The only way to come to this sort of a conclusion is through a fallacy called "wishful thinking."
+1. Been saying that for years and it keeps getting submitted as proof. Hell, virtually every super villain of the ancient ages claimed to be a god, what the hell did it prove then?
He's claiming that all shown uses are Oxford. It's really not outrageous. I can see the disagree but if you can't see the inherent ambiguity in the language then you're blind.
If he has proved such a claim, then why do I still see an Advancing Monsters section that talks about giving HD? Surly he woudl have debunked all claims as you said and such a thing would not be in my books.
Beholder don't be a retard. He is making much more of an argument then that.
Actully the core of his point is exception. As in I can find an exception (see PH) and therefor ALL CASES ARE TREATED AS SO. Which is a fallacy into it's self and falls though even the most basic form of logic.
Ad Hominem isn't the same thing as insulting. Learn the difference. And what did I Strawman?
I get the point you're making. I see the difference between "advance in power by means of the passage of time" and "have specially defined ages which lesser dragons do not." Both of which I see as legitimate interpretations of the original quote. .....true dragons are those creatures that grow more powerful as they grow older...other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons
Even in context, both reading are legitimate.
This is the ambiguity I see as well.
Aye, what does it mean by more powerful? I know, lets read the other 300+ pages instead of a dozen words from an entire book.
And don't both apply to dragonwrought Kobolds? They increase in power by means of the passage of time (wait a while and their mental stats go up, but unlike most other types they don't take penalties to go with it, so they clearly get stronger). And they have the specifically defined ages that lesser dragons don't have. So... this is rather moot.
I think I have a new name for that. Specific meets General.
Kobolds, not True Dragons. Lack everything.
DWK Kobolds, not True Dragons. Lack what every explanation of True Dragon has for traits.
DWK Kobold with Energy Immunity, wings, breath weapon, blindsight, yatta yatta yatta: is it a True Dragon?
Lets me drop the kobold crap your biaist with. If you give fire & acid immunity along with DR 10/silver & evil to an outsider is it a Devil? Or just an outsider with fire and acid immunity with DR 10/silver & evil? Oh I know the answer you would give but one since I'll just link it to the kobold and you can't have that.
Frankly, this debate won't be settled. Ever. No WotC employee is going to touch 3.5 again, so we're stuck without any sort of official answer one way or another. We all agreed that, even if DWK's are True Dragons, they were not intended to have Epic feats early or any of that (although they still auto-qualify for anything requiring Dragonblood subtype). The answer to wether or not they ARE True Dragons is, as this argument has shown, entirely up to the interpretation of one sentence which will vary from person to person and it willnever be settled.
But that is why it continues right there.
Example, the MM alone states:
Damage Reduction: Young adult and older dragons have damage reduction. Their natural weapons are treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. This is the
general rule. Unless something that trumps it is called out as a True Dragon, which RotD never does for kobolds, it must inherit DR via aging for it to be a True Dragon. There are dozens of traits. Even trying to dodge the bullet but saying you are a Planar Dragon to skip spellcasting, you would still fall short of the DR/SR/Age gives HD/Breath Weapon, etc. The only two arguments against that are JaronK's exception replaces general which is the biggest failure since failing was invented, and ignoring everything but one certain line. Wither if be Dragon Magic's rules on who you can create a dragon pact with, or one line in a nonerule sidebar (which the DMG says you can ignore anyway). As long was one side continues based off ignoring things, the other will continually find more and more rules for them to ignore. Even when we think everything has reached a point of everything already being said this thread shows us otherwise.
It isn't even a question of balance since time and time again I've pointed out and proved how a Steel Dragon out preforms a DWK Kobold being treated as a True Dragon. It's human nature rearing it's head. You must be right, you are never wrong. The more you back the kobold claim, the more you must adhere to it and never give in no matter how many facts you ignore or fallacies you must believe in. Same with with Fighter vs Wizard threads.