Challenging Dragonwrought Kobolds = True Dragons

[The_Laughing_Man]

2nd that. Also DWK is never explicitly stated to be true dragon. It only explicitly receives a dragon type.

[Nachofan99]

2nd that. Also DWK is never explicitly stated to be true dragon. It only explicitly receives a dragon type, nothing more, nothing less.

Except for that whole 12 age categories thing.  And that whole venerable doesn't make you lose stats line.  Except for those you're right, it's never explicitly stated.

[LogicNinja]

Is this thread really 28 pages of arguing about whether or not subjective terms in the book can be interpreted to allow you to do something that will ultimately be completely up to the DM anyway?

That's adorable.

[skydragonknight]

Welcome back to BG, Logic Ninja!

But yeah, I've heard it a billion times but never asked where the "don't get physical penalties from aging" line is since it's not in the dragonwrought feat itself.

[sir_argenon]

Is this thread really 28 pages of arguing about whether or not subjective terms in the book can be interpreted to allow you to do something that will ultimately be completely up to the DM anyway?

That's adorable.

desperately arguing that you are "advancing" and "more powerful" from aging stat bumps is what really took the cake for me.

[Kajhera]

Welcome back to BG, Logic Ninja!

But yeah, I've heard it a billion times but never asked where the "don't get physical penalties from aging" line is since it's not in the dragonwrought feat itself.

Page 39 in Races of the Dragon, under the Aging Effects table for kobolds, specifies that ability penalties due to age do not apply to dragonwrought kobolds.

[skydragonknight]

Ah, thanks.

[BeholderSlayer]

Interestingly enough, my tidbit of research that shows "advance" (or derivatives thereof) is used in Draconomicon to indicate gaining either HD or character levels 75% of the time hasn't been addressed.

Is this thread really 28 pages of arguing about whether or not subjective terms in the book can be interpreted to allow you to do something that will ultimately be completely up to the DM anyway?

That's adorable.

Isn't it? I thought so too.    Welcome back LN.

Is this thread really 28 pages of arguing about whether or not subjective terms in the book can be interpreted to allow you to do something that will ultimately be completely up to the DM anyway?

That's adorable.

desperately arguing that you are "advancing" and "more powerful" from aging stat bumps is what really took the cake for me.

Me too. Mmmm...cake.
Just an FYI, this is how I keep myself entertained when there's nothing else interesting going on.

2nd that. Also DWK is never explicitly stated to be true dragon. It only explicitly receives a dragon type, nothing more, nothing less.

Except for that whole 12 age categories thing.  And that whole venerable doesn't make you lose stats line.  Except for those you're right, it's never explicitly stated.

Neither of these examples are explicit examples of what makes a True Dragon. Yay, a half-dragon kobold with 15 levels of druid is explicitly a True Dragon.

[JaronK]

Interestingly enough, my tidbit of research that shows "advance" (or derivatives thereof) is used in Draconomicon to indicate gaining either HD or character levels 75% of the time hasn't been addressed.

Because it's completely and totally in every way irrelevant.  The reason why has been repeatedly stated (have you ignored it?  Or just forgotten why so fast?  You don't even check for "Lesser Dragon" status if you already are a True Dragon by the "more powerful" guideline).  Even if it wasn't, that's still 25% of the time where it doesn't mean what you want it to... and if it meant what you wanted it to, it would have contradictions.  So, you know, same old same old.

desperately arguing that you are "advancing" and "more powerful" from aging stat bumps is what really took the cake for me.

No one is arguing that anyone's "advancing" from aging stat bumps.  But yes, we're arguing that +3 to all your mental stats makes you more powerful.  With quotes!

Neither of these examples are explicit examples of what makes a True Dragon. Yay, a half-dragon kobold with 15 levels of druid is explicitly a True Dragon.

Considering what makes a true dragon is that something has 12 age categories and gets more powerful as it gets older, the fact that they put both of those things right at the start of the Kobold section conveniently together in a table looks pretty darn explicit.  And yes, any Kobold who manages to become a dragon and get more powerful as it gets older would be a True Dragon (I've seen nothing that exempts half dragons from this).  That's not a surprise.  Nor is it nonsensical... Kobolds themselves are made of nothing but True Dragon blood (literally, see Races of the Dragon) and Half Dragon then gets them even closer to their True Dragon lineage.  But evidently it takes just a bit more to push them over the edge (Druid 15).  Not that anybody ever plays a Half Dragon Kobold Druid 15, but who's counting?  Unless there's a specific rule that all Half Dragons are Lesser, in case that would trump it, obviously.

JaronK

[Kajhera]

I've played a half-dragon kobold bard 12 ... so close ... yet so far ...

[sir_argenon]

No one is arguing that anyone's "advancing" from aging stat bumps.  But yes, we're arguing that +3 to all your mental stats makes you more powerful.  With quotes!

ok, so a lvl 1 dwk fighter that starts with an int, wis, and cha of 3.... becomes venerable, and is now more "powerful" because of his 6'es in his stats?

[JaronK]

Half-dragon kobolds with dragonwrought fit the dragon magic definition of true dragons yet are explicitly listed as lesser dragons, so just meeting a single definition of true dragons doesn't mean you're done. You should still check for inconsistencies. Meeting a definition of lesser dragon is an inconsistency.

Luckily, I have no inconsistencies.  You can't just take one definition and ignore the others.  Dragon Magic is one of the definitions (but note that when it was printed there were absolutely no non dragons with 12 age categories), but you can't just ignore Draconomicon like that.  You have to put them together.  

The Draconomicon definition checks if you are a dragon and get more powerful as you get older.  If you do, True Dragon, full stop.  If you do not (you are an "other creature"), you check to see if you lack age categories to advance through.  If so, you are a Lesser Dragon.  If you're True by the first part, you never touch advancing.  The Dragon Magic definition is irrelevant to this part, so I'm not sure why you're confusing the two... it's a second qualifier.  It's not randomly inserted in.

The Dragon Magic definition just says you have to have 12 age categories, and be a dragon.

Putting these together, if you're a dragon with 12 age categories who gets more powerful as you get older, you're a True Dragon.  If not, THEN you check to see if you "advance through age categories."  If not, you're a Lesser Dragon.  There's nothing defined for what happens if you're not a True Dragon and then fail to meet the Lesser Dragon requirement.

By the way, where does it say Half Dragon Dragonwrought Kobold is explicitly not a True Dragon?  I looked for that but didn't see it.

Closer to implicit, actually. It's still random, so you could roll worse than by rolling 4d6 drop 1. It doesn't explicitly say "higher stats = higher power" and it does not necessarily lead to a so-called "more powerful" character by your own definition, so it's a very flawed.

...it's a stat generation method that gives higher average stats than all other rolling methods.  That's the only difference between it and the other methods.  And it's called "High Powered Characters."  That's pretty straight forward.  What other possible meaning for "High Powered" could it be?  The only difference is higher average stats!

JaronK

[Kajhera]

Implicit = you can deduce something from a given statement.
Explicit = what a given statement says.

... in case you people were honestly having trouble with this.

[BeholderSlayer]

Because it's completely and totally in every way irrelevant.  The reason why has been repeatedly stated (have you ignored it?  Or just forgotten why so fast?  You don't even check for "Lesser Dragon" status if you already are a True Dragon by the "more powerful" guideline).  Even if it wasn't, that's still 25% of the time where it doesn't mean what you want it to... and if it meant what you wanted it to, it would have contradictions.  So, you know, same old same old.

This is a faulty assumption.

[JaronK]

ok, so a lvl 1 dwk fighter that starts with an int, wis, and cha of 3.... becomes venerable, and is now more "powerful" because of his 6'es in his stats?

Absolutely.  D&D defines it as such here:

8.  High-Powered Characters:  Roll 5d6 six times, discarding the two lowest dice each time.  Arrange as desired.  This is just right for a high-powered game where the characters need to be really good just to survive.  The player may reroll all scores if his ability modifiers don't total at least +2 or if he doesn't have at least one score of 15 or higher

As you can see, higher stats (that's the only difference between this rolling method and the others) means you count as being higher powered.

Now, he's not MUCH higher power.  He's got a +2 to will saves, +2 to spot, sense motive and listen, +2 to UMD and diplomacy and bluff and intimidate, etc.  There are a few skill DCs he couldn't make before that he now can (for example, he can now craft Exotic Weapons if he had no ranks, which he couldn't do at all before... though he's unlikely to succeed for obvious reasons).  

Surely you'd agree... if humans had +3 to all mental stats built in, we'd cry they're even more overpowered than they already are.  If Half Elves got +3 to all mental stats, they'd be the default Wizard race instead of a laughing stock.  +3 to three stats is definitely a power increase, even if those stats are mostly dump stats.

Though a far more reasonable example would be this Kobold Fighter with 8s in all mental stats going to 11s, since 8 is as low as you can go in point buy and that's more commonly used (and if you roll three 3s with roll generation, your mods are too low and you reroll anyway).  In that situation, again you can now hit DCs you otherwise couldn't, plus Combat Expertise is more possible (you'd need just two more points in Int).

JaronK

[JaronK]

Because it's completely and totally in every way irrelevant.  The reason why has been repeatedly stated (have you ignored it?  Or just forgotten why so fast?  You don't even check for "Lesser Dragon" status if you already are a True Dragon by the "more powerful" guideline).  Even if it wasn't, that's still 25% of the time where it doesn't mean what you want it to... and if it meant what you wanted it to, it would have contradictions.  So, you know, same old same old.

This is a faulty assumption.

Not at all... in fact that's where you've gone so wrong.  If you'll read the source material, it's quite clear.  First it says "True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older."  Okay, so, like I said, check to see if it's a True Dragon at this point.  If it grows more powerful as it gets older, it's a true dragon.

Next, it says "Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons."  Note that "Other creatures" bit.  That means "creatures other than the type we just talked about, namely true dragons."  So the rest of that sentence only applies if the first qualifier turns out to be false and it's not a true dragon, but is still a dragon.

Here, I'll spell it out in programming terms, and see if that helps.

Code: [Select]

If(dragon is a creature that grows more powerful as it grows older)
  Then (True Dragon)
  Else (If (Dragon advances through age categories)
    Then (Lesser Dragon))
That's it, and that's exactly how it parses out.  You've been somehow missing that "Other" statement when parsing, and then gone back and said that being Lesser means you can't be true using the same "Other" statement you ignored on the first pass.

Here, let me give you another example of how this works.  If I say "employees who have marked parking spaces should park in those spaces.  Other employees who have bus passes should take the bus" that means any employee who has a marked parking space should park there, while those who do not but have bus passes should take the bus.  But what about an employee who has a marked parking space and has a bus pass?  What I've said there is that he should park in that space, because whether he has a pass or not is irrelevant.  And employees with neither a space nor a bus pass?  I haven't said anything about them at all.

JaronK

[LogicNinja]

Is there really a point to rules-lawyering "stat bonuses from age are getting more powerful, too!" when it's so blatantly obvious the writers are referring to the way dragons gain HD/size/SLAs/etc as they advance in age?

[JaronK]

Is there really a point to rules-lawyering "stat bonuses from age are getting more powerful, too!" when it's so blatantly obvious the writers are referring to the way dragons gain HD/size/SLAs/etc as they advance in age?

Remember which book was written last.  Even if that's what they meant in Draconomicon, and what they meant in Dragon Magic, what they said was that it just needed to get more powerful at all and that it needed 12 age categories in those two books.

What is blatantly obvious is that the writers of Races of the Dragon (the one written last, so the only one that was written with knowledge of the others) made damn sure DW Kobolds would be True Dragons using the rules the other guys made in Dragon Magic and Races of the Dragon.  Why else would they put absolutely everything necessary to qualify into a single table, and then make a feat that did exactly that?  Especially in a book that's all about how Kobolds want to be True Dragons and were actually made entirely from True Dragon blood.  Seriously, read over Races of the Dragon on Kobolds and it's actually quite clear that making them True Dragons was exactly what they intended.  Especially slipping that bit in there about not taking age penalties, right under the table that gives Kobolds the True Dragon ages table (which is not found ANYWHERE else besides in True Dragon entries).  Heck, that table itself is meaningless except for making Kobolds into True Dragons.

However I'm quite sure that while the writers of Races of the Dragon were doing this, they didn't notice what was being written concurrently (check the release dates) in Dragons of Eberron... remember, other than Dragons of Eberron, being a True Dragon means almost nothing.  It changes which side of a Dragonpact you're on (which would virtually never come up), allows you to take one lame feat in Dragons of Kyrnn (and be targeted by the same... again, this will never come up), and take a few PrCs that aren't that great in Draconomicon (might be fun and characterful, but that's about it).  It was so meaningless while they wrote Races of the Dragon that I'm pretty darn sure it was entirely a fluff thing... they had no idea that by the time Races of the Dragon actually came out, it would be overpowered as hell.

JaronK

[betrayor]

Is there really a point to rules-lawyering "stat bonuses from age are getting more powerful, too!" when it's so blatantly obvious the writers are referring to the way dragons gain HD/size/SLAs/etc as they advance in age?

Remember which book was written last.  Even if that's what they meant in Draconomicon, and what they meant in Dragon Magic, what they said was that it just needed to get more powerful at all and that it needed 12 age categories in those two books.

What is blatantly obvious is that the writers of Races of the Dragon (the one written last, so the only one that was written with knowledge of the others) made damn sure DW Kobolds would be True Dragons using the rules the other guys made in Dragon Magic and Races of the Dragon.  Why else would they put absolutely everything necessary to qualify into a single table, and then make a feat that did exactly that?  Especially in a book that's all about how Kobolds want to be True Dragons and were actually made entirely from True Dragon blood.  Seriously, read over Races of the Dragon on Kobolds and it's actually quite clear that making them True Dragons was exactly what they intended.  Especially slipping that bit in there about not taking age penalties, right under the table that gives Kobolds the True Dragon ages table (which is not found ANYWHERE else besides in True Dragon entries).  Heck, that table itself is meaningless except for making Kobolds into True Dragons.

However I'm quite sure that while the writers of Races of the Dragon were doing this, they didn't notice what was being written concurrently (check the release dates) in Dragons of Eberron...

JaronK

Actually Dragon Magic was released after Races of The Dragon....
Races of the Dragon is January 2006 and Dragon Magic is September 2006......
I don't think it effects your arguement though......

[skydragonknight]

The writers intent part of the argument giving them "everything they need" to meet a definition that hadn't been written yet.