Challenging Dragonwrought Kobolds = True Dragons

[Kuroimaken]

Wow, now that's what I call definitive immortality. Gotta look at some feats, then.

Hey, just checking (I don't have time to really do research, just thinking), are there any true dragons that cannot cast spells as sorcerers or another class naturally? There probably are, but I honestly don't remember.

Pyroclastic Dragon, Draconomicon.

Speaking of recognizing names since I pretty much never pay attention to who posted what until some trait stands out. Snake is a half-troll parrot, BS is a hard worker as he showed the willingness and capability of digging in rule books rather than googling his answer and TML is still just TML. Yes Flames, I have good news for you, I have almost associated Hi Welcome on BG's forums with you.

Hi Welcome

I'm not the only one to use that phrase by the way.

Hi Welcome

[spoiler]Because I gotta screw with your minds every now and then.[/spoiler]

[archangel.arcanis]

Alright, where's this DR/SR gained through aging thing, and how many actual True Dragons does it fail to count?  And why are we talking about encounters?  Is that what this is, you're mad I didn't like your argument before, so now you're desperate to prove yourself by taking a contradictory position?  You failed last time because while you used the DMG for encounter definitions you then ignored later FAQs and such on the subject (which added more possible encounter types).  Now you're failing because you're ignoring actual rule definitions in favor of stuff that fails to fit what it's supposed to be defining.

I check one of my last posts it has the details. But I checked every true dragon in Draco, OA, & MM1 they all gain SR/DR. That is almost the entirety of the list and I don't have access to the other books right now to confirm or deny if they exist. The rule is in the Draco page number and location in my previous post.

[skydragonknight]

Note that the excerpt below is obviously talking about true dragons here (there is a paragraph for lesser dragons further down), so lets invoke some very basic common sense in that regard and leave that in mind.
Full section in Laughing Man's post, quoted above.

When a dragon reaches a new age category, its ability
scores improve across the board

Although the "across the board" part seems to be misleading (only a few true dragons increase their dexterity from aging), isn't it true that gaining an age category for any universally accepted true dragon gives at least a +1 ability increase to one of its ability scores? Whereas a dragonwrought kobold only increases ability scores by aging when it reaches three specific age categories?

------

Because no one has dared to touch this, I will repost it. Reposted verbatim.

[BeholderSlayer]

And abilities... seriously.  The little mental stat 3 Kobold with no relevant skills could not EVER hear people whispering from 20 feet away (DC 17, which with a -4 penalty he can't pull off).  When he grows to venerable he can, just because he aged to venerable.  Nothing else did it.  That's a new ability.  Last time I mentioned crafting, but people focused on the masterwork tool as though that was the point, so we'll remove that... our dumb Kobold can't make an exotic weapon with just normal tools.  When he ages to venerable, he can.  New ability.  How about treating poisons?  He couldn't treat lich dust poison, or Dark Reaver Powder using the Heal skill.  Then he became vulnerable.  Now he gains the ability to treat those poisons.  These are all abilities where he had nothing going for him except his age, and the age ALONE allowed him to do these things.  New abilities!  Tada!

This fails the universality test. Mental stat 21 across the board DWK could do this stuff already. This results in some DWK being TD, and others not, and hence is not good argument as you have stated yourself.

But of course abilities is STILL a red herring, because as was established ages ago the "gains abilities" bit is in the part about known True Dragons... which is to say only the ones in the Monster Manual.  Not all True Dragons.

False. "All known true dragons" was used in the previous paragraph. We are talking about "All true dragons" as stated in the first sentence of the next paragraph. By simple application of the rules of the written English language we know that "All true dragons" is referencing a new topic different from the previous paragraph. This was not established ages ago, this was presumed based on bias.

[The_Laughing_Man]

Advancement and Aging
A dragon PC begins at a specified
age (in accordance with the current party level in the
campaign) and gains character levels as the player wishes
over the course of its adventures.

Would that suggest that a true dragon will always have a level adjustment?

[archangel.arcanis]

Advancement and Aging
A dragon PC begins at a specified
age (in accordance with the current party level in the
campaign) and gains character levels as the player wishes
over the course of its adventures.

Would that suggest that a true dragon will always have a level adjustment?

Yes but 0 is still a LA. It also suggests they all have variable level adjustments as well, but that probably won't pass the smell test either.

[The_Laughing_Man]

Advancement and Aging
A dragon PC begins at a specified
age (in accordance with the current party level in the
campaign) and gains character levels as the player wishes
over the course of its adventures.

Would that suggest that a true dragon will always have a level adjustment?

Yes but 0 is still a LA. It also suggests they all have variable level adjustments as well, but that probably won't pass the smell test either.

Minimum level adjustement +2?

[archangel.arcanis]

Advancement and Aging
A dragon PC begins at a specified
age (in accordance with the current party level in the
campaign) and gains character levels as the player wishes
over the course of its adventures.

Would that suggest that a true dragon will always have a level adjustment?

Yes but 0 is still a LA. It also suggests they all have variable level adjustments as well, but that probably won't pass the smell test either.

Minimum level adjustement +2?

Fairly certain that was only in reference to their tables on the next page and not requiring that every wyrmling have a +2 or greater LA.

[The_Laughing_Man]

Fair enough.

[BeholderSlayer]

Advancement and Aging
A dragon PC begins at a specified
age (in accordance with the current party level in the
campaign) and gains character levels as the player wishes
over the course of its adventures.

Would that suggest that a true dragon will always have a level adjustment?

Yes but 0 is still a LA. It also suggests they all have variable level adjustments as well, but that probably won't pass the smell test either.

By "varies" it means by type of dragon and age. My only concern with that quote is that I don't know for sure if all UATD fit into the 2-6 range at wyrmling to juvenile, likely not.

It is true, though, that lesser dragons do not have variable level adjustments at all. All UATD have LA that increases as they age and gain power.

[BeholderSlayer]

Possible solution to Havok's conundrum:

You can wear more magic items.
Benefit: Choose one type of magic item that has a limit on the number you can usually wear and gain its benefit, such as a ring or belt. You can now wear one more magic item of this type and also gain its benefit.
....
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time you take the feat it applies to a new type of wearable magic item.

I'm not totally convinced but hey, let's look at it:
Is it granting the ability to do something new? Yes, the dragon can now wear two belts. Now he can wear 2 gloves......Now he can wear 3 belts....etc. It isn't augmenting something he could already do before (i.e. do something better).

The feat fails to set a limit on how many times you can take it, but also says that it must apply to a new type of wearable magic item. That forms a little interpretation problem, I think, but might pass the RAW smell test.

Really though (no offense to Havok at all, as I've been following his logic too) we are probably bordering on reductio ad absurdum here with this whole "immortal dragon" thing. It's not absurd to necessarily have an immortal dragon (as shown by the PrC) but it is slightly absurd to have one that lives until it has NI HD. Whatever though, I'll look for more ideas as I get the chance. What do you think about the above feat?

[Kajhera]

What I think about the above feat is that it should be applied to hats, most certainly.

[BeholderSlayer]

Another thing maybe to consider for the discussion between Havok and myself:

Caster Level:
A great wyrm's caster level increases by 2 for every virtual age category the dragon gains. As with the epic dragons described later in this chapter, advanced dragons gain the Improved Spell Capacity feat as a bonus feat for every 3 caster levels above 20th.

This could be taken to mean, RAW, that even though a Great Wyrm may lack spellcasting, they gain it once becoming an Advanced Dragon. Later, once their caster level becomes 20th or more, they start gaining Improved Spell Capacity. Since their Charisma score increases as it ages, the advanced immortal dragon can look forward to eventually being able to cast spells of a NI level no matter what type of dragon it may be. They gained this ability simply through aging, so it is different than the argument that a level 1 DWK going from 11 to 14 charisma gained the ability to cast spells of a certain level. The DWK had to level up in class levels to actually gain the ability to cast those spells since its former class level did not give it the ability (as shown by PrC entry lines). The Advanced Dragon did not, all it had to do is age.

[Bozwevial]

What I think about the above feat is that it should be applied to hats, most certainly.

[spoiler][/spoiler]

[Havok4]

YEah, can you stay consistent? Prior to my post you were all for finding an exclusion for ALL age categories to create a point. After I tell you it's not happening, blammo, revision to what you said. Now as long as one age category in any dragon empty it works! Srsly, that is for all accounts a win to me.

Also, see exception does not replace general. See also exception replacing general still fails. See also you ignoring this because we're 23 pages in and no one has dared to address DR/SR while talking exceptions. I have considered that a win for years. It's also the reason JaronK moved to define/describe, fact is your still behind him. Let me know when you catch up.

I know what I said was not true. I was just taking the logic BeholderSlayer was using to to a logical extreme to analyze its flaws. The revision was due to you proving a point I made wrong so I dropped that idea, I am sorry if I made that unclear, I was revising my point there because I conceded on the chaining age categories back to wyrmling thing was not viable.

 If exceptions to kobolds getting new abilities cause them to not be true dragons that logic should apply to regular true dragons as well, but if it does not all true dragons are true dragons so that logic cannot work, that was my point.

Possible solution to Havok's conundrum:

You can wear more magic items.
Benefit: Choose one type of magic item that has a limit on the number you can usually wear and gain its benefit, such as a ring or belt. You can now wear one more magic item of this type and also gain its benefit.
....
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Each time you take the feat it applies to a new type of wearable magic item.

I'm not totally convinced but hey, let's look at it:
Is it granting the ability to do something new? Yes, the dragon can now wear two belts. Now he can wear 2 gloves......Now he can wear 3 belts....etc. It isn't augmenting something he could already do before (i.e. do something better).

The feat fails to set a limit on how many times you can take it, but also says that it must apply to a new type of wearable magic item. That forms a little interpretation problem, I think, but might pass the RAW smell test.

Really though (no offense to Havok at all, as I've been following his logic too) we are probably bordering on reductio ad absurdum here with this whole "immortal dragon" thing. It's not absurd to necessarily have an immortal dragon (as shown by the PrC) but it is slightly absurd to have one that lives until it has NI HD. Whatever though, I'll look for more ideas as I get the chance. What do you think about the above feat?

The issue with that feat is that it just improves your ability to wear magic items. If getting the ability to make new items is just improving the DWK's crafting ability the feat to wear more magic items should be an improvement of the normal true dragons ability to wear magic items. And I do not think this it is reductio ad absurdum here just because the case is unusual, under certain conditions true dragons would fail your definition of gaining new abilities so that definition cannot be true by your own universality requirement.

On the spell casting issue I read that not as improving the dragons spell casting level, just their caster level, so they would never gain the ability to cast spells just from aging in the epic advanced progressions, although certain feat trickery could allow that. I would argue that after that a certain point the true dragon would just improve their existing spell casting ability and not gain any new abilities given previous definitions ruling out new spell slots as individual abilities. What if a DWK picks up casting or manifesting trough a feat due to their first hd, lets say hidden talent, aging would give them more times per day to use that power. Or uses the magical training, versatile spell caster, heighten spell,  extra slot trickery. Even through they do not gain those HD due to aging they could gain the ability to use spells in those slots due to aging or more spell slots due to aging without the help of any classes spell casting.

[snakeman830]

Okay, I seriously cannot find a reference to "All True Dragons have SR/DR" in any place except the Monster Manual.  We already know we can't use that section to define True Dragon as it excludes all Lung, Planar, Gem, and Incarnum Dragons with other details from the same section (Keen Senses, Blindsense, spellcasting, and immunity to an attack form are not all posessed by some of those I just listed, which happen to make up the majority of UATD's).  Give me a page number and we can properly look at the "SR/DR".  Since the MM listing is in the exact same section as those qualities most UATD's lack, it's safe to assume that entry is only meant to describe the ten in that book.

Soro: we STILL need to create a definition that includes ALL UATD's and EXCLUDES DWK's for your argument to work.  We also need rules quotes backing up said definitions or else it falls into houserule territory.  This is fine for any given game, but do not be so presumptiouous as to think it's RAW.

[skydragonknight]

For definition, perhaps my last post will help.
"A dragon with twelve age categories which has one or more ability scores increase each time it reaches a new age category."

Unless one of the 43 fails this rubric (possible, I only have some of the sourcebooks), then we have a semi-convoluted definition - but a definition nonetheless.

For reference, which books are the 43 universally accepted true dragons located in?

[BeholderSlayer]

The issue with that feat is that it just improves your ability to wear magic items. If getting the ability to make new items is just improving the DWK's crafting ability the feat to wear more magic items should be an improvement of the normal true dragons ability to wear magic items. And I do not think this it is reductio ad absurdum here just because the case is unusual, under certain conditions true dragons would fail your definition of gaining new abilities so that definition cannot be true by your own universality requirement.

Fair enough, that's not how I read it, but fair enough.

On the spell casting issue I read that not as improving the dragons spell casting level, just their caster level, so they would never gain the ability to cast spells just from aging in the epic advanced progressions, although certain feat trickery could allow that. I would argue that after that a certain point the true dragon would just improve their existing spell casting ability and not gain any new abilities given previous definitions ruling out new spell slots as individual abilities. What if a DWK picks up casting or manifesting trough a feat due to their first hd, lets say hidden talent, aging would give them more times per day to use that power. Or uses the magical training, versatile spell caster, heighten spell,  extra slot trickery. Even through they do not gain those HD due to aging they could gain the ability to use spells in those slots due to aging or more spell slots due to aging without the help of any classes spell casting.

While true, there is a limit to how far this can go. Once the DWK reaches a certain point, he no longer gains anything by aging. Also, I think it's very important that aging grant the whole ability, not some combination of aging and gaining class levels.

A UATD, if immortal, can conceivably do this ad infinitum. So, if the DWK were to somehow gain immortality, let's say, by taking that epic feat for expanding your lifespan repeatedly, he still would no longer gain anything after his 3rd ability score boost. While not stated, I think this is the spirit of the statements regarding advancement through age.

I would say to forget about the "new abilty vs. improvement" thing, but the "gains more abilities" thing just nags at my logic. If it had said "gains greater abilities" or some such instead, this would be easier. Then we could just apply the universality question to the DWK, and it would inevitably fail.

[archangel.arcanis]

Okay, I seriously cannot find a reference to "All True Dragons have SR/DR" in any place except the Monster Manual.  We already know we can't use that section to define True Dragon as it excludes all Lung, Planar, Gem, and Incarnum Dragons with other details from the same section (Keen Senses, Blindsense, spellcasting, and immunity to an attack form are not all posessed by some of those I just listed, which happen to make up the majority of UATD's).  Give me a page number and we can properly look at the "SR/DR".  Since the MM listing is in the exact same section as those qualities most UATD's lack, it's safe to assume that entry is only meant to describe the ten in that book.

Soro: we STILL need to create a definition that includes ALL UATD's and EXCLUDES DWK's for your argument to work.  We also need rules quotes backing up said definitions or else it falls into houserule territory.  This is fine for any given game, but do not be so presumptiouous as to think it's RAW.

Draco. Page 22 Sidebar at the bottom under Rules: Dragon Immunities.

True  dragons  develop  damage  reduction  as  they  age,  as
noted  in  the  Monster  Manual.  Damage  reduction  is  a  super-
natural ability and is ineffective in an antimagic field.
True  dragons  also  develop  spell  resistance  as  they  age,  as
noted in the Monster Manual.

When I mentioned this earlier I also noted that this is where it explicitly states True dragons have immunity to one type of energy that does not hold true for dragons in the same book.

[Havok4]

I agree that is a good definition of true dragons that exclude DWK, the issue is that unless the definition comes from a book somewhere it is not really a definition, it is a description. The trick would be to find a book that lists that definition somewhere. We can rule out definitions that do not fit existing true dragons due to the errata conflict rules, but not create new ones without house ruling.

Edit: Silly Ninjas.

While true, there is a limit to how far this can go. Once the DWK reaches a certain point, he no longer gains anything by aging. Also, I think it's very important that aging grant the whole ability, not some combination of aging and gaining class levels.

A UATD, if immortal, can conceivably do this ad infinitum. So, if the DWK were to somehow gain immortality, let's say, by taking that epic feat for expanding your lifespan repeatedly, he still would no longer gain anything after his 3rd ability score boost. While not stated, I think this is the spirit of the statements regarding advancement through age.

I would say to forget about the "new abilty vs. improvement" thing, but the "gains more abilities" thing just nags at my logic. If it had said "gains greater abilities" or some such instead, this would be easier. Then we could just apply the universality question to the DWK, and it would inevitably fail.

Okay then. I know that using that logic makes DWKs fail, but known true dragons would fail as well which was my point. "Greater abilities" would still be arguable as known true dragons would still fail by my logic, although you would have as slightly stronger argument for outing DWKs. I also agree that dropping the new ability vs improvement thing as it just gets too subjective and crazy if you look at it too hard.