Most Powerful Combinations II

[Mixster]

Another crazy set-up is Wizard + Wizard PrCs 9/ Warblade 1/ Jade Pheonix Mage 10.
Get Leadership, get a cohort that's at least a level 5 warblade. Cast Shapechange on yourself and your cohort. Both of you are now chokers.

Stop right there.  Now, look again at Shapechange.  See the problem with this?

Range: Personal
Target: You

Now, I could see some serious power coming out of a symbiont-happy Psion.  Throwing Scarabs are only 1k each.  Their granted abilities (other than Share Spells) aren't that important.  Now, manifest Mind Seed on them.  A bit later and now you paid 1k for a little copy of you (albeit, -8 levels) that can freely manifest while attached to you.  You can PsyRef different powers known, feats, and skill setups into each one too.  Shared Schism, anyone?  How about Energy Conversion and go bake in an Energy Wall?  Affinity Field + Bestow Power just got to insane levels.

Dammit forgot that, so your cohort actually needs to be a choker warblade, that could be harder.

Dominate monster, Hmm Hmm...

[Rebel7284]

2 Swordsages with Adaptive style can pull the chain off as can RKVs obv.  Swordsages don't actually have actions left after that though.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Also Dragonwrought kobold almost_anything20.

I disproved that in the namesake thread

Illithid Savant

This is where I ended the aforementioned thread

the Illithid Savant a more or less infinite loop

My interpretation disables the IS eating other IS's for the latter's abilities gained from others making it no longer infinite (but still worth while).

[Bastian]

Also Dragonwrought kobold almost_anything20.

I disproved that in the namesake thread

Really? What build doesn't benefit even slightly from epic feats.

[SorO_Lost]

Also Dragonwrought kobold almost_anything20.

I disproved that in the namesake thread

Really? What build doesn't benefit even slightly from epic feats.

Any build bogged down by at least 9,001 threads of flame wars? It's based on an illogical argument that involves ignoring entire chapters of books by finding a key exceptions to their general rules to shove a personal interpretation of one sentence in a sidebar over the intent and interpretation of books used in the argument. It makes a very good recipe for drama.

[snakeman830]

What chapters are being ignored?  There is only one definition that encompasses all True Dragons (forget DWK's for this statement).  Dragonwrought Kobolds also fit this definition  All of the others have exceptions in clearly defined True Dragons.  Since those definitions have exceptions, what stops a Dragonwrought Kobold from being another exception?

[SorO_Lost]

Monster Manual
Ancient Wyrms are over 100ft.

Counter posed
Draconomicon says Whites are not and the Draconomicon was printed afterwards. THE WHOLE BOOK IS BANNED!

Draconomicon
True Dragons have; immunity to a one type of energy, are warm-blooded, have wings, frightful presence, grow in size, live over 2,000 years, have blindsense, spell resistance, damage reduction, have a draconis fundamentum that produces breath weapons, etc.

Counter posed
[light] isn't an energy. BANNED!
Kobolds are cold-blooded? IGNORED!
I can think of one without wings. BANNED!
Frightful presence / spell resistance / damage reduction? In the same section as the energy therefor wrong & BANNED!
Blindsense? IGNORED!
Kobolds are True Dragons thus have a draconis fundamentum, only it don't work. So umm... IGNORED!
Kobolds have aging categories, are of dragon type. I shall use page 4's sidebar and define "more powerful" to mean standard aging penalties/bonuses when the penalties are ignored. QUOTED!

Races Of The Dragon
Lists True Dragons & Kobolds as separate entities.

Counter posed
Not all kobolds are dragonwrought. IGNORED!

Dragons of Krynn (officially stamped by wtoc and printed 3 years after the draconomicon)
All true dragons are extraordinary beings possessing superior senses, intelligence, and the gift of flight (in the case of the sea, amphi and aquatic dragons, this is replaced by powerful swimming). Some or all of these are absent in dragonkin and lesser dragon types. In addition, dragons gain power and abilities as they age, making an ancient or great wyrm dragon a terrifying amalgam of magical and supernatural ability.

Counter posed
I don't need a reason at this point, not like I ever had one in the things before. IGNORED!

Dragons of Faerun (also printed after the Draconomicon)
Extensive lists of true dragons. Black, blue ... crystal ... silver and steel ... deep dragons. And so on. No kobolds.

Counter posed
Draconomicon was printed before Race Of The Dragon that's why Kobolds are not listed ... Wait what? STOP QUOTING BOOKS!

***

I could probably keep going but srsly. Anyone saying kobolds are true dragons don't give a dire rat's tail what rules, quotes, reasons, logic, or anything there of is presented. Kobolds are True Dragons becuase they say so and nothing can tell them otherwise.

Edit: Ahh what the hell
snakeman830
Some dragons lack an ability or two. They are still True Dragons so Kobolds are too!

Counter posed
Example dragons you can call out lack one or two things they are supposed to have and in turn have something else. Not ALL of them without benefits like Kobolds. Apples & Oranges.

[snakeman830]

As I stated before: if a definition allows exceptions, then what is stopping DWKs from being another exception?  So, I will only address those points that have no exceptions among published True Dragons and compare them to DWK's.

1. Dragon Type: this one isn't even up for debate  The Dragonwrought feat explicitly states this

2. 12 Age categories: All Kobolds have these, Dragonwroughts included

3. Warm blooded: True, normal kobolds don't fit this, but it is entirely up for debate on if Dragonwroght Kobolds are cold-blooded or not.  They obviously have some blood link to True Dragons, the only question is just how much does this affect?  We know it affects their physiology because of how they age and how they live longer than normal Kobolds as well as the change in type.  The fact is, we just don't know.  This is the one hangup for being sure or not.

4. Grow more powerful as they age: Well, DWK's don't get any weaker, and they do gain bonuses for aging, so they fit this criteria.

5. Live for over 2,000 years: DWK's have their maximum age determined by their Cha score.  Given how much time it gives them to raise their score 2 points, they can easily live for over 2,000 years provided they aren't killed by something else.

6. Grow in size: WHAT LIVING THING DOESN'T???  if you meant grow in size category, it's still the same.  Unless you're going to imply that a human infant is a Medium creature, of course...

Now, as for the others.  I know a True Dragon that doesn't fit those criteria, and it's even listed in Races of the Dragon as being a True Dragon!

Yu Lung dragons lack:
wings (also lacked by all lung dragons but the Li Lung)
Frightful Presence (lacked by most dragons of Juvenile age or younger)
breath weapon
damage reduction (lacked by most dragons of Juvenile age or younger)
spell resistance (lacked by most dragons of Juvenile ageor younger)
immunity to an energy (lacked by Radiant, Force, Prismatic, Shadow, most Lung (Lung Wang & Shen Lung has), Chaos, Incarnum, Ethereal, Rust, Styx, and Tartarian dragons)
blindsense

But wait!  They have Blindsense!  Actually no, no Lung dragons have Blindsense.  They have Blindsight, but that's a different ability.

So, we have an explicitly True Dragon variety that lacks all of those things, the same things, I might add, that DWK's lack.

Since we have an exception to all of those "rules", what is to stop a DWK from being another one?

[SorO_Lost]

Since we have an exception to all of those "rules", what is to stop a DWK from being another one?

Quoting you. Applying the same let's ignore this and that tactic employed by fors so a much much much less significant degree to ignore your interpretation of "more power" everything is lost. Also, the tactic of ignoring content because a book published later changes things can be copied and applied to Draconomicon's sidebar rendering it irrelevant as there are books published afterwards that define the criteria for True Dragons. And that is one of the reasons to me fors fail out. They have to use all this ignore examples, quotations of exceptions, and sweeping everything they can under the rug. Any one of their so called tactics undermines their own point.

Hell, let's look at one of your so called points.
Yu Lung dragons lack: <snip> damage reduction (lacked by most dragons of Juvenile age or younger) <snip>
Quoting specific age examples of a dragon to abolish an entire entry that True Dragons have Damage Reduction. I could say Wizard's don't cast spells by ignoring everything and citing Feebleminded Wizards as my example in my next post in a Fighter vs Wizard debate. Let's see how that goes over.

Also on your 3. Dragonwrought only references ancestry not direct linage. A direct linage would be more akin to Half-Dragon since they have a 'pure kobold' mother.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Dude, those "over 2000 years" or whatever are general descriptions, not specific.  

Look, I just killed a young red dragon.  Looks like he didn't live over 2000 years.

Or check out the yellow dragon, of which it is said "its status as a true dragon is without doubt. "

Now, if you want to go by the "most recently printed" rule,

Benefits: If you strike the killing blow against a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category),

Look, if you want to argue this, first define what criteria you will use to consider what rules take precedence.  Then show that your interpretation is the only one that meets those criteria.  

[Garryl]

Fellas, as much as I like cooking popcorn over a good flame war, I don't think this is an appropriate place for it. Take this outside, please.

[snakeman830]

Oriental Adventures was published before Draconomicon, so any definition of a True Dragon as of Draconomicon must take those into account.  Incarnum dragons are the only True Dragon that were published post-Draconomicon, so them I can forgive breaking some of the "rules"

We still have an explicitly true dragon that lacks numerous qualifications that YOU cited.  The ONLY qualification that ALL published True Dragons have and Dragonwrought Kobolds are questionable (not blocked from) on is the warm-blooded point and that is completely up to the DM to decide on.  So yes, Dragonwrought Kobolds are not True Dragons in some games.  In some they are.  If the DM interprests this as just fluff, then Kobolds are True Dragons.

Okay, so as to what builds wouldn't be improved by epic feats?  Probably any where all of the feats are used already.  There are a lot of them out there.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Also, epic feats are pretty sucky on the whole.  Either they give lame benefits (_{thirty feet more of darkvision so exciting}) , or require ridiculous stats/ranks, or both.  The only one even close to being worthwhile is epic toughness, and +30 hp still becomes almost irrelevant after low levels.

Heck, I allow epic feats for everyone provided they have a good reason for wanting them.

[SorO_Lost]

Fellas, as much as I like cooking popcorn over a good flame war, I don't think this is an appropriate place for it. Take this outside, please.

Agreed but dibs on one last run. Not stubbornness but it's in my nature to turn a person's tactics against them.

[spoiler]1.

Now, if you want to go by the "most recently printed" rule,

Benefits: If you strike the killing blow against a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category),

All true dragons are extraordinary beings possessing superior senses, intelligence, and the gift of flight (in the case of the sea, amphi and aquatic dragons, this is replaced by powerful swimming). Some or all of these are absent in dragonkin and lesser dragon types. In addition, dragons gain power and abilities as they age, making an ancient or great wyrm dragon a terrifying amalgam of magical and supernatural ability.

Counter posed
IGNORED! The text found in the true dragon chapter is getting ignored by TML in favor of an in parentheses reminder in a feat found else where in the book rather than giving any credit or attention to the Nature of Dragons section in the chapter of True Dragons. What could be his excuse? An extreme and literal interpretation of of "new" being taken clear to the book's construction? The feat pages come after the True Dragon chapter after all. Oh but pages are not always printed in order and he could never find out the order of print to ever really use that stupid idea.

2.

Draconic Vampirism [General]
You are able to absorb the fleeing life energy from a dying dragon using the energy to temporarily increase your own strength.
Prerequisites: Juvenile or older true dragon, caster level 1st.(equal to the DC of your breath weapon)These temporary Hit Dice increase your abilities just as if you had gained age, increasing your power and your size,

By quoting the rest of the feat we see the feat says True Dragon's have breath weapons, age gaining HD and increase in size. It's printed after that quote too and isn't in parentheses.

But as I said

I could probably keep going but srsly. Anyone saying kobolds are true dragons don't give a dire rat's tail what rules, quotes, reasons, logic, or anything there of is presented. Kobolds are True Dragons becuase they say so and nothing can tell them otherwise.

They will never care.

***
[/spoiler]

I like the Lingering Damage feat. Deal your SA damage next round to any guy you SA'ed last round without any action on your part.

[snakeman830]

I like the Lingering Damage feat. Deal your SA damage next round to any guy you SA'ed last round without any action on your part.

Even better when combined with Staggering Strike from Complete Adventurer.  Now, you force a high DC Fort save for each attack both this round and the next round or the target is stuck with only a standard or a move action.  I have used this combo to incredible effect in an epic game myself.

[Nunkuruji]

How about this logic, for the sake of lols

Adult True Dragons are LA -, and are not PC playable
Adult True Dragon Kobolds are therefore LA -, and are thus not PC playable

 

[Bastian]

Also, epic feats are pretty sucky on the whole.  Either they give lame benefits (_{thirty feet more of darkvision so exciting}) , or require ridiculous stats/ranks, or both.  The only one even close to being worthwhile is epic toughness, and +30 hp still becomes almost irrelevant after low levels.

Heck, I allow epic feats for everyone provided they have a good reason for wanting them.

Getting Fast Healing 3 (that can be raise by 3 for every time you take the feat) isn't worthwhile?

Edit: This post formerly mentioned that Regeneration could be gotten with an epic feat but that was wrong.

[snakeman830]

Where can you get Regeneration 3?  I can only find Fast Healing.

[Bastian]

Where can you get Regeneration 3?  I can only find Fast Healing.

I looked through it again and it isn't there (this is what I get for trusting other people ).

Anyways, while I was searching through the epic feats I had a thought, there is literally no build that can't be improved by having Epic Leadership simply because if they optimize their leadership score they can have one of their followers be higher level than them and be optimal at whatever they want.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

If you look, Solo, that chapter is referring to clan dragons.

However, that "known as" refers to the in-character terminology.  The entire chapter is all flavor with no mechanics; for example " Longer-lived than any other
race, dragons can also extend their lifespans by hibernating in near-perfect stasis".  Despite no dragon having that ability in its statblock.  By your arguments (that every single entry in that chapter must be met to qualify), there is no such thing as a true dragon.

My argument is as follows: only rules text (and not flavor text) should be used to adjudicate rules discussions.