D&D 3.5 Quick & Dirty Kobold Handbook

[Geeksthenewsexy]

The (Mini) Kobold Handbook

{Scrubbed}

Purple = Excellent
Blue = Good
Green = Average
Orange = Below Average
Red = Terrible




Standard Kobolds
(Also known as Generic Kobolds, as found in the SRD and 3.5 Monster Manual)


Ability Modifiers: -4 Strength, +2 Dexterity, -2 Constitution.
Size: Small
Base Land Speed: 30'
Vision: Darkvision out to 60 feet.
Skill Bonuses: A kobold character has a +2 racial bonus on Craft (Trapmaking), Profession (Miner), and Search checks.
Natural Armor Bonus: +1
Special Qualities: Light sensitivity.
Automatic Languages: Draconic.
Bonus Languages: Common, Undercommon.
Favored Class: Sorcerer.
Level Adjustment: +0.

{Scrubbed}

[Geeksthenewsexy]

[Reserved For Later Use]

Note: Feel free to PM me if you feel something is missing, and I'll see about adding it!

[Gruftzwerg]

Great Handbook, I love Kobolds <3

I would like to point out a lil mistake.

Manual Expertise (Ex): A kobold paragon may add their class level as a racial bonus on Craft (trapmaking), Profession (mining), and Search checks. (Changing from a +2 to a +5 racial bonus to Search never hurt anyone!)

Racial Bonuses don't stack. So you get only a max of +3 racial bonus for the mentioned skills. Imho it is bad editing and by RAI you are right. But a strict RAW reading would be only +3.


Further consider to add Dragon Psychosis from Dragon #313.
While many consider them cheesy and broken, for completeness they should be mentioned (with a warning). Imho by RAW they count for all dragon, since True Dragon is never mentioned in the text. While some of the psychosis have the "effect" to lose abilities of True Dragons, those are not part of the "requirements". If some part of an "effect" can't find a valid target, that doesn't stop the rest of the "effect", that can find valid targets, to work (e.g. compare to AoE spells with invalid targets in the area, the valid targets are still effected /or/ buff spells which affect mutiple stats: If you don't have one of the stats, that doesn't stop the spell from affecting the stats that you have ).

[Geeksthenewsexy]

Great Handbook, I love Kobolds <3

I would like to point out a lil mistake.


Racial Bonuses don't stack. So you get only a max of +3 racial bonus for the mentioned skills. Imho it is bad editing and by RAI you are right. But a strict RAW reading would be only +3.


Further consider to add Dragon Psychosis from Dragon #313.
While many consider them cheesy and broken, for completeness they should be mentioned (with a warning). Imho by RAW they count for all dragon, since True Dragon is never mentioned in the text. While some of the psychosis have the "effect" to lose abilities of True Dragons, those are not part of the "requirements". If some part of an "effect" can't find a valid target, that doesn't stop the rest of the "effect", that can find valid targets, to work (e.g. compare to AoE spells with invalid targets in the area, the valid targets are still effected /or/ buff spells which affect mutiple stats: If you don't have one of the stats, that doesn't stop the spell from affecting the stats that you have ).

Thanks!

I clarified the +3 vs +5 Raw/Rai argument, and added Dragon Psychosis as a mention of Dragonwraught Cheese, but didn't list it out as this is intended purely for 'Restricted to Kobolds' and the cheese available for the Dragonwraught really needs its own Handbook. Though I might add that as a section on the reserved post some time in the future and call it 'The (Mini) Dragonwraught Kobold Cheese Handbook'. lol

[ExLibrisMortis]

This looks good! One nitpick: I find it a little hard to tell your red and purple apart.


Racial Bonuses don't stack.
Did you know that the DMG rules on bonus stacking are on the exact same page number as the RC rules? Page 21 for both, and neither says that racial bonuses stack, but for some stupid reason, the section on special spell effects (PHB 171) calls out racial bonuses as stacking. This is not reproduced in the Rules Compendium. *throws up hands*

Anyway, racial bonuses do stack. Which, in the case of kobold paragon, is a good thing. Let's just be happy with that for a moment :smalltongue:.

[Gruftzwerg]

This looks good! One nitpick: I find it a little hard to tell your red and purple apart.


Did you know that the DMG rules on bonus stacking are on the exact same page number as the RC rules? Page 21 for both, and neither says that racial bonuses stack, but for some stupid reason, the section on special spell effects (PHB 171) calls out racial bonuses as stacking. This is not reproduced in the Rules Compendium. *throws up hands*

Anyway, racial bonuses do stack. Which, in the case of kobold paragon, is a good thing. Let's just be happy with that for a moment :smalltongue:.

I had similar problems with the colors^^

I never noticed (racial bonus stacking on) PHB 171. But sadly , by RAW, that doesn't change much in our situation here. Because the general rules for stacking are on page 21. Page 171 handles only "spell effect bonuses", which would make racial bonuses from spells an exception. But it does not become a general rule for racial bonuses from other sources (like natural racial skill bonuses in our chase).

[ExLibrisMortis]

I never noticed (racial bonus stacking on) PHB 171. But sadly , by RAW, that doesn't change much in our situation here. Because the general rules for stacking are on page 21. Page 171 handles only "spell effect bonuses", which would make racial bonuses from spells an exception. But it does not become a general rule for racial bonuses from other sources (like natural racial skill bonuses in our chase).
I don't think that specific bit applies only to spells. The paragraph starts out talking about spells, certainly, but then it says: "The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don’t generally stack", which is definitely talking about the general stacking rules. It then goes and talks about the exceptions--randomly adding racial bonuses--and never returns to spells at all. To me, it's a paragraph that starts with spells and wanders off into general rules (that apply to spells, of course). I think the reason it's in there might be that polymorph and the like can grant racial bonuses, which then cause the possibility of stacking racial bonuses, not usually available elsewhere.

Of course, by super-duper-strict RAW, there's no rule that says sectioning has any bearing on rules' scope, so it's a general rule despite being buried in the rules for spells. No, I don't suggest using this interpretation all the time, but the principle--that all rules have maximum scope, regardless of where they appear, unless a more limited scope is explicitly indicated--is sound.

[Gruftzwerg]

I don't think that specific bit applies only to spells. The paragraph starts out talking about spells, certainly, but then it says: "The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don’t generally stack", which is definitely talking about the general stacking rules. It then goes and talks about the exceptions--randomly adding racial bonuses--and never returns to spells at all. To me, it's a paragraph that starts with spells and wanders off into general rules (that apply to spells, of course). I think the reason it's in there might be that polymorph and the like can grant racial bonuses, which then cause the possibility of stacking racial bonuses, not usually available elsewhere.

Of course, by super-duper-strict RAW, there's no rule that says sectioning has any bearing on rules' scope, so it's a general rule despite being buried in the rules for spells. No, I don't suggest using this interpretation all the time, but the principle--that all rules have maximum scope, regardless of where they appear, unless a more limited scope is explicitly indicated--is sound.

I get what you mean, but as said,by RAW it in the wrong chapter to be a general rule for stacking bonuses and have any impact beyond spell effect racial bonuses. It's odd yeah...^^

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: Thread closed