Contingency - There when you need it?

[Arcanist]

"Up to now," which, if you'll notice excludes "now."

How do you figure that "Up to now" excludes "now".

Wrong. The Dragonwrought being a dragon would mean that it is the specific trumping the general. So try again, unless you want me to use core to invalidate other feats or some such.

Show me something that specifies that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons.

>List of all True Dragons.
>Dragonwrought Kobold is not on it.
>Must mean its inaccurate.

On a side note: Please, feel free to use any source in this discussion. Don't let lack of a source hold you back.

...And this time, try to actually pay attention to the basics of wording and, you know, rules.

Wow, you failed in literally less then 1 comment. I'd want to say that is a record but I'm confident you'd only take that as a challenge.

[Kazyan]

Incarnum Dragons are not in that list, even though MoI was released before RotD.

While you two deal with that tidbit hilariously, I'm going to eat popcorn on the abandoned tracks of the thread.

[Little Brother]

How do you figure that "Up to now" excludes "now".

The "Up to" is not inclusive.

Show me something that specifies that Dragonwrought Kobolds are True Dragons.

Show me how they aren't. Remember, True Dragon is the default.

>List of all True Dragons.
>Dragonwrought Kobold is not on it.
>Must mean its inaccurate.

You make it sound like this is impossible, or even uncommon. May I direct you at Abjurant Champion? Or the premade Ur-Priest?

On a side note: Please, feel free to use any source in this discussion. Don't let lack of a source hold you back.

No u. You have yet to prove they are not. Otherwise, they are.

Wow, you failed in literally less then 1 comment. I'd want to say that is a record but I'm confident you'd only take that as a challenge.

Uh, this whole English language thing ain't your strong point, is it?

[Engine]

No u. You have yet to prove they are not. Otherwise, they are.

Ehr, I always thought the burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim. In this case, you.

[Little Brother]

Ehr, I always thought the burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim. In this case, you.

He is the one asserting the claim, though, as True Dragon is specifically the default.

[Acanous]

I am completely serious. Which is more important to you, your life, power, or sex. You only get two. The wizard is in the big leagues. He has to be careful at all times. Sex leaves you vulnerable, and gives you an unnecessary weakness. I highly doubt any self-respecting god-wizard has a libido.

I was gonna pop in with my results from talking to WoTC Customer support (Who say that Mindsight is an added feature to Telepathy, so keeps Telepathy's tags) but then I saw this.

Now, I have a wizard character in City of Heroes based somewhat off of D&D adventures. He's a Wiz/Master Specialist (Conjurer)/Crusader/Jade Phoenix/Wayfarer Guide.
With Abrupt Jaunt, but anyhow.
He's the character my forum name's taken from, and there've been some pretty epic RP moments- one of which was when a rather powerful succubus was trying to seduce him. Instead he took her being within 5 feet and flat-footed to gnab a surprise round on her.
The reason? He'd been Mindraped and his libido was removed, like 500 years ago.
That RP was like, 2 years ago. It's come up on a couple of occasions since.

So while other points we may disagree on, in this I believe you to be entirely correct.

[Psyren]

>List of all True Dragons.
>Dragonwrought Kobold is not on it.
>Must mean its inaccurate.

Not to leap into the fray or anything, but this logic doesn't work. Otherwise, we would say that there are only 11 base classes in all of D&D 3.5 (PHB 21.)

However, I do agree with you that Dragonwrought Kobolds may not be True Dragons. I see that they gain the Dragon type (as opposed to being dragonblooded reptilian humanoids), but see nothing in RotD that actually says they become True Dragons.

[Acanous]

Is there any case of a creature having the Dragon type that is not a true dragon?
If so, then this is an argument, that Dragon (True) is like being Humanoid (Human) and that a Kobold *Can't* qualify, as it's not a Dragon Dragon.

[Little Brother]

Is there any case of a creature having the Dragon type that is not a true dragon?

Yes. A True Dragon is the default. Things are then disqualified. Like the Wyvern.

If so, then this is an argument, that Dragon (True) is like being Humanoid (Human) and that a Kobold *Can't* qualify, as it's not a Dragon Dragon.

Wut.

[Jarian]

Page 1: Contingency
Page 3: Rogue Vs. Wizard
Page 8: Mindsight Raaaaaage
Page 10: Yet Another Dragonwrought Kobold Debate™

I think the forumgoers might have a touch of ADD this week.

[Kazyan]

Page 1: Contingency
Page 3: Rogue Vs. Wizard
Page 8: Mindsight Raaaaaage
Page 10: Yet Another Dragonwrought Kobold Debate™

I think the forumgoers might have a touch of ADD this week.

And we wouldn't have it any other way.

[Psyren]

Is there any case of a creature having the Dragon type that is not a true dragon?

Half-dragons, for one. If anything I would expect a DW Kobold to get bumped up to this level; I don't see anything saying "DW Kobolds become True Dragons, gaining all associated benefits."

[whibla]

Thank you CandyCorn, for posting on-topic. I suspect that would probably work for all but the most determined strip search. There's a minor question in my mind as to what happens if you do convert the focus to one of cloth-like consistency, as in: is it still a statuette made of elephant ivory, but at this point it doesn't really matter.

Thank you Arcanous, for backing up the bloody obvious fact that an ability that works using telepathy is still telepathy, regardless of what else it gives you. While I love the idea that one can discard anything in RAW one does not like, simply by defining it as "Fluff Text", I can't help but feel that this somehow ceases to be RAW at that point.

And thank you Jarian (and Kazyan) for pointing out, in your usual humorous style(s), just how far off track this thread has gone.

I'll leave any discussion as to the nature and inclusivity of dragons to a more appropriate place, and no doubt I'll leave that more appropriate place wondering...well, just wondering...

Thanks again, to those who at least tried.

[Psyren]

Oh, oops! I honestly thought this was the dragonwrought debate thread, they're both on the front page right now.

I'll continue any discussion of kobolds there.

[Lycar]

I think the forumgoers might have a touch of ADD this week.

This week?

From my experience, every week is ADD week on this forum.


Back on topic:

Should I remind you that cows aren't spherical and don't exist in a vacuum?

All mindreading/blanking shenanigans aside, is the assumption that the wizard in question is the paranoid kind that never, you know, interacts with other people? Because there may be a few more ways to get one's hands on that statuette other then approaching said wizard on a featureless plane of infinite size.

For example, that wizard who shoved the statuette up there (ouch!) better permanently wears a Ring of Sustenance, otherwise...

And if he carries it in his clothing, well, unless he actually did have his libido mindraped out of him there are a few possible scenarios that make more use of Bluff and Diplomacy then actual Sleight of Hands. Just saying.

Oh and another thing: Schrödinger wizards may have access to all spells ever, but they still only have a limited number of slots.

Sure, you can be Rogue-proof. And Dragon-proof. And maybe 2 or 3 more immunities on top of that. But you can't be immune to everything. At least not at ECL 12.

Once the wave-form collapses and wizard has a definite spell list up, we can figure out what kills him that day. I dare say random Rogues should be among the least of worries a spellcaster has to think about.

[Little Brother]

Thank you Arcanous, for backing up the bloody obvious fact that an ability that works using telepathy is still telepathy, regardless of what else it gives you. While I love the idea that one can discard anything in RAW one does not like, simply by defining it as "Fluff Text", I can't help but feel that this somehow ceases to be RAW at that point.

Because it isn't actually RAW, because it is not in the location where it is designated as rules. Seriously, you cannot claim the little flavor text(Outside of the "Benefits" area, is rules. It's really absurd.

Look at Power Specialization. It says that "You deal more damage with your powers." What does it do? Gives you a touch of bonus damage on rays/touch spells. So, no bonus on AoE stuff. Unconditional power says "Disabling conditions do not hold you back." Yeah, they still do, unless you're going to claim that it makes you immune to death and gives you Diehard. It's absurd. I don't care if you houserule it, or whatever, but do not claim it's RAW. Mindsight is NOT telepathy-based.

[Wavelab]

Ok back onto the main topic. Yes a rogue can get the focus from a wizard. It is possible. But there is also a chance of the wizard frying him. It's all a case of how prepared who is. In the experiment the rogue was supposed to be prepared and the wizard not, but if you give the wizard 75 statuettes and so on and so forth he is clearly prepared, so the experiment failed. But if we had a basic vanilla wizard and a rogue who actually tried then it is possible.

[ryu]

Vanilla as in blasty? That's not what a wizard gets the rep of powerful from. You want to do battle with batman you get BATMAN. Not Robin, Joker, or Catwoman. You get BATMAN and all he stands for.

[Wavelab]

Vanilla as in blasty? That's not what a wizard gets the rep of powerful from. You want to do battle with batman you get BATMAN. Not Robin, Joker, or Catwoman. You get BATMAN and all he stands for.

Anything really. Be it a blaster, batman a god wizard. Whatever. It's still possible.

[Psyren]

What about Craft Contingent Spell? There's no focus for that, so the rogue is hosed. Sure it costs XP, but so does being raised from the dead because you didn't protect yourself properly.

"It doesn't take up space on the body or have a physical form, and it remains inactive until triggered."

[Wavelab]

What about Craft Contingent Spell? There's no focus for that, so the rogue is hosed. Sure it costs XP, but so does being raised from the dead because you didn't protect yourself properly.

"It doesn't take up space on the body or have a physical form, and it remains inactive until triggered."

Well yes that solves it. But we were talking about the contingency spell. Not the feat.

[Jarian]

What about Craft Contingent Spell? There's no focus for that, so the rogue is hosed. Sure it costs XP, but so does being raised from the dead because you didn't protect yourself properly.

"It doesn't take up space on the body or have a physical form, and it remains inactive until triggered."

Well yes that solves it. But we were talking about the contingency spell. Not the feat.

Also, the challenge in question was at 9th level. The Wizard doesn't meet the prerequisites to take the feat at 9th.

[Hirax]

Also, the challenge in question was at 9th level. The Wizard doesn't meet the prerequisites to take the feat at 9th.

Seriously folks. Stop talking about 9th level wizards. Contingency is a 6th level spell, you need to be level 11 to cast it.

[Jarian]

Seriously folks. Stop talking about 9th level wizards. Contingency is a 6th level spell, you need to be level 11 to cast it.

Mm, that's pretty easy to fix, given the level of optimization flying around.

Alternatively, a scroll.

[Psyren]

Also, the challenge in question was at 9th level. The Wizard doesn't meet the prerequisites to take the feat at 9th.

As noted, you can't cast the spell then either, so what's the point? May as well discuss both.

[Jarian]

As noted, you can't cast the spell then either, so what's the point? May as well discuss both.

If you discuss both, it becomes a matter of the Rogue managing to catch the Wizard in an AMF (not likely), without triggering the tinfoil hat that all Wizards wear (less likely), and managing to prevent him from walking 10 feet away on his turn (massively unlikely). Contingency having a focus is the only thing making this "Plausible" instead of "Myth Busted".

Alternately, level 11 doesn't give the Wizard a feat but does give the Rogue his 10th level Special Ability, so eh.

[Little Brother]

Also, the challenge in question was at 9th level. The Wizard doesn't meet the prerequisites to take the feat at 9th.

>Implying it isn't pathetically easy to raise your caster level by two or more.

[Jarian]

>Implying it isn't pathetically easy to raise your caster level by two or more.

Permanently raising your caster level by 3 would typically be considered outside the bounds of the restrictions placed on the challenge. All things are possible when you use Wizard Power™, but that quickly leads us down the slippery slope toward 9th level spells at 1st level, or any other stop in between.

[Little Brother]

Permanently raising your caster level by 3 would typically be considered outside the bounds of the restrictions placed on the challenge. All things are possible when you use Wizard Power™, but that quickly leads us down the slippery slope toward 9th level spells at 1st level, or any other stop in between.

There are items that do it. There are feats that do it. There are spells that also raise CL. There are PrCs. I, personally, seriously reconsider my build if my wizard ends up, by level 8-ish, with a CL lower than or equal to its level.

The Divine Oracle, at level 1, gives you +2 CL(Even if only for Divination, it will still qualify you), meaning all you need is one puny Ioun Stone/Robe/Ring/Even the trait Spellgifted will get you there...

[Jarian]

The Divine Oracle, at level 1, gives you +2 CL(Even if only for Divination, it will still qualify you),

[Citation needed]

Caster level 12th, and Caster level 9th (12 w/ Divination), are not the same thing to the best of my knowledge. If that's how it's being interpreted, then Craft Contingent Spell is indeed well within the grasp of even a 6th level Wizard.