I know about 1st level feat, but what's the another one?

[mealin]

Why -2? I know about 1st level feat, but what's the another one?

He's referring to the Dragonwrought feat you need to take

[Maglubiyet]

Normal kobolds are degenerate mutant spawn of dragon heritage. Occasionally one will be born that's a throwback to its original progenitor race - dragons.

Kind of like how you can breed stunted, wrinkled bean plants with each other and mostly get more stunted, wrinkled bean plants, but sometimes get a tall, smooth plant. Dragon-ness must be a multi-loci homozygous recessive trait in the DNA.

[Prime32]

Pun-Pun is not a dragonwrought kobold. Whoever told you otherwise is mistaken. His ascent is entirely based on a) regular vanilla kobolds being scaled ones for the purposes of the Sarrukh's Manipulate Form, and b) being able to make a sufficiently high Knowledge (The Planes) check, to summon Pazzuzu, who will always grant a request to a Paladin.Interestingly, Dragonwrought kobolds actually can't become Pun-Pun, since dragons explicitly don't count as Scaled Ones.

I choose to take this as evidence that the Dragonwrought genes were introduced by time travellers in an attempt to stop Pun-Pun from coming to power. :smalltongue:

[Chronos]

Quoth ShurikVch:

Note: by RAW, Manipulate Form is completely harmless. All "insanely broken" stuff from it is just wishful thinking or/and humor
Well, it can certainly increase ability scores arbitrarily high. That already seems pretty "insanely broken" to me. And it can also add abilities. Just what abilities it can add is not specified, but there are presumably some, and I've never seen any argument for anything more restrictive than "abilities that have already been printed somewhere".

[ShurikVch]

Well, it can certainly increase ability scores arbitrarily high. No, it can't. It's duration is "permanent", not "instant". Same source doesn't stack.


And it can also add abilities. Just what abilities it can add is not specified, but there are presumably some, and I've never seen any argument for anything more restrictive than "abilities that have already been printed somewhere". Wishful thinking. Because it doesn't say which abilities it add, it actually unable to add any

[Chronos]

So, when it says "can add abilities", what it actually means is "can't add any abilities". Gotcha.

And you don't need for the ability score increases to stack, because at any given time, you've only got one increase to any given score. If your Int is increased to 18, then increased to 24, then increased to 30, then your Int is 30. The increases to 18 and to 24 are no longer in effect, but they don't need to be, because the increase to 30 is still in effect.

[ShurikVch]

So, when it says "can add abilities", what it actually means is "can't add any abilities". Gotcha. It doesn't matter what it say it can. Because it doesn't say which ones abilities it can grant, it actually couldn't grant any. Just like, for example, you couldn't buy something which is out-of-stock.


And you don't need for the ability score increases to stack, because at any given time, you've only got one increase to any given score. If your Int is increased to 18, then increased to 24, then increased to 30, then your Int is 30. The increases to 18 and to 24 are no longer in effect, but they don't need to be, because the increase to 30 is still in effect. OK, then what you say about it?
Any ability score may be decreased to a minimum of 1 or increased to a maximum equal to the sarrukh’s corresponding score. No matter how high is "sarrukh’s corresponding score", it's still far from infinite :smalltongue:

[Red Fel]

It doesn't matter what it say it can. Because it doesn't say which ones abilities it can grant, it actually couldn't grant any. Just like, for example, you couldn't buy something which is out-of-stock.

I don't know that it's necessary for it to list every Ex, Su, or Sp ability in the game. That seems like overkill. It simply says "A sarrukh may also grant the target an extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like ability or remove one from it." That's explicit. To then say "But it doesn't list which abilities, so it can't do so at all," runs directly contrary to the language which explicitly says that yes, it can.

I understand your frustration. I feel the same every time someone says "the book doesn't say I can't do it, therefore I must be able to." But in this case, the book explicitly says that you can. That's a full stop.


OK, then what you say about it? No matter how high is "sarrukh’s corresponding score", it's still far from infinite :smalltongue:

The trick with Pun-Pun was to give the Manipulate Form ability to a familiar, artificially inflate its ability scores, and then have the familiar use Manipulate Form on Pun-Pun. This would cycle - Pun-Pun would increase the viper's ability scores, which would let the viper raise Pun-Pun's, which would give Pun-Pun a higher CL for the buff it would use on the viper (via shenanigans), and back and forth, until Pun-Pun had NI ability scores.

Let's just agree that Manipulate Form is a horribly written and broken ability, that Pun-Pun is an abomination of TO, and that chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream, and move on.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Draconomicon page 4, sidebar, The Different Kinds of 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).

This basically says that all dragons are true dragons, except when they don't advance through age categories.

This is corroborated by Dragon Magic page 87, the most recent thing published that makes mention of it: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

The Dragonwrought feat gives them the dragon creature type, and per Races of the Dragon page 39, they use the same twelve age categories that is a requirement for being considered a true dragon. Thus, they are in fact true dragons.


One counter-argument cites the list of possible half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon, which is in no way pertinent as this discussion is not about half-dragons, and that list is not even complete as it skips obvious true dragons from Dragons of Faerun and other books. Furthermore, Dragon Magic was published after Races of the Dragon and gives a more current definition which will override previous ones according to the primary source rules.

Some people will split hairs by saying Dragonwrought Kobolds are lacking the Advancement: [age categories] entry that other true dragons have, but this goes against the most recent definition which only states that a true dragon must have the twelve age categories, not advance according to them. Furthermore, a MM dragon which takes class levels does not cease to be a true dragon because it's no longer advancing according to the age categories.

[Elderand]

chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream, and move on.

I will never agree to that ! Everyone knows the best flavor of ice cream is the sound a mewling butterfly swimming through unborn souls pinned to the cyclopean maw of an unfathomable beast.

[Elricaltovilla]

Let's just agree that Manipulate Form is a horribly written and broken ability, that Pun-Pun is an abomination of TO, and that chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream, and move on.

I think you mean Mint Chocolate Chip, you heathen. Or strawberry if you're talking specifically about soft serve.

[Threadnaught]

No, it can't. It's duration is "permanent", not "instant". Same source doesn't stack.

Wishful thinking. Because it doesn't say which abilities it add, it actually unable to add any

Multiple castings/uses don't stack, only the strongest counts.

Manipulate Form for +32 Strength is inferior to Manipulate Form for +64 Strength, so only the +64 Strength counts.


This is all off topic though, let's concentrate on the 121 year old Great Wyrm Dragonwraught Kobolds, their Epic Feats, Sovereign Archetypes and possibly the Xorvintaal Template. Is it possible to give a Dragon the Xorvintaal Template if it has a Sovereign Archetype? I'm thinking about a Kobold Warblade who fights unarmed and poisons everyone she fights.

[ShurikVch]

I don't know that it's necessary for it to list every Ex, Su, or Sp ability in the game. That seems like overkill. It simply says "A sarrukh may also grant the target an extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like ability or remove one from it." That's explicit. To then say "But it doesn't list which abilities, so it can't do so at all," runs directly contrary to the language which explicitly says that yes, it can.

I understand your frustration. I feel the same every time someone says "the book doesn't say I can't do it, therefore I must be able to." But in this case, the book explicitly says that you can. That's a full stop. D&D 3.5 as a whole is a permission-based game. You couldn't do literally nothing unless RAW says you can.
And, in this case, RAW says "sarrukh may also grant the target an extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like ability or remove one from it", not "sarrukh may also grant the target any extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like ability or remove one from it". See difference?

[Ruethgar]

That is why you have a viper familiar that you Bull's Strength/Cat's Grace etc. to manipulate form up on you then switch.

But on point. Races of the Dragon technically provides the newest definition of a true dragon with its list, removing the previously True Tome, Hex, Faerunian and Tiamut's sister chromatics Purple, Orange and Yellow from the list. However it is only in publications to date which at the time of writing did not include Races of the Dragon itself meaning any dragons introduced there-in fall to the Dracinomicon and Dragon Magic to define as True dragon or not which the dragonwrought kobold qualify for.

Also, the sovereign archetypes are not True dragon only though they heavily imply as such. Any dragon can take them. The only thing true dragons give are the epic feats at old age, madness from Dragon 313 and I think a few feat and class options from the Dracinomicon.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

This is all off topic though, let's concentrate on the 121 year old Great Wyrm Dragonwraught Kobolds, their Epic Feats, Sovereign Archetypes and possibly the Xorvintaal Template. Is it possible to give a Dragon the Xorvintaal Template if it has a Sovereign Archetype? I'm thinking about a Kobold Warblade who fights unarmed and poisons everyone she fights.

Just go Dracolich, get a paralyzing gaze and paralyze everything you hit with your claw/claw/bite routine. Get (Improved) Rapidstrike and the Mongoose maneuvers for more claw attacks, and take Ability Focus for +2 paralysis DC.

[WhamBamSam]

This is all off topic though, let's concentrate on the 121 year old Great Wyrm Dragonwraught Kobolds, their Epic Feats, Sovereign Archetypes and possibly the Xorvintaal Template. Is it possible to give a Dragon the Xorvintaal Template if it has a Sovereign Archetype? I'm thinking about a Kobold Warblade who fights unarmed and poisons everyone she fights.The Sovereign Archetype doesn't cause the dragon to cease to be a True Dragon, and Sovereign Archetypes explicitly say that they have no downside for varieties of dragon who don't have alternate spell selection options, so yes, the two are compatible.

EDIT:
Just go Dracolich, get a paralyzing gaze and paralyze everything you hit with your claw/claw/bite routine. Get (Improved) Rapidstrike and the Mongoose maneuvers for more claw attacks, and take Ability Focus for +2 paralysis DC.The Rapidstrike line requires that a Dracolich Dragonwrought Kobold still be a dragon, as undead don't qualify for it. However, it's entirely possible that this is the case, as the kobold still has, and qualifies for, a feat that says "your type is dragon."

For Dracoliches, I actually prefer to move away from claw/claw/bite a lot of the time. The Dracolich Paralyzing Gaze says it works on any physical attack, so you can use weapons (even ranged ones) and still make use of it.

EDIT 2:
That is why you have a viper familiar that you Bull's Strength/Cat's Grace etc. to manipulate form up on you then switch.

But on point. Races of the Dragon technically provides the newest definition of a true dragon with its list, removing the previously True Tome, Hex, Faerunian and Tiamut's sister chromatics Purple, Orange and Yellow from the list. However it is only in publications to date which at the time of writing did not include Races of the Dragon itself meaning any dragons introduced there-in fall to the Dracinomicon and Dragon Magic to define as True dragon or not which the dragonwrought kobold qualify for.

Also, the sovereign archetypes are not True dragon only though they heavily imply as such. Any dragon can take them. The only thing true dragons give are the epic feats at old age, madness from Dragon 313 and I think a few feat and class options from the Dracinomicon.This is not the case. RotD (January 2006), is sandwiched between the publishing times of Draconomicon (November 2003) and Dragon Magic (September 2006). So whether the first or most recent rule on the point counts as the primary souce, RotD has no authority on the topic.

[Threadnaught]

The Sovereign Archetype doesn't cause the dragon to cease to be a True Dragon, and Sovereign Archetypes explicitly say that they have no downside for varieties of dragon who don't have alternate spell selection options, so yes, the two are compatible.

Sweet, Wyrm of War for Kobold Warblade it is then.
I wonder how much I could boost a Kobold Artificer.


Just go Dracolich, get a paralyzing gaze and paralyze everything you hit with your claw/claw/bite routine. Get (Improved) Rapidstrike and the Mongoose maneuvers for more claw attacks, and take Ability Focus for +2 paralysis DC.

Nah, as much as I adore Undead, I want to play a Dragon for once.

[ezkajii]

I've always figured, Kobolds, no matter what feats, templates, class features, etc. you apply to them, are not true dragons, simply because that is not what they are.

An atropal, a chichimec, and a hecatoncheires are all abominations.
A red dragon, a deep dragon, and a tome dragon are all dragons.
A kobold, a dragonwrought kobold, a half-dragon kobold are all kobolds.
The identity of the creature is stated in the name of the creature itself, and no matter what else you tack on top it's still just the kind of creature that it is.

[bjoern]

I've always figured, Kobolds, no matter what feats, templates, class features, etc. you apply to them, are not true dragons, simply because that is not what they are.

An atropal, a chichimec, and a hecatoncheires are all abominations.
A red dragon, a deep dragon, and a tome dragon are all dragons.
A kobold, a dragonwrought kobold, a half-dragon kobold are all kobolds.
The identity of the creature is stated in the name of the creature itself, and no matter what else you tack on top it's still just the kind of creature that it is.

While I follow your logic (not necessarily agree) you have to consider how that would apply to other things.

You baleful polymorph me into a slug? Nope I'm a human. Polymorph doesn't work on me.

[Necroticplague]

I've always figured, Kobolds, no matter what feats, templates, class features, etc. you apply to them, are not true dragons, simply because that is not what they are.

An atropal, a chichimec, and a hecatoncheires are all abominations.
A red dragon, a deep dragon, and a tome dragon are all dragons.
A kobold, a dragonwrought kobold, a half-dragon kobold are all kobolds.
The identity of the creature is stated in the name of the creature itself, and no matter what else you tack on top it's still just the kind of creature that it is.

Using the same logic;

"I've always figured Humans, no matter what.......you apply to them, are always living, simply because that is what they are.

A human, a necropolitan human, and a ghost human are all human.

The identity of the creature is stated in the name of the creature itself, and no matter what else you tack on top it's still just the kind of creature that it is."

[Arael666]

The Dragonwrought feat gives them the dragon creature type, and per Races of the Dragon page 39, they use the same twelve age categories that is a requirement for being considered a true dragon. Thus, they are in fact true dragons.

As I said in the other tread, having the same age categories as a dragon is NOT the same as advancing by age categories. In D&D advance means gaining HD, so unless a Dragonwrought Kobold aquires HD simply by getting older he is not advancing through age categories.

[Arael666]

Also, the sovereign archetypes are not True dragon only though they heavily imply as such. Any dragon can take them. The only thing true dragons give are the epic feats at old age, madness from Dragon 313 and I think a few feat and class options from the Dracinomicon.

Actually you got those things reversed. Sovereign archetypes alter a true dragon's original casting, thus it can only be applied to True Dragons, since lesse dragons dont have innate casting. Also, epic feats are available to any dragon (true or lesser) as long as he is at least old age.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

As I said in the other tread, having the same age categories as a dragon is NOT the same as advancing by age categories. In D&D advance means gaining HD, so unless a Dragonwrought Kobold aquires HD simply by getting older he is not advancing through age categories.

I've already clarified this, the most recent definition from Dragon Magic is as follows: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

No mention of advancement, Dragonwrought Kobolds are dragons who have twelve age categories, thus they are true dragons by the RAW definition.

[Arael666]

I've already clarified this, the most recent definition from Dragon Magic is as follows: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

No mention of advancement, Dragonwrought Kobolds are dragons who have twelve age categories, thus they are true dragons by the RAW definition.

So, you chose to ignore all the previous specific rules about dragons in favor of dragon magic's out of place line. And I enforce "line" cause Dragon Magic does not even dedicate a subchapter to talk about true dragons, that line is inside the explanation for dragonpacts. But yeah, that sounds perfectly logical, lets just ignore a whole friggin book fully dedicated to True Dragons in favor of a single line of text mentioned in an alternate rules section, that makes so much sense!

[Milo v3]

So, you chose to ignore all the previous specific rules about dragons in favor of dragon magic's out of place line. And I enforce "line" cause Dragon Magic does not even dedicate a subchapter to talk about true dragons, that line is inside the explanation for dragonpacts. But yeah, that sounds perfectly logical, lets just ignore a whole friggin book fully dedicated to True Dragons in favor of a single line of text mentioned in an alternate rules section, that makes so much sense!

Dragon Magic is the most up to date source.

[Arael666]

Dragon Magic is the most up to date source.

According to this a Half-Dragon Kobold is a True Dragon, no need for the Dragonwrought feat.

[Milo v3]

According to this a Half-Dragon Kobold is a True Dragon, no need for the Dragonwrought feat.
Lack of LA is pretty good.

[The Insanity]

I've already clarified this, the most recent definition from Dragon Magic is as follows: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

No mention of advancement, Dragonwrought Kobolds are dragons who have twelve age categories, thus they are true dragons by the RAW definition.
Sorry, but that contradicts earlier sources... how? Not mentioning something doesn't mean it all of a sudden doesn't matter. And note that the example in your quote does have advancement.

[Yuki Akuma]

According to this a Half-Dragon Kobold is a True Dragon, no need for the Dragonwrought feat.

Sure are, but the Dragonwrought feat doesn't add a +3 level adjustment, so it's objectively better than the Half-Dragon template.

[danzibr]

Draconomicon page 4, sidebar, The Different Kinds of Dragons


This basically says that all dragons are true dragons, except when they don't advance through age categories.

This is corroborated by Dragon Magic page 87, the most recent thing published that makes mention of it: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

The Dragonwrought feat gives them the dragon creature type, and per Races of the Dragon page 39, they use the same twelve age categories that is a requirement for being considered a true dragon. Thus, they are in fact true dragons.


One counter-argument cites the list of possible half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon, which is in no way pertinent as this discussion is not about half-dragons, and that list is not even complete as it skips obvious true dragons from Dragons of Faerun and other books. Furthermore, Dragon Magic was published after Races of the Dragon and gives a more current definition which will override previous ones according to the primary source rules.

Some people will split hairs by saying Dragonwrought Kobolds are lacking the Advancement: [age categories] entry that other true dragons have, but this goes against the most recent definition which only states that a true dragon must have the twelve age categories, not advance according to them. Furthermore, a MM dragon which takes class levels does not cease to be a true dragon because it's no longer advancing according to the age categories.
Until I read this exact post I thought Dragonwrought Kobolds were not true dragons. Ahh, definitions. Reminds me of all the nice properties the empty set enjoys.

[Arael666]

Until I read this exact post I thought Dragonwrought Kobolds were not true dragons. Ahh, definitions. Reminds me of all the nice properties the empty set enjoys.

Yeah, I see it now too. I should have know better then questioning RAW with logic and reason. It's just RAW, it does not mean DM's are obliged to allow it.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

So, you chose to ignore all the previous specific rules about dragons in favor of dragon magic's out of place line. And I enforce "line" cause Dragon Magic does not even dedicate a subchapter to talk about true dragons, that line is inside the explanation for dragonpacts. But yeah, that sounds perfectly logical, lets just ignore a whole friggin book fully dedicated to True Dragons in favor of a single line of text mentioned in an alternate rules section, that makes so much sense!

The entire opposition all chose to ignore the Draconomicon's very specific definition in favor of referencing the contextually irrelevant list of half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon. As soon as a newer, more current and up to date definition was discovered that would automatically override that list without argument, suddenly the Draconomicon version is conveniently the most relevant. You can choose to use and to ignore whatever rules you want at your own gaming table, but leave your own opinions of what the rules should say out of a RAW argument.

[Arael666]

The entire opposition all chose to ignore the Draconomicon's very specific definition in favor of referencing the contextually irrelevant list of half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon. As soon as a newer, more current and up to date definition was discovered that would automatically override that list without argument, suddenly the Draconomicon version is conveniently the most relevant. You can choose to use and to ignore whatever rules you want at your own gaming table, but leave your own opinions of what the rules should say out of a RAW argument.

Did you even bother to read my last post before writing that? I'm guessing not, chill dude, you're right.

[Ruethgar]

Actually you got those things reversed. Sovereign archetypes alter a true dragon's original casting, thus it can only be applied to True Dragons, since lesse dragons dont have innate casting. Also, epic feats are available to any dragon (true or lesser) as long as he is at least old age.
The archetypes alter the domains in the innate spellcasting but the dragon need not have domains to take an archetype. It is limited to dragons yes, but not just true dragons. Also almost if not all dragons with the old age category are true dragons. The normal old age category is only available to the playable races(so maybe Kyrn draconians are an exception don't have the book) and the12 category old age is for true dragons only according to dragon magic.

[ezkajii]

Using the same logic;

"I've always figured Humans, no matter what.......you apply to them, are always living, simply because that is what they are.

A human, a necropolitan human, and a ghost human are all human.

The identity of the creature is stated in the name of the creature itself, and no matter what else you tack on top it's still just the kind of creature that it is."

Correct. I mean their type would change, and they would also be the other thing. So something was true for all undead would affect a necropolitan and a ghost human the same, as would something that affects all humans (if it does not specify humanoid, obviously). Likewise, a dragonwrought kobold would be affect by anything that relies on dragon type, on it being a kobold, or anything that affects any dragonwrought specifically. However, at no point is their kind changed into true dragon, at least the way i see it.

[Chronos]

And if you ever found anything that required the dragon kind as opposed to dragon type, that might be relevant. But I doubt there is anything, since I don't think "kind" is ever actually defined in the rules.

[danzibr]

Yeah, I see it now too. I should have know better then questioning RAW with logic and reason. It's just RAW, it does not mean DM's are obliged to allow it.
Oh yeah. Totally. Dragonwrought Kobolds being True Dragons are just like drown healing. RAW but absurd (at least in my book).

[ZamielVanWeber]

Oh yeah. Totally. Dragonwrought Kobolds being True Dragons are just like drown healing. RAW but absurd (at least in my book).

Mostly its just a fantastic example of how the writer's never took other books into account, ever. Kobolds get 12 (pure fluff) age categories and can, through a feat, become dragons. Next dragon book unequivocally defines them as true dragons. Whoops?

[WhamBamSam]

Oh yeah. Totally. Dragonwrought Kobolds being True Dragons are just like drown healing. RAW but absurd (at least in my book).I for one like that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons, both in terms of fluff and crunch. As I've said previously, I do enforce a ban list and a few house rules on kobold cheese, but I let a lot of it (both True Dragon cheese and regular Dragon cheese) fly. I'll absolutely agree that it isn't RAI, but so what? I'm more or less convinced that no one involved in writing Races of the Dragon had a clue what they were doing, but I honestly think it ended up being a better book as a result of their incompetence than it would have been had they written everything so that it worked the way they wanted it to.

For example, I ban the standard Wyrm of War, because I believe that feat starvation should be part of the price for accessing kobold cheese, but I'll allow, and potentially recommend Passion's Flame for rages/day as a Barbarian of your character level (as it references "caster level" rather than "Sorcerer caster level," and so you can use the one from the Draconic Rite of Passage), and I'm happy with the variant Wyrm of War (trading Sorcerer spells known for Tiger Claw maneuvers), even in its cheesier applications.

For the record, even with all the kobold cheese I allow, I still find human to be the best suited race to a given mechanical concept more often. There are things that I ban that are borked enough that they'd bring the glorious kobold master race up to human levels of ubiquity, and maybe to some it seems cleaner just to houserule/erroneously rule that Dragonwrought Kobolds aren't True Dragons than to ban some things but not others within the vat of True Dragon cheese. I disagree. I'd rather prune that particular tree than cut it down.

[hamishspence]

Draconomicon page 4, sidebar, The Different Kinds of Dragons


This basically says that all dragons are true dragons, except when they don't advance through age categories.

This is corroborated by Dragon Magic page 87, the most recent thing published that makes mention of it: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."


Which raises certain questions about Lung Dragons - since they don't have 12 age categories - they have 9, with the first 3 age categories all being "one separate dragon type" - the immature form of all Lung Dragons.

And in Dragon Magazine 345 (July 2006), the three types of Sea Serpent do have the classic 12 age categories, and the Dragon type, but are written in a way that suggests they are "not true dragons":

page 55:

"Like true dragons, sea serpents gain great power and size as they age. Upon hatching, they might only measure a few feet, but the eldest stretch well over 100 feet long, with some stories suggesting even larger specimens. They use the same age categories as true dragons."

[danzibr]

Which raises certain questions about Lung Dragons - since they don't have 12 age categories - they have 9, with the first 3 age categories all being "one separate dragon type" - the immature form of all Lung Dragons.

And in Dragon Magazine 345 (July 2006), the three types of Sea Serpent do have the classic 12 age categories, and the Dragon type, but are written in a way that suggests they are "not true dragons":

page 55:

"Like true dragons, sea serpents gain great power and size as they age. Upon hatching, they might only measure a few feet, but the eldest stretch well over 100 feet long, with some stories suggesting even larger specimens. They use the same age categories as true dragons."
So... by definition, Sea Serpents are indeed true dragons, but yes, their text is merely saying they're similar to true dragons. If it said ``Like all true dragons...'' then it'd be clear they are.

So. Looks like an inconsistency in D&D, with the inconsistency being found in Drag Mag. Not surprising, given how big D&D is.

I wouldn't call this a straight up contradiction (darn close), but this does make me wonder what straight up contradictions there are in D&D.

[Necroticplague]

In terms of fluff, it makes a fair bit of sense for Dragonwrought kobolds to be true dragons. Aren't Dragonwrought kobolds ones who are pretty much throwbacks to back when kobolds literally had blood of a true dragon running through their veins? And thus some of the power of such?

[danzibr]

In terms of fluff, it makes a fair bit of sense for Dragonwrought kobolds to be true dragons. Aren't Dragonwrought kobolds ones who are pretty much throwbacks to back when kobolds literally had blood of a true dragon running through their veins? And thus some of the power of such?
Huh. If I recall correctly, Kobolds came from the drops of blood of the first dragons.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Which raises certain questions about Lung Dragons - since they don't have 12 age categories - they have 9, with the first 3 age categories all being "one separate dragon type" - the immature form of all Lung Dragons.

And in Dragon Magazine 345 (July 2006), the three types of Sea Serpent do have the classic 12 age categories, and the Dragon type, but are written in a way that suggests they are "not true dragons":

page 55:

"Like true dragons, sea serpents gain great power and size as they age. Upon hatching, they might only measure a few feet, but the eldest stretch well over 100 feet long, with some stories suggesting even larger specimens. They use the same age categories as true dragons."

All the lung dragons technically do have twelve age categories, but they all have identical stats for the first three.

Looking at the sea serpents' stats, I'd say they're definitely true dragons, the only thing they're lacking beyond what MM dragons get are flight and innate spellcasting. Chances are the authors were simply ignorant of the definition of true dragons. I don't see their rules text specifically calling them out as not being true dragons, and if by some miracle they're not true dragons by RAW, they would be an exception to the general rule. Dragonwrought Kobolds make no such exception, and thus follow the general rule.

[hamishspence]

Or they just figured that aquatic dragons "of some relation to true dragons" could have the 12 age categories for convenience and to maximise utility for low-level adventures.

[Arcanist]

All the lung dragons technically do have twelve age categories, but they all have identical stats for the first three.

I challenge you to find me a Lung Dragon with 12, single table, age categories.

I'd also like to point out that by RAW, if we're following the convenient age category table in RotD, Kobolds do not have a maximum age since they never achieve middle age, old, or venerable and therefore do not age. By association, they do not gain the benefits (or penalties for that matter) for aging in the first place. Ain't that a kick in the head?

EDIT: My mistake, they apparently skip Middle Age and immediately hit Old and then never hit Venerable so they get a +2 to Int, Wis, and Cha.

[Heliomance]

So... by definition, Sea Serpents are indeed true dragons, but yes, their text is merely saying they're similar to true dragons. If it said ``Like all true dragons...'' then it'd be clear they are.

So. Looks like an inconsistency in D&D, with the inconsistency being found in Drag Mag. Not surprising, given how big D&D is.

I wouldn't call this a straight up contradiction (darn close), but this does make me wonder what straight up contradictions there are in D&D.

Off the top of my head, there's Dragonborn of Bahamut. The target creature explicitly becomes a Humanoid, and the target creature just as explicitly retains its type.

[danzibr]

Off the top of my head, there's Dragonborn of Bahamut. The target creature explicitly becomes a Humanoid, and the target creature just as explicitly retains its type.
Can a creature not have 2 types? I know type and subtype, and while 2 types seems odd at first glance, maybe it's fine.

[Chronos]

You can also have a Deep Imiskari who (via a flaw) takes both Human Heritage and Otherworldly as feats at first level. Such a creature would then be both a humanoid and an outsider.

There are also situations that come up in gestalt, like a character taking the 20th level of Dread Necromancer at the same time as the 10th level of Green Star Adept.

[WhamBamSam]

Off the top of my head, there's Dragonborn of Bahamut. The target creature explicitly becomes a Humanoid, and the target creature just as explicitly retains its type.There's a discrepancy between the "race" section for Dragonborn (which says they're Humanoid (Dragonblood)) and the sidebar on the Ritual of Rebirth, which makes the more reasonable claim that Dragonborn come out with their type intact, but with the dragonblood subtype.


You can also have a Deep Imiskari who (via a flaw) takes both Human Heritage and Otherworldly as feats at first level. Such a creature would then be both a humanoid and an outsider.A Half-Elf who takes Half-Elf Paragon at 1st level can accomplish this without flaws.

[Deophaun]

The entire opposition all chose to ignore the Draconomicon's very specific definition in favor of referencing the contextually irrelevant list of half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon.
A) Draconomicon does not have a very specific definition. It has a very vague definition, and then latter somewhat refines it by refering to advancement through age categories.
B) Draconomicon does, however, define what advancing through age categories means, and why your dragon familiar doesn't suddenly become a lot more powerful when you hit it with the aging effect from bestow curse. As dragonwrought kobolds don't advance in this way, they aren't true dragons, as per Draconomicon.
C) And everyone knew that already, as if you look throughout the arguments that DWKs are true dragons, the language always has to shift midway through away from any reference to "advancing" to "having" while hoping no one notices.
D) Per the errata document, Draconomicon's definition of a true dragon overrules Dragon Magic's, because Draconomicon's topic is the nature of dragons, while Dragon Magic's is not. this is what errata calls "topic precedence."

[Invader]

I'm ok with the dragon thing, and IIRC the pun-pun build relies on the rule that any dragon (not just true dragons) of old age or older can select epic feats. What I want to understand is this apparent understanding that Dragonwrought Kobolds are true dragons.

If someone could explain that to me or point me to the discussion where this was "decided", that would be great.

The discussion is linked in my sig.

[Chronos]

So what's the argument that "decided" it? If it's just the table, that doesn't do it: White dragonwrought kobolds are white dragons (which are on the table), brass dragonwrought kobolds are brass dragons (which are on the table), and so on.

[danzibr]

The discussion is linked in my sig.
Where in that thread is it *proven* that DWK's are *not* True Dragons?

[Necroticplague]

Where in that thread is it *proven* that DWK's are *not* True Dragons?

That's not how logic works. Unless something is stated to be true, it's assumed to be false (with exception for the axioms, which are often where the conflict lies). Thus, it is nothing/nobody's job to prove them not true dragons, it is the burden of proof to show that they are.

[Arcanist]

Where in that thread is it *proven* that DWK's are *not* True Dragons?

Here you go (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13337638&postcount=275). After about page 12 is when the entire thread gets slide into a torrent of worthless arguments on the grammar of the relevant passage. Read on if you'd like a stroll down memory lane. Reading my old comments reminds me how little I've grown up over the years. Truly a shame. :smallsigh:


That's not how logic works. Unless something is stated to be true, it's assumed to be false (with exception for the axioms, which are often where the conflict lies). Thus, it is nothing/nobody's job to prove them not true dragons, it is the burden of proof to show that they are.

This is true. The positive assertion is that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons. You may house rule that they are if you are so inclined, however please refrain from claiming that your house rules are somehow official rules. I do so miss the days before RAI was a term and it was all about RAW. :smalltongue:

[danzibr]

That's not how logic works. Unless something is stated to be true, it's assumed to be false (with exception for the axioms, which are often where the conflict lies). Thus, it is nothing/nobody's job to prove them not true dragons, it is the burden of proof to show that they are.
You misunderstand. Invader's signature says, ``The greatest Dragonwrought kobold discussion ever [Result: DW kobolds are NOT true dragons.]'' This boldly states that it is proven that DW Kobolds are not True Dragons. It does not say, ``The greatest Dragonwrought kobold discussion ever [Result: IT WAS FAILED TO BE PROVEN THAT DW kobolds are true dragons.]'' Hence my previous post.

Still, I can't blame you for assuming someone on the internet doesn't understand logic.

Here you go (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13337638&postcount=275). After about page 12 is when the entire thread gets slide into a torrent of worthless arguments on the grammar of the relevant passage. Read on if you'd like a stroll down memory lane. Reading my old comments reminds me how little I've grown up over the years. Truly a shame. :smallsigh:

This is true. The positive assertion is that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons. You may house rule that they are if you are so inclined, however please refrain from claiming that your house rules are somehow official rules. I do so miss the days before RAI was a term and it was all about RAW. :smalltongue:
Now this is much more useful than Necroticplague's response.

You know, I remember reading quite a bit of that thread a while ago. Now I wonder why Biffoniacus_Furio says that quote is not relevant. Hmm, no wait, I understand his point. It *is* missing some, for sure.

At this point it seems to me that RotD implicitly states DW Kobolds are not True Dragons (which is relevant as DW Kobolds are introduced in that book), whereas by the definition in Dragon Magic (which was published later), DW Kobolds are True Dragons. So... essentially Dragon Magic contradicts RotD. But it's contradicting a list which claims to be comprehensive yet clearly is not.

[Gwendol]

Old argument. True dragons grow larger and more powerful as they age, while kobolds don't really, or rather they advance by class. In the end though we are left to draw our own conclusions based on the published material.

[Arael666]

D) Per the errata document, Draconomicon's definition of a true dragon overrules Dragon Magic's, because Draconomicon's topic is the nature of dragons, while Dragon Magic's is not. this is what errata calls "topic precedence."

Why the hell did I never realized that before?
http://i.imgur.com/XCrjOwD.png

So, Draconomicon being the primary source on true dragons and Dragon magic being a secondary source (since all the information that book has on true dragons is a single line of text), and there is no errata on DWK being true dragons, The Draconomicon is correct.

Thank you Deophaun for that insight.

[danzibr]

Why the hell did I never realized that before?
http://i.imgur.com/XCrjOwD.png

So, Draconomicon being the primary source on true dragons and Dragon magic being a secondary source (since all the information that book has on true dragons is a single line of text), and there is no errata on DWK being true dragons, The Draconomicon is correct.

Thank you Deophaun for that insight.
Oooooh now that's interesting. So we have two definitions of True Dragon (correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have the books in front of me):

1) Dragon type and advances through 12 age categories (where the notion of advancing is made precise in Draconomicon).
2) Dragon type and has 12 age categories.

The first is from Draconomicon, and the second, while newer, comes from Dragon Magic. As Draconomicon is considered (I suppose) the primary source, we use 1). Essentially... that makes it sounds like Dragon Magic has a typo.

[Threadnaught]

On the one hand, Dragonwrought Kobolds don't Advance through 12 age categories, on the other, they have 12 age categories.
Depends on what counts as a True Dragon.


My guess is, it's up to the DM.

[Arcanist]

On the one hand, Dragonwrought Kobolds don't Advance through 12 age categories, on the other, they have 12 age categories.
Depends on what counts as a True Dragon.


My guess is, it's up to the DM.

This is also true. Advance is a game mechanic and all unquestionable True Dragons follow it. Kobolds, regardless of feats, do not advance by age categories. They advance by class level.

[Arael666]

1) Dragon type and advances through 12 age categories (where the notion of advancing is made precise in Draconomicon).

Among other requirements like innate spellcasting and specific organs like the Draconis Fundamentum, but that is the most important definition and is repeated in other books.


The first is from Draconomicon, and the second, while newer, comes from Dragon Magic. As Draconomicon is considered (I suppose) the primary source, we use 1). Essentially... that makes it sounds like Dragon Magic has a typo.

I wouldn't say typo, just that the book never wanted to discuss true dragons in the first place, so it just mention two of most basic characteristics of true dragons so it can go on explaining the rules for Dragonpacts. But yeah, otherwise thats how I see it.

[WhamBamSam]

Among other requirements like innate spellcasting and specific organs like the Draconis Fundamentum, but that is the most important definition and is repeated in other books.Innate spellcasting is absolutely not a requirement to be a True Dragon. Regardless of whether or not Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons, there are plenty of varieties which are explicitly True Dragons but which do not have innate spellcasting.

[Arcanist]

Among other requirements like innate spellcasting and specific organs like the Draconis Fundamentum, but that is the most important definition and is repeated in other books.

Draconis Fundamentum is not, in any substantial way, related to game mechanics and to insist that one is necessary to be considered a True Dragon just feels like moving the goal post to me. Essentially, if you define this as the requirements for being a True Dragon, you are just pushing it so that all a Dragonwrought Kobold, or any Kobold for that matter, would need to be considered a True Dragon is to be a Sorcerer with the Dragon type and to have taken the Dragon Breath feat. To me, a True Dragon isn't something that you can somehow become. It's something that you are or you're not (but that is my opinion of course).

Regardless, Dragonwrought Kobolds are not True Dragons, however anyone who states otherwise is more then welcome to house rule it in their game, but it is not official rules.

[Arael666]

Draconis Fundamentum is not, in any substantial way, related to game mechanics and to insist that one is necessary to be considered a True Dragon just feels like moving the goal post to me. Essentially, if you define this as the requirements for being a True Dragon, you are just pushing it so that all a Dragonwrought Kobold, or any Kobold for that matter, would need to be considered a True Dragon is to be a Sorcerer with the Dragon type and to have taken the Dragon Breath feat. To me, a True Dragon isn't something that you can somehow become. It's something that you are or you're not (but that is my opinion of course).

Regardless, Dragonwrought Kobolds are not True Dragons, however anyone who states otherwise is more then welcome to house rule it in their game, but it is not official rules.

I'm just quoting the book, no need to get all buthurt. Besides, no, just doing that wouldn't give a kobold the gland, in fact, even if it did the kobold would still have to fit ALL THE OTHER requirements. I'ts amazing how you guys cherry pick your requirements like that.

[Segev]

I will never agree to that ! Everyone knows the best flavor of ice cream is the sound a mewling butterfly swimming through unborn souls pinned to the cyclopean maw of an unfathomable beast.

Nonsense. It's Mint Cookies & Cream.

[WhamBamSam]

I'm just quoting the book, no need to get all buthurt. Besides, no, just doing that wouldn't give a kobold the gland, in fact, even if it did the kobold would still have to fit ALL THE OTHER requirements. I'ts amazing how you guys cherry pick your requirements like that.Fang Dragons are explicitly True Dragons and they presumably don't have one, as they lack a breath weapon. Many other varieties explicitly stated to be True Dragons lack innate spellcasting.

[Invader]

Where in that thread is it *proven* that DWK's are *not* True Dragons?

There are a couple of points made that are definitive enough to me to make that claim and as the majority of participants seem to agree that they are not that is also good enough for me.

That being said, the whole debate has been beaten to death and I don't have the energy to argue about it anymore, hence all I did was link to the original discussion the OP asked about so he could infer his own decision as every point for or against the argument had been pretty much included in that thread.

[bjoern]

This is also true. Advance is a game mechanic and all unquestionable True Dragons follow it. Kobolds, regardless of feats, do not advance by age categories. They advance by class level.

Its been mentioned already but if what you say is correct, a red dragon that "advances" one level in fighter stops being a dragon and is now something else....a raceless monster?

[ExLibrisMortis]

Is there anything which prevents a dragonwrought kobold from advancing through age categories? Races of the Dragon does not specify that kobolds with sufficient RHD go up in age category, but there might be some general rule somewhere which states that a true dragon gains an age category for every 3 RHD it gains. In that case, a 16 HD dragonwrought kobold would be just at age category 6 (1 HD wyrmling, plus five categories gained).

Mind you, that would lead to the crazy situation of a kobold getting 15 extra HD in 11 years (3 HD in the first six months). Kobolds would be the ultimate race to breed for massive HD gain, barring perhaps oozes or something. You couldn't get them class levels, but dragon HD are pretty good (better than NPC classes barring adept, and better than some PC classes).


Edit@Arcanist: I don't think that a MM entry "Advancement: by character class" means you can't get any RHD. The MM1 chapter 4 (p. 290), on advancing monsters, says: "These methods are not mutually exclusive — it’s possible for a monster [...] to be improved by both increasing its Hit Dice and adding character class levels."

For players, that may not be totally relevant, but the RAW of this isn't determined by the PC side only. NPC dragonwrought kobolds are equally burdened by their uncertain status under the current RAW-maze!

[Arcanist]

I'm just quoting the book, no need to get all buthurt. Besides, no, just doing that wouldn't give a kobold the gland, in fact, even if it did the kobold would still have to fit ALL THE OTHER requirements. I'ts amazing how you guys cherry pick your requirements like that.

Fine, a Dragon Breath graft. Please elaborate on what these "requirements" exactly are? Because as far as I can see, nobody agrees on what quantifies a True Dragon since the "requirements" appear to be all over the place. Why don't you tell me what your requirements for a True Dragon?


Its been mentioned already but if what you say is correct, a red dragon that "advances" one level in fighter stops being a dragon and is now something else....a raceless monster?

It's like when you give, for example, a pit fiend class levels. Just because you've given the pit fiend a class level, does not disallow it from taking additional Hit Dice to increase in size. The same applies for a Dragon of any type as well. The only noteworthy difference in this case is that the Kobold cannot ever advance via racial hit dice as a side effect of their listing in the Monster Manual.

I'll admit however that this is an interesting rule discrepancy and if this is ever resolved (it won't be), we should probably start seeing threads on this topic (we won't).

[Arael666]

Fine, a Dragon Breath graft. Please elaborate on what these "requirements" exactly are? Because as far as I can see, nobody agrees on what quantifies a True Dragon since the "requirements" appear to be all over the place. Why don't you tell me what your requirements for a True Dragon?

1 - Innate Spellcasting. I know people pointed true dragons that don't have this capability, but if the book that they were printed say they are true dragons then tey are. It's just an exeption to the genreal rule that dragons have innate spell casting, they don't cease to be true dragons because they dont have that hability, since the book in wich they were printed says they are true dragons. Anyway, the Monster Mannual says that all true dragons have this capability and Draconomicom corroborate this on page 24.
2 - ADVANCING by age categories. Sure kobolds have age categories, but they don't advance by them!
3 - Draconis Fundamentum. Same principle as nº 1 apply, if a book prints a dragon that does not have a breath weapon but says it is a true dragon then it is. (the text of the Metabolic Fire graft doesn't mention the gland, but we can let this slide since everything points in that direction).
4 - Having age categories
5 - Being warm-blooded.

Among other anatomy and fisiologic related things, but yeah, the requirements indeed are all over the place. As you can see I'm just quoting Draconomicon fluff and crunch, you may waive a few things here and there that you perceive as just fluff text that have nothing to do with da rules (wich I do not agree with but can understand the reasoning). However, there are 3 requirements that you simply cannot ignore, wich are: innate spellcasting, having 12 age categories and advancing by those age categories.

[Arcanist]

1 - Innate Spellcasting. I know people pointed true dragons that don't have this capability, but if the book that they were printed say they are true dragons then tey are. It's just an exeption to the genreal rule that dragons have innate spell casting, they don't cease to be true dragons because they dont have that hability, since the book in wich they were printed says they are true dragons. Anyway, the Monster Mannual says that all true dragons have this capability and Draconomicom corroborate this on page 24.
2 - ADVANCING by age categories. Sure kobolds have age categories, but they don't advance by them!
3 - Draconis Fundamentum. Same principle as nº 1 apply, if a book prints a dragon that does not have a breath weapon but says it is a true dragon then it is. (the text of the Metabolic Fire graft doesn't mention the gland, but we can let this slide since everything points in that direction).
4 - Having age categories
5 - Being warm-blooded.


Fine. The Incarnum Dragon does not have Innate Spellcasting. No listed sourcebook states that they are True Dragons, therefore, by your definition, they are not True Dragons.
Something we agree on. You seem to have this vague idea that anyone that disagrees with you on certain things disagrees with you on everything. I've made it very clear that I agree that Dragonwrought Kobold's aren't True Dragons. Why you are trying to make this argument directed at me is beyond me.
It seems to me that you determine whether something is a True Dragon by the book explicitly mentioning it. That said: Incarnum Dragon.


Everything else you say thereafter should largely be irrelevant. I have no idea if you are trolling or seriously making this argument directed at someone who largely agrees with you.

[Temennigru]

I've already clarified this, the most recent definition from Dragon Magic is as follows: "...a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon)."

No mention of advancement, Dragonwrought Kobolds are dragons who have twelve age categories, thus they are true dragons by the RAW definition.

That is not the most recent definition of true dragons. That is a reminder text for creating dragonpacts.
If reminder texts could override definitions, then texts like

...foobar monsters (those furry monsters from page 46)
would also be able to override "foobar monster" definitions as being anything furry in page 46.

[Gwendol]

That is not the most recent definition of true dragons. That is a reminder text for creating dragonpacts.
If reminder texts could override definitions, then texts like

would also be able to override "foobar monster" definitions as being anything furry in page 46.

Not to mention the fact that Dragon Magic is not the primary source for dragons. Draconomicon is.

[nyjastul69]

Nonsense. It's Mint Cookies & Cream.

Is that True Cookies and Cream, or Wrought Cookies and Cream?

Seriously though, I've never heard of Mint Cookies and Cream. Mint chocolate chip is prevalent in my locale though. Is it a regional thing like coffee milk?

[Socratov]

[...]that chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream, and move on.

Nuh-huh. I know I'm late to the party (had a couple of very busy days) but this is just horribly unoptimised. You are better off wiht a different flavour of ice cream and add greater chocolate chips. For example mint ice cream with extra pure greater chocolate chips makes for a far better dessert then plain chocolate ice cream. Same goes for vanilla, hazelnut, pistacchio and yoghurt (though for that greater chocolate flakes might be a better choice). And don't get me started on chocolate dips...

[nyjastul69]

Nuh-huh. I know I'm late to the party (had a couple of very busy days) but this is just horribly unoptimised. You are better off wiht a different flavour of ice cream and add greater chocolate chips. For example mint ice cream with extra pure greater chocolate chips makes for a far better dessert then plain chocolate ice cream. Same goes for vanilla, hazelnut, pistacchio and yoghurt (though for that greater chocolate flakes might be a better choice). And don't get me started on chocolate dips...

You're doing it wrong! The point is not to TO the flavor. It is to enjoy and savor the flavor.

*No icecreams were hurt during this post, although there were some iscreams.*

[Socratov]

You're doing it wrong! The point is not to TO the flavor. It is to enjoy and savor the flavor.

*No icecreams were hurt during this post, although there were some iscreams.*

No you are doing it wrong! By improving the flavour of the dessert it's so much easier to actually enjoy and savour the flavour. I'm not saying it's impossible to not enjoy unoptimised flavour, but optimising the flavour surely helps with enjoying said flavour.

*please remind yourself that, yes, we have gone full stormwind in an ice cream analogy about optimization. Congratulations*

[nyjastul69]

No you are doing it wrong! By improving the flavour of the dessert it's so much easier to actually enjoy and savour the flavour. I'm not saying it's impossible to not enjoy unoptimised flavour, but optimising the flavour surely helps with enjoying said flavour.

*please remind yourself that, yes, we have gone full stormwind in an ice cream analogy about optimization. Congratulations*

You spelled flavor and savor incorrectly.! Your arguments are phallatious! Errmmm... Sorry... Will... Stop... Now...

I would suggest asking the current GM of any game whether a DWK is a true iscream dragon or not. These threads do not answer the question, nor will they ever.

That is to say the iscream question, not the obvious DWK question. Hmmm... seems like we all forgot about Monkday.

[atemu1234]

Note: by Common RAI, Manipulate Form is completely harmless. All "insanely broken" stuff from it is just wishful thinking or/and humor

Had to fix that for you. RAW is Rules-as-Written, whose dogmatic interpretation is what allows Pun-Pun to even exist.

[Threadnaught]

You spelled flavor and savor incorrectly.!

Says someone who can't spell flavour and savour. Y'all nayed too calm tha hayeck dowhen y'all, ah piddy teh foo. Murica, y'all.
Let me prenaance towmaytorr coractly y'all. Tow-May-Torr, y'all.

Okay, enough yankee bashing.


On topic, it depends on the ruling you're using, either it's the Dragons that Advance through 12 age categories, or it's the Dragons which have 12 age categories. Either or really.

Kobolds don't Advance through the 12 age categories, unless you arbitrarily give them Class levels for reaching a certain age, which makes little sense as it effectively makes every old person super high level, while artificially aging someone for getting a certain amount of xp.

[Socratov]

You spelled flavor and savor incorrectly.! Your arguments are phallatious! Errmmm... Sorry... Will... Stop... Now...

I would suggest asking the current GM of any game whether a DWK is a true iscream dragon or not. These threads do not answer the question, nor will they ever.

That is to say the iscream question, not the obvious DWK question. Hmmm... seems like we all forgot about Monkday.


Says someone who can't spell flavour and savour. Y'all nayed too calm tha hayeck dowhen y'all, ah piddy teh foo. Murica, y'all.
Let me prenaance towmaytorr coractly y'all. Tow-May-Torr, y'all.

Okay, enough yankee bashing.
[...]

damnit, swordsage'd :smallbiggrin:

so, before we move on to real pressing matters, how do we stand on the frozen yoghurt in the dessert situation? True dessert or not?

[Elderand]

damnit, swordsage'd :smallbiggrin:

so, before we move on to real pressing matters, how do we stand on the frozen yoghurt in the dessert situation? True dessert or not?

Only as long as it's made from whole milk from shoggoths

[Socratov]

Only as long as it's made from whole milk from shoggoths

but the low fat variant doesn't count? Not even if it has been aged for some time to allow the proteins to bond?

[nyjastul69]

True dragons get more powahful (sorry) as they age. Do DWK? In a pedantic sense they do. They get ability bumps, without any associated penalties. That could be considered an increase in power. True dragons seem to have not just a stat block, but also a coupler (sorry Bawstonian yank here) associated tables. They have a 'Dragon by age' table and a 'Dragon abilities by age' table. I don't see the 'increased abilities based upon age' table for DWK's.

I wish it were Monkday.

Edit: I like pie.

[Ruethgar]

1 - Innate Spellcasting. I know people pointed true dragons that don't have this capability, but if the book that they were printed say they are true dragons then tey are. It's just an exeption to the genreal rule that dragons have innate spell casting, they don't cease to be true dragons because they dont have that hability, since the book in wich they were printed says they are true dragons. Anyway, the Monster Mannual says that all true dragons have this capability and Draconomicom corroborate this on page 24.
2 - ADVANCING by age categories. Sure kobolds have age categories, but they don't advance by them!
3 - Draconis Fundamentum. Same principle as nº 1 apply, if a book prints a dragon that does not have a breath weapon but says it is a true dragon then it is. (the text of the Metabolic Fire graft doesn't mention the gland, but we can let this slide since everything points in that direction).
4 - Having age categories
5 - Being warm-blooded.

Among other anatomy and fisiologic related things, but yeah, the requirements indeed are all over the place. As you can see I'm just quoting Draconomicon fluff and crunch, you may waive a few things here and there that you perceive as just fluff text that have nothing to do with da rules (wich I do not agree with but can understand the reasoning). However, there are 3 requirements that you simply cannot ignore, wich are: innate spellcasting, having 12 age categories and advancing by those age categories.
1. There is no direct mention of true dragons on page 24 or the requirement that they have innate spellcasting to be considered true dragons, please cite somewhere else to support your claim.
2. Please provide the page number for an extended definition because the often cited page 4 of the Draconomicon is not sufficient to disqualify DWKs considering most playable races advance through age categories. Do note that the word "advances" is not the same as the D&D term "Advancement."
3. Draconis Fundamentum, it says only true dragons have it, it does not say all true dragons have it.
4. Kobolds have age categories just like humans and red dragons do.
5. Despite being specifically called cold blooded, "kobolds do generate some internal body heat from taking in food and engaging in activity"RotD39 which makes them a form of endotherm as all true dragons are. That they do not succumb to hibernation or similar effect in cold weather as long as their metabolism is going on overdrive only further strengthens this argument.

[thecrimsondawn]

1. There is no direct mention of true dragons on page 24 or the requirement that they have innate spellcasting to be considered true dragons, please cite somewhere else to support your claim.
2. Please provide the page number for an extended definition because the often cited page 4 of the Draconomicon is not sufficient to disqualify DWKs considering most playable races advance through age categories. Do note that the word "advances" is not the same as the D&D term "Advancement."
3. Draconis Fundamentum, it says only true dragons have it, it does not say all true dragons have it.
4. Kobolds have age categories just like humans and red dragons do.
5. Despite being specifically called cold blooded, "kobolds do generate some internal body heat from taking in food and engaging in activity"RotD39 which makes them a form of endotherm as all true dragons are. That they do not succumb to hibernation or similar effect in cold weather as long as their metabolism is going on overdrive only further strengthens this argument.

When I saw 4 pages on this topic, I thought at first - This topic always ends up this way.

However this is useful information. I like to play DWKs as dragons - and a dragon is a dragon to me - true or not. However I would never ever argue for epic spellcasting, that just takes all the fun out the game.
D&D is about having fun, and many of us find fun in many different ways. For me, making powerful concepts and builds is very entertaining to me, but when it comes to playing, I love exotic creatures and stories to back them up. Having dragon psychosis as an option makes for very interesting role playing, and gives a nice bonus to a play style for it too. I feel that all things aside - this should be left to the DM to decide as until someone from WoTC comes with a direct answer to this, it will always be up to these incredibly long, and researched debates

[danzibr]

When I saw 4 pages on this topic, I thought at first - This topic always ends up this way.

However this is useful information. I like to play DWKs as dragons - and a dragon is a dragon to me - true or not. However I would never ever argue for epic spellcasting, that just takes all the fun out the game.
D&D is about having fun, and many of us find fun in many different ways. For me, making powerful concepts and builds is very entertaining to me, but when it comes to playing, I love exotic creatures and stories to back them up. Having dragon psychosis as an option makes for very interesting role playing, and gives a nice bonus to a play style for it too. I feel that all things aside - this should be left to the DM to decide as until someone from WoTC comes with a direct answer to this, it will always be up to these incredibly long, and researched debates
Speaking of fun, I'm having ideas of a campaign of DWK's treated as true dragons, with all the related cheese.

Should be balanced (I mean, if everyone does it). Could be quite fun.

[Eloel]

Speaking of fun, I'm having ideas of a campaign of DWK's treated as true dragons, with all the related cheese.

Should be balanced (I mean, if everyone does it). Could be quite fun.

If it has always been as such and has been used by everyone, you either get the kobolds exterminated by stronger dragons (Eberron dragons), or have kobolds rule the world of humanoids (due to faster and more widespread access to higher level spells).

[Threadnaught]

2. Please provide the page number for an extended definition because the often cited page 4 of the Draconomicon is not sufficient to disqualify DWKs considering most playable races advance through age categories. Do note that the word "advances" is not the same as the D&D term "Advancement."

I was going to pick at this, but then you pointed out how Advancement is different to advancement.


4. Kobolds have age categories just like humans and red dragons do.

Really, someone saying a creature must have Age Categories in order to qualify as a True Dragon, is complete bull****. If it were just having Age Categories, then even Warforged count as True Dragons.
Now having 12 Age Categories, however, is something completely different.

[lsfreak]

Is there actually anything rules-based that says Draconomicon is the primary source? I'd be inclined to think both Draconomicon and Dragon Magic are supplemental to the primary source of MM.

[Eloel]

Is there actually anything rules-based that says Draconomicon is the primary source? I'd be inclined to think both Draconomicon and Dragon Magic are supplemental to the primary source of MM.

Draconomicon quite clearly says "The Book of Dragons".

[lsfreak]

That's not rules-based, that's common-sense based. MM presents true dragons first. Draconomicon and Dragon Magic both add further details, in which case any contradictions take a) primary source and b) newest rules as primary. Is there a rules-based reason why this is line of reasoning is incorrect?

[ShurikVch]

Had to fix that for you. RAW is Rules-as-Written, whose dogmatic interpretation is what allows Pun-Pun to even exist. "What allows Pun-Pun to even exist" is not a RAW itself, but tendentious interpretation of those.

For example, please, can you quote, what's allow Pun-Pun to get divine rank. Just, please, carefully, say this text says it's possible to get a divinity with it. I, for some reason, doubt you may do it :smallamused:

Same about the Pun-Pun's special abilities. Because there no list of special abilities which yo can get, everybody somehow decided you may get any ability despite text clearly lacks of word "any". On the contrary, any ability which not listed in the MF's description, explicitly can't be given with it. What, no abilities listed at all? :smallconfused: Not my problem! :smallcool:

Granted, you still get notable ability score boost, especially to Str, but still, it's far from "infinite", and Str is one of the most useless abilities unless you play Warhulk or Illumian spellcaster with Aeshkrau sigil

[Chronos]

About that Draconis Fundamentum, or however you spell it-- How do you know that dragonwrought kobolds don't have it? Maybe that's yet another one of the things the feat gives you, in the process of turning you into a dragon.

EDIT:

Granted, you still get notable ability score boost, especially to Str, but still, it's far from "infinite",...
OK, so you claim there's an upper limit to the scores you can get? Name an upper limit to any score, and I'll tell you how to get higher than that using Manipulate Form.

[Eloel]

OK, so you claim there's an upper limit to the scores you can get? Name an upper limit to any score, and I'll tell you how to get higher than that using Manipulate Form.

There's a difference, albeit a small one, between "arbitrarily high" and "infinite". Pun-Pun achieves the former, but not the latter.

[ShurikVch]

OK, so you claim there's an upper limit to the scores you can get? Name an upper limit to any score, and I'll tell you how to get higher than that using Manipulate Form. OK.
For Str limit will be about 100: 23 (from start) + 32 (Giant Size) + 16 (Bite of Werebear) + 5 (Wish) + 4 (Alchemical) +4 (Moral) +4 (Sacred) + 4 (rage zyme) + 2 (silthilar muscles) + 2 (horseshoes of flame) + 2 (arm of nyr) + 2 (Death Knell)

[Eloel]

OK.
For Str limit will be about 100: 23 (from start) + 32 (Giant Size) + 16 (Bite of Werebear) + 5 (Wish) + 4 (Alchemical) +4 (Moral) +4 (Sacred) + 4 (rage zyme) + 2 (silthilar muscles) + 2 (horseshoes of flame) + 2 (arm of nyr) + 2 (Death Knell)

Please tell me why the below method does not work.

1. Cast Giant Size on familiar. Familiar becomes colossal and gains +32 size bonus to strength, giving the viper a total strength score of 36.
2. The viper uses Manipulate Form to increase Pun-Pun's strength score up to a maximum equal to the viper's strength score. In this case, 36. (This is not a bonus of any kind, he is augmenting Pun-Pun's original strength score.)
3. Pun-Pun dismisses the Giant Size effect on the viper. The viper goes back down to tiny size and 4 strength.
4. Pun-Pun casts Giant Size on himself. His strength score is 36 from step 2, now he goes colossal and gains a +32 size bonus to strength. His strength is 68.
5. Pun-Pun uses Manipulate Form to increase the strength of his tiny viper familiar. To match Pun-Pun's strength score, the viper's strength score is permanently increased from 4 to 68.
6. Pun-Pun dismisses the Giant Size effect on himself. He goes back to small size and 36 strength.
7. Pun-Pun casts Giant Size on his familiar. The viper becomes colossal and goes from 68 strength to 100 strength.
8. The viper uses Manipulate Form to permanently increase Pun-Pun's strength to 100.
9. Repeat process.

[ShurikVch]

Please tell me why the below method does not work.

Any ability score may be decreasedto a minimum of 1 or increased to a maximum equal to the sarrukh’s corresponding score. Viper is not a sarrukh, nor is Pun-Pun

[Milo v3]

Viper is not a sarrukh, nor is Pun-Pun

Simply find a way to make your character have the title of sarrukh, possibly in a society you create or a religion for yourself.

[Eloel]

Viper is not a sarrukh, nor is Pun-Pun

Not without some way of changing shape, no. OH, WAIT.

[ShurikVch]

Not without some way of changing shape, no. OH, WAIT. ??? :smallconfused:

[atemu1234]

??? :smallconfused:

It's a spell.

Also, the typical way to gain Manipulate Form is to get a gated Sarrukh to do it.

[ShurikVch]

It's a spell. Usually Pun-Pun made as character from 1 to 5 level. What Shapechange we can speak of at those levels? :smallannoyed:


Also, the typical way to gain Manipulate Form is to get a gated Sarrukh to do it. Yes, you may. But it wouldn't give you arbitrary high abilities

[Eloel]

Usually Pun-Pun made as character from 1 to 5 level. What Shapechange we can speak of at those levels? :smallannoyed:


We wildshape into one.

[dascarletm]

Question:
Do kobolds or dragonwrought kobolds appear in the list: Appendix 2: Index of Dragons?
Because according to this line of text:

"Appendix 2: Index of Dragons provides
a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in
official sources."

Wouldn't only what is in that list be considered a true dragon, unless it was presented since that book?

[Hecuba]

As soon as a newer, more current and up to date definition was discovered that would automatically override that list without argument

Addressing this first: there is pointedly not an order of publication rule for RAW.
It would be a sensible rule and likely would solve a significant number of issues. I heartily advocate the use of such a rule in normal play.

But to my eye, the discussion around this topic has always been about RAW, in its most tortured form.
And order of publication has no standing in RAW.

What the RoD list does that is of note for RAW discussions is establishe its precedence more or less properly.
There are only a couple of other examples of this actually happening according to the rules laid out for doing such a thing.

It happens to do so by referencing order of publication (and calling out Draconomicon specifically), but what gives it standing to make such a rule has nothing to do with its publication date and everything to do with it explicitly calling itself out as a more authoritative source.


The entire opposition all chose to ignore the Draconomicon's very specific definition in favor of referencing the contextually irrelevant list of half-dragon varieties in Races of the Dragon.
This accomplishment in RAW precedence is, of course, immediately undermined by poor editing.
This is because - while there is very little for it to supersede from Draconomicon other than the set of what qualifies as a true dragon - it is not a direct list of true dragons.

There is a logically sound argument for it providing a list of true dragons.

It is a list explicitly containing a half-dragon variety for all true dragons published to that date: as a logical consequence, it should give us an exhaustive list of true dragons to that date.

There is also a logically sound argument for it not overriding the rules for true dragons from other sources.

While it establishes it's precedence, it does not explicitly expand that precedence beyond half-dragons. Thus question becomes whether the logical consequences of a rule carry the same precedence.
If not, the more explicit rules on the subject from Draconomicon take precedence.

Both positions cause complications that were almost certainly unintended.

In practice, I find this conversation tells us more about poor editing than about RAW or intended design.
It says a lot that one of the few times WOTC followed their own precedence rules, they royally messed it up.

[Troacctid]

That's not rules-based, that's common-sense based. MM presents true dragons first. Draconomicon and Dragon Magic both add further details, in which case any contradictions take a) primary source and b) newest rules as primary. Is there a rules-based reason why this is line of reasoning is incorrect?

The introductions in each book loosely define their scope. Draconomicon is meant as a reference for the powers and tactics of dragons, as well as offering a variety of additional dragon-related options for players and DMs. Races of the Dragon is "primarily a player resource focusing on new options and expanded rules for D&D players who want to play draconic races." Dragon Magic is "all about what happens when 'lesser' races form loose pacts or associations with dragons and learn the creatures' ancient secrets."

[Eloel]

Wouldn't only what is in that list be considered a true dragon, unless it was presented since that book?

Relevant point 1:
Races of the Dragon is newer than Draconomicon

Relevant point 2:
Draconomicon also claims to list all lesser dragons in the said Appendix. Given that a dragon is either true or lesser, we can easily conclude that those lists are not comprehensive.

Appendix 2 lists every lesser dragon that has been described in a DUNGEONS & DRAGONS rulebook or accessory

[WhamBamSam]

1. There is no direct mention of true dragons on page 24 or the requirement that they have innate spellcasting to be considered true dragons, please cite somewhere else to support your claim.
2. Please provide the page number for an extended definition because the often cited page 4 of the Draconomicon is not sufficient to disqualify DWKs considering most playable races advance through age categories. Do note that the word "advances" is not the same as the D&D term "Advancement."
3. Draconis Fundamentum, it says only true dragons have it, it does not say all true dragons have it.
4. Kobolds have age categories just like humans and red dragons do.
5. Despite being specifically called cold blooded, "kobolds do generate some internal body heat from taking in food and engaging in activity"RotD39 which makes them a form of endotherm as all true dragons are. That they do not succumb to hibernation or similar effect in cold weather as long as their metabolism is going on overdrive only further strengthens this argument.Dragonwrought Kobolds might well be warm blooded. True or not, they are dragons, and the section in RotD which says kobolds are cold-blooded also says dragons are warm blooded. I suspect you might find other statements to that effect.


Question:
Do kobolds or dragonwrought kobolds appear in the list: Appendix 2: Index of Dragons?
Because according to this line of text:

"Appendix 2: Index of Dragons provides
a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in
official sources."

Wouldn't only what is in that list be considered a true dragon, unless it was presented since that book?Draconomicon predates it and Dragon Magic came later. RotD is the middle child in this controversy, and can't be said to have any authority. Also, since a Red Dragonwrought Kobold counts as a Red Dragon for most purposes, you could say that Dragonwrought Kobolds are on the list, and that you might as well argue that Wyrmling dragons aren't present either. Also, also as Ruethgar likes to bring up, that table may only refer to books published prior to RotD, and not include the dragon contained within.


The introductions in each book loosely define their scope. Draconomicon is meant as a reference for the powers and tactics of dragons, as well as offering a variety of additional dragon-related options for players and DMs. Races of the Dragon is "primarily a player resource focusing on new options and expanded rules for D&D players who want to play draconic races." Dragon Magic is "all about what happens when 'lesser' races form loose pacts or associations with dragons and learn the creatures' ancient secrets."Wouldn't that make Dragon Magic the authority on the lesser race of kobolds becoming more associated with dragons?:smalltongue:

I agree, Draconomicon probably should be considered the primary source (of course it should probably also be considered a 3.0 book, but hey, I'm happy enough to take advantage of its 3.5 status in other contexts). There's an argument that it only establishes itself as a primary source for the MM 10, but it's a somewhat flimsy one.

The advancing argument is shaking my previous conviction in Dragonwrought Kobolds being True Dragons, though the rest of the counterarguments about lists and innate spellcasting and magic livers are nonsense. I'd like to see what people have to say about Ruethgar's counterargument on the point, though.

[dascarletm]

Ah, I don't actually have that book, so based on the quote I saw here it seemed like it was a comprehensive list of true dragons.

[ShurikVch]

We wildshape into one.
Wild shape (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildShape):

The new form’s Hit Dice can’t exceed the character’s druid level.

Sarrukh
(Progenitor Race)
Medium Monstrous Humanoid
Hit Dice: 14d8+70 (133 hp)
So much for 5th level kobold who broke the game... :smallsigh:

[Eloel]

Wild shape (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildShape):


So much for 5th level kobold who broke the game... :smallsigh:

Divine Minion 1.
Wizard 1. Endurance, Alertness (through viper familiar)
Master of Many Forms 1.
Master of Many Forms 2. Assume Supernatural Ability
Master of Many Forms 3.

DM1 gives 11th level Wildshape, MoMF stacks to 14.

[ShurikVch]

Divine Minion 1.
Wizard 1. Endurance, Alertness (through viper familiar)
Master of Many Forms 1.
Master of Many Forms 2. Assume Supernatural Ability
Master of Many Forms 3.

DM1 gives 11th level Wildshape, MoMF stacks to 14.
Firstly:
MoMF stacks to 14 Quote, please

Secondly:
REQUIREMENTS
To qualify to become a master of many forms, a character must fulfill all the following criteria.
Feats: Alertness, Endurance.
Special: Wild shape class feature. Class feature, not template feature

[Eloel]

Quote, please


It's in the errata, you're welcome to go check.


Secondly: Class feature, not template feature



A divine minion can wild shape as an 11th-level druid

That means it's a class feature. Doesn't have to be gained through a class.

[danzibr]

That means it's a class feature. Doesn't have to be gained through a class.
Now *that's* interesting. I wouldn't have read it that way. I would've thought of it as a racial feature which emulates a class feature.

[Arcanist]

I honestly don't know what is more awe inspiring. The fact that this thread was derailed by ice cream jokes or that it was derailed into a discussion about MoMF... Or something :smallconfused:

[bjoern]

I honestly don't know what is more awe inspiring. The fact that this thread was derailed by ice cream jokes or that it was derailed into a discussion about MoMF... Or something :smallconfused:

I don't think they mod DWK threads. If they did they'd be closed before the first reply.

[Phelix-Mu]

Did we already get links somewhere in the interspersed pages to some of the earlier titanic threads on this topic? *summons Karnith or some other beacon of link organization* Because several were true gems of RAW wrangling, on par with the eternal "Is the set {Ex, Su, Sp, Nat} Complete and Exhaustive or are...WAIT, LET'S JUST AGREE THAT SHAPECHANGE IS DUMB" threads (a little creative license and my personal view there).

To my mind, the finer points of the RAW are interesting, but hardly pertinent in most cases. As already noted, DWK doesn't need to be a True Dragon to actually have access to most of the silliness that is out there. But it really is interesting (or bloody eyes-inducing, your pick) to see the evidence on each side of the scales.

As to the Manipulate Form ability, that is just silly nonsense. Let us speak of it no further in such serious tones.:smallamused: