Author Topic: On Kobolds and True Dragons  (Read 38124 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #120 on: March 31, 2010, 04:20:32 PM »
It's helpful to see how many books have a line like that, though.  It looks like all the books on Dragons agree with the definition that you need to be a dragon with age categories, but the specific "has to be 12" thing is relevant because the disguise skill refers to adult, old, and venerable as age categories (though the main description of those ages does not).

JaronK

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #121 on: July 17, 2010, 12:04:33 PM »
Since I was asked to bring this back up, at this point there are four sources on what a True Dragon is.  One is a description (it talks about what "known" True Dragons are, and the description given does not match most True Dragons) and three are definitions (they say "this is what a True Dragon is" basically).  The description (MM1) does not match the definitions (Dragons of Krynn, Dragon Magic, Draconomicon), nor does it match the vast majority of defined True Dragons.  All three definitions match up.  Dragon Magic says that a True Dragon is any Dragon with 12 age categories.  Dragons of Krynn says a True Dragon is any Dragon with age categories.  Draconomicon says that True Dragons are any dragons that get more powerful as they get older and have age categories.  The most clear entries (Dragon Magic and Dragons of Krynn) are the ones where the definition is critical for rules purposes (since Draconomicon and Monster Manual don't actually have special rules that deal with True Dragons, they just talk about them).

Frankly, I don't see why this is even open for debate still, especially once you read those books on the topic.  The only question is the bit about energy immunity... which still doesn't hold true for a number of known True Dragons.

JaronK

awaken DM golem

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3294
  • PAO'd my Avatar
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #122 on: July 17, 2010, 04:43:54 PM »

The only question is the bit about energy immunity... which still doesn't hold true for a number of known True Dragons.

In any case, energy immunity can be obtained by (long list).

Agita

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5465
  • SFT is mai waifu.
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #123 on: July 17, 2010, 04:48:36 PM »

The only question is the bit about energy immunity... which still doesn't hold true for a number of known True Dragons.

In any case, energy immunity can be obtained by (long list).
Perhaps the easiest way is having Mantle of the Icy Soul (the one that wasn't nerfed in SpC) cast on yourself by an NPC.
It's all about vision and making reality conform to your vision. By dropping a fucking house on it.

Agita's Awesome Poster Compilation
Lycanthromancer's Awesome Poster Compilation

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #124 on: July 17, 2010, 05:38:45 PM »
Dragons of Krynn

page 15, True Dragon chapter
1. 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).
2. Some or all of these are absent in dragonkin and lesser dragon types.
3. In addition, dragons gain power and abilities as they age,

Page 15 again
4. Draconic magic is, strictly speaking, ambient in nature. It is not dependent on Chaos, unlike the sorcerers and mystics of the Age of Mortals

Page 155, Book Three Kindred Of The Dragon, 2nd chapter, page 155
5. No dragonwrought kobolds listed.

page 168
6.
Quote
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(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, although you do not age any.

***

1. Darkvision or did they intend Blindsight & Keen Senses?
2. Well all dragons have darkvision so probably not.
3. Not more powerful as they age where you shove your intent into a book ignoring somewhere around 500 pages of the book's intent which trumps yours but gain abilities. Dragonwrought age isn't gaining more abilities its only increasing existing ones.
4. True Dragon casting != Sorcerer casting. Greater Draconic Rite doesn't meet True Dragon spellcasting requirements. See also the order of rules.
5. I recall you had a huge block of text detailing some excuse why the draconomicon didn't list Kobolds. Heres a book printed after RotD to counter that.
6. Brought to light by one of your followers where he half quoted it. I finished his quote and he dropped it. You're turn.

7. Of all the true dragon rules (outside of dragon magic's out of place line) there is one trait never made an exception to. Directly gaining HD from aging. Disprove that using your against the rules methods if you want, I'd like to see what excuse you come up with.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #125 on: July 17, 2010, 05:39:57 PM »
Also, requiring every generality in worldbuilding sections to be true results in no true dragons existing

Quote from: Dragons of Krynn
Longer-lived than any other race, dragons can also extend their lifespans by hibernating in near-perfect stasis.  

No dragon has that ability in its statblock.  In addition, Elans are immortal, and you can't live longer than 'immortal'.  So therefore there is no such thing as a true dragon. :p
Quote
However, that "known as" refers to the in-character terminology.  The entire chapter is all flavor with no mechanics;
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Lo77o

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
  • Guns dont kill people, apes with guns kills people
    • Email
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #126 on: July 17, 2010, 05:51:57 PM »

Quote
However, that "known as" refers to the in-character terminology.  The entire chapter is all flavor with no mechanics;

God dammit... I had to run to the store to get the book. By the time iv read the chapter and i was about to point this out, you had already done it.

Well.. +1
"Home is where you can find a decent graveyard and strangers can disappear without awkward questions." - Braids, Cabal Minion

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #127 on: July 17, 2010, 08:09:16 PM »
Dragons of Krynn

page 15, True Dragon chapter
1. 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).

Dragonwrought Kobolds can indeed take Dragon Wings for flight (I believe there's actually an underground dragon that lacks both swimming and flight.   Not totally sure though).  They also have boosted intelligence (higher than White Dragons).  Superior senses?  Why yes, they get darkvision and low light vision, in addition to a wisdom boost.  Neat.  Not hard to get swimming either.  Besides, isn't this talking about known true dragons, implying there could be others?  It's not like the part where they strictly define True Dragons in this very book as ones with age categories.  I notice you neglected to quote that despite its being the one time they strictly define it mechanically.

Quote
2. Some or all of these are absent in dragonkin and lesser dragon types.

So, since White Dragons lack superior intelligence, they're lesser?  Is that your statement?  Because you seem to be claiming here that Kobolds can't be true due to potentially missing energy immunity and flight.  So White Dragons are out?

Quote
3. In addition, dragons gain power and abilities as they age,

DKobolds definitely get this one.  +3 to all mental stats is certainly more powerful.  They also get the ability to take epic feats when they get old enough.

Quote
Page 15 again
4. Draconic magic is, strictly speaking, ambient in nature. It is not dependent on Chaos, unlike the sorcerers and mystics of the Age of Mortals

Some dragons don't even have casting.  Interestingly, Dragons are, in fact, Sorcerers (many of them).

Quote
Page 155, Book Three Kindred Of The Dragon, 2nd chapter, page 155
5. No dragonwrought kobolds listed.

Wait, a book that came out before Dragonwrought existed didn't list Dragonwrought?  My god, those foolish developers!  How could they not see the future?

Seriously, you're reaching so hard it hurts at this point.

Quote
page 168
6.
Quote
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(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, although you do not age any.

So, yeah.  Let's just point that out again:  a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category).  Hey look, a clear definition.  No exceptions exist, actually.  Unlike all the other ones, this definition actually holds true.  I notice you failed to underline it, despite it being the one part of this that actually applies as a mechanical definition.  Nothing else you've put in here does so.

***

See, you have a bunch of general descriptions, many of which don't even apply to many True Dragons (White Dragons lack superior intelligence, younger dragons don't even have magic, etc).  You've even reached really far with the statement that Dragonwrought Kobolds aren't listed as True Dragons in a book printed before they were even thought of as though that means anything.  Plus you list the HD thing as though it gave that as a definition of True Dragon (it didn't though it assumed you would have it if you were, that's not the same thing). And yet there's one definition in all that fluff, one thing that directly says what a True Dragon is.  I'll restate it, in case you somehow lost track of it in fluff:

a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category)

Now let's quote Dragon Magic on the topic, and again I'm going to cite actual mechanical rules, not just fluff about what specific people know of True Dragons.  Page 87 here:

a true dragon (that is, a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon).

Hey look!  Mechanics!  And perfect agreement!

Now, since you think general descriptive summaries count as definitions, let's make general descriptive summaries of all known true dragons.  Do they all have energy immunity?  No, some Lung Dragons do not.  Do they all grow to over 100 feet long?  No, White Dragons do not.  Are they all of superior intelligence?  No, White Dragons cap out at 12 Int (lower than a Venerable Dragonwrought Kobold's average 13).  Are they all Metallic or Chromatic?  No, Lung Dragons and Gem Dragons and Planar Dragons and Ferrous Dragons are not (but Dragonwrought Kobolds are, as per the table in the Kobolds section of Races of the dragon).  Are they all listed in Dragons of Krynn or Draconomicon?  No, Ferrous Dragons are not (and neither is any dragon printed after those two books, because the designers aren't actually prophetic).  Do they live a long time?  No, Rattelyr dragons live a rather short time.  Okay, so none of that stuff.  But all of the ones listed as True Dragons, they have the following:

They have 12 age catagories (Li Lungs have fewer, but they mature into another kind of Lung dragon, and the sum total is 12).
They're of the dragon type, with all the usual dragon type abilities.
They do in fact get more powerful as they get older

Funny how those are pretty much exactly what the primary source (Draconomicon) says.  And guess how Dragonwrought Kobolds stack up?  Bingo.  While we're at it, remember the definition of a Lesser Dragon in Draconomicon is one that lacks age categories.  Any dragon that's not lesser is true.  Are DKobolds lesser dragons?  Do they lack age categories?  Think carefully about how to define them as such.

JaronK
« Last Edit: July 17, 2010, 08:19:36 PM by JaronK »

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #128 on: July 17, 2010, 08:17:16 PM »
It's also worth mentioning that while Dragons of Eberron is clearly talking about True Dragons in the paragraph where it states who gets to take Sovereign Archtypes, the way it's written any dragon can do it (it's just that only certain specific True Dragons lose their ability to cast certain types of spells with their innate casting).  So, it's all pretty academic anyhow.  Certainly, if we're going for technicalities like "Dragonwrought Kobolds weren't listed as True Dragons in a book written before the Dragonwrought feat was created" then a technicality like "it says any dragon can do it" is reasonable.

JaronK

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #129 on: July 17, 2010, 08:55:17 PM »
And let's say we have a half-white-dragon red dragon, or a paragon red dragon, or a red dragon of legend.  It's not listed on any list of true dragons, yet saying it wouldn't qualify as one because of that would be stupid.

You could argue that it's a list of all true dragons that have statblocks, but as far as I can tell WotC never bothered to actually stat out a dragonwrought kobold, so that's out too.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Littha

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2155
    • Email
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #130 on: July 17, 2010, 09:04:17 PM »
Quote
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(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, although you do not age any.
Fang Dragon

wotmaniac

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • Emperor's Enforcer
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #131 on: July 19, 2010, 02:36:25 AM »
Here's the deal -- this whole issue is basically just to try to justify early access to epic feats (i.e., at 1st level), right?
That being the case, then this whole thing is being argued from the wrong end; and, thus, is largely irrelevant. 

Okay, sure .... let's just go ahead and call dragonwrought kobolds "true dragons" (as I think that argument has already been made, ad nauseum).  But that still doesn't mean that you can get early access to epic feats, and here's why:
Sure, there's that paragraph in Draconomicon that says that dragons of a old age can take epic feats, but that is an addition to the rules in ELH, not a replacement.  If you look, you'll see that every single "true" dragon ever printed already has at least 21 HD by time they hit old age.  Let's break-down that paragraph to see what is really going on:
The first sentence simply restates the original rule from ELH.  Before this, there was never anything that said that HD could qualify for epic feats; up to this point, only class/character levels were mentioned.
Next, you have the sentence that has spurred all of this debate; the thing is, you have to read the whole sentence -- you can't just look at the "Dragons of at least old age also can choose these feats" part and leave it at that.  The rest of that sentence, "even if they have no class levels", is a reference back to the first sentence -- this is the first place in 3.5 that establishes that creature HD count for the purposes of epic feats; that is all this does.  Interpreting this to mean that a quirky 1st-level character can take epic feats is completely ignores context (not just of the whole paragraph, but the rule-set as a whole)
This was November '03 (very early in the 3.5 cycle)

Fast forward 26 months -- enter Races of the Dragon -- drop one designer and add 4 more, and you have a completely different dynamic.  Given that, do you think it might be possible, in all of their dragon/kobold obsession, that they might have forgotten about the specific verbiage of a single paragraph in 300-page book that was put out over 2 years prior?  Given the design philosophy, I think that the most probable answer is that they would have thought that injecting a sentence to the effect of "you still can't take epic feats until you have at least 21 HD" would be excessively redundant (if the thought even occurred to them at all -- which it probably didn't).

Yea, you found a silly, quirky, unintentional loophole that involved a 2 different sets of designers and is separated by 2+ years and 10k+ pages of disjointed development -- congratulations.  It was funny -- at first.  Now it is time to move on to something a little less ridiculous.

[spoiler]
If you stop ignoring 289 pages telling what the intent is to stretch "more power" in your own god complexion of your interpretation trumps all to cover ability adjustments from aging then I will ignore a quarter page of rules that exist within a sidebar.
I think in this case the grammar is less important than whether the Str and Dex bonus provided to your created undead scales.

Greenbound Summoning RAI
Expanded Gestalt
More Savage Progressions[/spoiler]
Report any wrongs I have done here.

Bastian

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 540
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #132 on: July 19, 2010, 03:12:30 AM »
Here's the deal -- this whole issue is basically just to try to justify early access to epic feats (i.e., at 1st level), right?
That being the case, then this whole thing is being argued from the wrong end; and, thus, is largely irrelevant.
No, there's quite a bit more riding on True Dragonhood. Clearly you are an expert on this topic.  

Quote
Okay, sure .... let's just go ahead and call dragonwrought kobolds "true dragons" (as I think that argument has already been made, ad nauseum).  But that still doesn't mean that you can get early access to epic feats, and here's why:
Sure, there's that paragraph in Draconomicon that says that dragons of a old age can take epic feats, but that is an addition to the rules in ELH, not a replacement.
So you claim but the text indicates otherwise. Where does it say it's not an exception?
Quote
If you look, you'll see that every single "true" dragon ever printed already has at least 21 HD by time they hit old age.
I'll take your word for this, though I wouldn't be surprised to find an exception besides Dragonwrought Kobolds.
Quote
Let's break-down that paragraph to see what is really going on:
The first sentence simply restates the original rule from ELH.  Before this, there was never anything that said that HD could qualify for epic feats; up to this point, only class/character levels were mentioned.
Next, you have the sentence that has spurred all of this debate; the thing is, you have to read the whole sentence
I have to READ the whole sentence? Really? But that would be hard and might make you look foolish.

If only "Dragons of at least old age also can choose these feats even if they have no class levels" meant that old aged dragons could choose epic feats regardless of class levels. But sadly no, apparently it means, following the rules in the epic level handbook with no exceptions, dragons of at least old age can take epic feats since their HD count will always be higher than 21 and their dragon HD counts in place of class levels when determining whether you qualify for prerequisites for epic feats. That must be the sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-text
because it's almost like it isn't there. :rollseyes

Quote
-- you can't just look at the "Dragons of at least old age also can choose these feats" part and leave it at that.  The rest of that sentence, "even if they have no class levels", is a reference back to the first sentence -- this is the first place in 3.5 that establishes that creature HD count for the purposes of epic feats; that is all this does.  Interpreting this to mean that a quirky 1st-level character can take epic feats is completely ignores context (not just of the whole paragraph, but the rule-set as a whole)
This was November '03 (very early in the 3.5 cycle)

Fast forward 26 months -- enter Races of the Dragon -- drop one designer and add 4 more, and you have a completely different dynamic.  Given that, do you think it might be possible, in all of their dragon/kobold obsession, that they might have forgotten about the specific verbiage of a single paragraph in 300-page book that was put out over 2 years prior?  Given the design philosophy, I think that the most probable answer is that they would have thought that injecting a sentence to the effect of "you still can't take epic feats until you have at least 21 HD" would be excessively redundant (if the thought even occurred to them at all -- which it probably didn't).

Yea, you found a silly, quirky, unintentional loophole that involved a 2 different sets of designers and is separated by 2+ years and 10k+ pages of disjointed development -- congratulations.  It was funny -- at first.  Now it is time to move on to something a little less ridiculous.
See above for why this is all gibberish.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2010, 03:19:00 AM by Bastian »

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #133 on: July 19, 2010, 07:25:49 AM »
Here's the deal -- this whole issue is basically just to try to justify early access to epic feats (i.e., at 1st level), right?

No.  It's trying to find out what the rules actually say.  Trying to justify would imply trying to bend the truth in some way... this is not so.  To be clear, I'm not currently playing any Kobolds, and I'd ask in advance before trying something like this anyway.  This is kind of like Pun Pun... you figure out what the rules let you do, regardless of what you play.

Besides, access to epic feats early doesn't help much.  Most epic feats require skills or other prerequisites so high you have to be epic (or nearly so) anyway, and most of those that you can qualify for early suck.  The only exception is Epic Toughness which grants +30hp... useful for a low level tank, but otherwise unimpressive.  The powerful thing here is access to Sovereign Archtypes (which don't technically require being a True Dragon anyway).  I don't think epic feats have even been mentioned in quite some time, mostly because access to them really doesn't get you anything interesting (you can't take Epic Spellcasting, for example).

So, no, not even close to correct.

Quote
Yea, you found a silly, quirky, unintentional loophole that involved a 2 different sets of designers and is separated by 2+ years and 10k+ pages of disjointed development -- congratulations.  It was funny -- at first.  Now it is time to move on to something a little less ridiculous.

No, we found what the rules say.  That's all.  No one here is claiming it was intended that Kobolds get epic feats early or that they were supposed to get Sovereign Archtypes.  It's clearly an example of one set of designers acting without the knowledge of another set.  Reading Races of the Dragon it's painfully obvious that Dragonwrought Kobolds were intended to be True Dragons... everything about their lore, from their religion to their values indicates that being like proper dragons is their primary goal and the various things they added in (like age categories, and saying that they count as Chromatic or Metallic, and their religion stating they're made from the pure blood of True Dragons) all are set up for that.  But it's likewise obvious that the people who wrote Dragons of Eberron didn't know about this when they made Sovereign Archtypes, and the people writing Races of the Dragon didn't know about the line in Draconomicon that does indeed say Old dragons get epic feats (and yes, we know, it's because at the time Old dragons always had 21+HD).

To be clear, this is just "what do the rules say?"  It is not a justification for anything.  It is not a discussion of what the designers intended.  It's not a statement of how anyone should play.  It's just what they say.  And right now what they say is that a True Dragon is "a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category" or "a dragon with twelve age categories, such as a red dragon."  Thus, they're True Dragons.  Pretty straight forward, with a lot of people trying VERY hard to justify that they're not (check out the recent reaching with comments about books not mentioning items that didn't even exist when they were written). It then says "Dragons of at least old age also can choose these feats even if they have no class levels" (implied True Dragons, though it doesn't actually say that) and that any dragon can take Sovereign Archtypes with an implication that you should be a True Dragon to do it.  Cool.  That's just what it says.  Are either of those supposed to be for Kobolds?  Almost certainly not.  But it's what they say.

JaronK

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #134 on: July 20, 2010, 12:07:44 PM »
Took me awhile to respond, been busy while I'm motivated on True Dragons. Plus the storms keep knocking my net out blocking my submissions which is really annoying. The bottom of my post has a tangent for some information farming if you would like to take a look and answer some of it for me.

Post #1
[spoiler]
Let's just point that out again:  a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category).  Hey look, a clear definition.  No exceptions exist, actually.  Unlike all the other ones, this definition actually holds true.  I notice you failed to underline it, despite it being the one part of this that actually applies as a mechanical definition.
Because it's useless. PHB's Alter Self spell says everyone has age categories and races with the dragon type are still considered lesser races.

a true dragon (a creature of the dragon type that possesses an age category)
Also useless for you. If you say newest only applies then you cannot use Dragon Magic's rules. If you don't use newest applies then MMI, MMII, DoF, MoF, and Draconomicon's rules can be used.[/spoiler]

Post #2
[spoiler]
1. Reading Races of the Dragon it's painfully obvious that Dragonwrought Kobolds were intended to be True Dragons... 2. everything about their lore, from their religion to their values indicates that being like proper dragons is their primary goal and the various things they added in (like age categories, and saying that they count as Chromatic or Metallic, and their religion stating they're made from the pure blood of True Dragons) all are set up for that.
1. Quote please, I've looked for something that said Kobolds are meant to be a True Dragon rather than a dragon but I can't see past the glaring separation of True Dragons & Kobolds in all RotD's Other Races sections blocking my view.

2. Oh their desire to be a dragon or page 41's "The two races are related"? Yeah, theres a lot of that in the flavor.
Speaking of wants and flavor I want some true dragon innate spellcasting abilities with my half-dragon (direct parentage>ancestry) warblade and unobtainium flavored ice cream in my hand. Guess that means I have it.

To be clear, this is just "what do the rules say?"  It is not a justification for anything.  It is not a discussion of what the designers intended.
eh?
This coming for the guy who inserts his meaning into a word as a method of proving kobolds are a True Dragon. Well right there you have it, this is not a discussion of what JaronK intends things to mean.

<sniped revision>look I don't allow it so it's cool for it to be true.</snip>
Newest low I've seen.
[/spoiler]

Post #3
[spoiler]The methods JaronK uses to say kobolds are True Dragons are...

1. Specific replaces General
Fang Dragons don't have a breath weapon there for you do not need a breath weapon to be a True Dragon.
Chaos Dragons don't have innate spellcasting there for you do not need innate spellcasting to be a True Dragon.
???
My kobold is a True Dragon!

I'll use the Fang & Improved Disarm for example in a true Lost style explaination. A Fang Dragon's Ability Drain description states "a fang dragon does not have a breath weapon", it is an exception to the general rule that all True Dragon's have a breath weapon and since the Fang is listed as a True Dragon and since it is a more specific entry it takes precedence over True Dragon rules allowing the Fang to be a True Dragon. Now look at Improved Disarm, would you say everyone has +4 to disarm checks?

Missing the linkage I used? Yeah, no one ever gets them. Create a stat block of a character with the Improved Disarm feat. He has a +4 bonus to disarm checks instead of +0, an exception to the rules of combat. Just as a Fang Dragon has a bite attack instead of a breath weapon, an exception fo the rules of True Dragons. Trying to say Bob doesn't need a breath weapon to be a True Dragon is like saying Tim don't need Improved Disarm for the same +4 bonus to disarm checks. Apply train of thought to how monsters aqcuire spells without class levels if you desire.

Fang Dragons are an exception to requiring a Breath Weapon to be a True Dragon, however unless you are a Fang Dragon you don't get it's rules. Not only am I speaking from a several thousand example generated view but it just so happens the DMG/RC has a rule on this.

Rules Compendium, Page 5, Order of Rules Application


A Fang Dragon can be a True Dragon simply by saying it is, thats just how it is. At no point does a kobold get the same exception.

*

2. Ignoring the above, specific does replace general
durr, dur, durpa durrrr. HHHUUUUURRRRR! *drools*
Aka in the next post JaronK posts no less than 0 words to refute that but instead 450 words about how he makes exceptions to what he uses. So following his method...

His method, find an exception to ignore it, isn't enough to work either. Every True Dragon listed as such gains Dragon HD Size Increases as a direct result of aging. At the young adult age (or older) they all gain Damage Reduction, Frightful Presence, and Spell Resistance.. Finally they all also have the Keen Senses & Blindsense abilities. All of them have those abilties, even the Yu since all Yu dragons inherit one the other Lung Dragon stat blocks. I suppose a Kobold could obtain all those traits given all the feats, classes, and spells out there. But by that the cost is beyond the gain and JaronK refuses to follow up on this route since he is set on trying to make Loredrake obtainable at level 1.

*

3. Newest Only
Draconomicon, Dragons Of Faerun, Magic of Incarnum, Monsters of Faerun, Monster Manual I, Monster Manual II, Sandstorm, & Shining South rules are older than Dragon Magic. They don't count, ignored.
Actully, Dragons of Krynn was the last 3rd/3.5 edition book printed to say what a dragon is (that I've found). It restablishes many but not all of the rules from the books before it. For example, True Dragon innate casting, which is material component free reguardless of gp cost putting it far beyond the abilities of Eschew Materials. Breath weapons and flight make a comeback as requirements as well and so on.

*

4. Flavor
Dragonwrought is a state brought on my True Dragon ansetory, it's so pure I am a True Dragon. P.S. Kobold flavor says they wish to be a dragon so ha.
Half-Dragon is a state brought on by ten levels in a worthless PrC or having direct linage to a True Dragon (ie one parent was one). Half-Dragon's are not pure enough to be a True Dragon nor is your mutt whos twice removed great great grandfather was a True Dragon. There is zero text supporting the generic haritage of True Dragons is capable of skipping generations and plently suggesting it don't.

Speaking of wants and flavor I want some true dragon innate spellcasting abilities with my half-dragon (direct parentage>ancestry) warblade and unobtainium flavored ice cream in my hand. ... Hmm, for some reason that didn't work.

*

5. I say so.
As you know, words are a way of expressing meaning. It isn't the words them selves that have any real bearing, it's the intent. It's also subject to personal interpretation so of course JaronK immediately leap on that like a fly on pie.

Take for example "In addition, dragons gain power and abilities as they age" To me I see they must gain new abilities not simply increase exsisting ones. Kobolds are out. To others +3 int is more power, kobolds are in. And more importently, crack open a book with any True Dragons and see what it means by gaining power & abilitites from aging. So JaronK has a stance nothing but his opinion matters.

Well I have an opinion and we're both login names on a chat board, it would be a tie prompting me to ask about boobs except the books do matter and should have been the answer a long time ago if not for Internet egos.

*

6. With my rules combined, I am True Dragon kobold! Go Kobold, hes a hero...
This is truly the most annoying habit of JaronK.

Core problem with this method, besides the fact it's just as easy to mix up methods to create points against as well, is it don't take into account all of the rules so it's like saying the world is flat becuase you choose to ignore a geography and then trying to prove it by falling off the edge of Earth. You can't ignore everything and selectively pin a half of a sentence as a point.

Oh, I need more analogies. I shall do one better and selectively pick letters! (not going anywhere with this other than poking fun btw, not giving you an idea here)
In all fairness, that listing
was mostly talking about monsters, not PCs, and monsters don't have age penalties anyway.  A horse, for example, doesn't get venerable.  So the "more powerful" thing actually applies only to standard True Dragons, PC races, and a few other select things.  Either way, that part of the definition does fit.[/i]
K, bored now. Only Radiant Dragon's lose dex as they age. 4 points in total even though size growth is supposed to remove 2 dex per increase.





*

7. Big blocks of text no one really reads
for ( int i - 0; i < 65535; i++ ) { document.Write( "blah " ); }

All he posts are blocks of of the repeated text against any post against him. He doesn't address anything really. Take any post he has made in here in response to another. He only refutes half of it and bounces inbetween methods using huge chunks of text as a way to distract you. Take an example from the last one of my posts, I speak of how True Dragons have innate casting and he fails to refute it by saying True Dragons can and have taken sorcerer levels. I'm torn over it, am I suppose to believe he is that stupid or just trolling?

*
8. And finally, I'm Mr Nice Guy
Allow this because I don't think it should work like this either

Well it's not like he ever used any kinda of rules anyway so asking nicely is a perfectly valid argument for him.

Note: I tried this one at work yesterday, I didn't get a raise like I wanted :(
[/spoiler]

***
***
***

True Dragon questions (that has nothing to do with kobolds!)
[spoiler]
The True Dragon innate spellcasting trait allows many to cast cleric spells as divine spells and material free casting. Got any good examples of abuse for this? Apocalypse From The Sky withstanding of course. The Resurrection chain looks very promising. Also my PDF of Dragon Magazine is corrupted or something. The Tome Dragon's Precognition ability isn't detailed. Could someone PM the information if you have it please?
[/spoiler]
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Littha

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2155
    • Email
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #135 on: July 20, 2010, 12:37:59 PM »
Actually, as far as I am aware the vast majority of dragons dont have spellcasting...

Rebel7284

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1585
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #136 on: July 20, 2010, 01:07:59 PM »
boobs

Best part of your post.  

You make some good points but your post is full of personal attacks at JaronK.  Why would I want to listen to your points when you are being so mean spirited?
Negative level on a chicken would make it a wight the next day.  Chicken the other wight meat. -borg286

zaulsiin

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #137 on: July 20, 2010, 01:45:48 PM »
Post #3
[spoiler]The methods JaronK uses to say kobolds are True Dragons are...

1. Specific replaces General
Fang Dragons don't have a breath weapon there for you do not need a breath weapon to be a True Dragon.
Chaos Dragons don't have innate spellcasting there for you do not need innate spellcasting to be a True Dragon.
???
My kobold is a True Dragon!

I'll use the Fang & Improved Disarm for example in a true Lost style explaination. A Fang Dragon's Ability Drain description states "a fang dragon does not have a breath weapon", it is an exception to the general rule that all True Dragon's have a breath weapon and since the Fang is listed as a True Dragon and since it is a more specific entry it takes precedence over True Dragon rules allowing the Fang to be a True Dragon. Now look at Improved Disarm, would you say everyone has +4 to disarm checks?

Missing the linkage I used? Yeah, no one ever gets them. Create a stat block of a character with the Improved Disarm feat. He has a +4 bonus to disarm checks instead of +0, an exception to the rules of combat. Just as a Fang Dragon has a bite attack instead of a breath weapon, an exception fo the rules of True Dragons. Trying to say Bob doesn't need a breath weapon to be a True Dragon is like saying Tim don't need Improved Disarm for the same +4 bonus to disarm checks. Apply train of thought to how monsters aqcuire spells without class levels if you desire.

Fang Dragons are an exception to requiring a Breath Weapon to be a True Dragon, however unless you are a Fang Dragon you don't get it's rules. Not only am I speaking from a several thousand example generated view but it just so happens the DMG/RC has a rule on this.

Rules Compendium, Page 5, Order of Rules Application


A Fang Dragon can be a True Dragon simply by saying it is, thats just how it is. At no point does a kobold get the same exception.

*
[/spoiler]

This is actually a good point, but the rest of it is near incomprehensible vitriol. I really don't understand where the hostility is coming from, and it makes it difficult to take any arguments seriously.

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #138 on: July 20, 2010, 02:04:49 PM »
Sor0, give me a full list of what you believe to be the necessary criteria for a true dragon with text citations.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Agita

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5465
  • SFT is mai waifu.
Re: On Kobolds and True Dragons
« Reply #139 on: July 20, 2010, 04:05:37 PM »
I'm pretty tired of the whole debate, so I hope you'll forgive me for ignoring your post except for this.
True Dragon questions (that has nothing to do with kobolds!)
[spoiler]
The True Dragon innate spellcasting trait allows many to cast cleric spells as divine spells and material free casting. Got any good examples of abuse for this? Apocalypse From The Sky withstanding of course. The Resurrection chain looks very promising. Also my PDF of Dragon Magazine is corrupted or something. The Tome Dragon's Precognition ability isn't detailed. Could someone PM the information if you have it please?
[/spoiler]
Favorable Sacrifice could have some wacky interaction depending on how you read it. It gives out benefits depending on how expensive your material component was. Depending on your interpretation, it might either not work at all or give you the most expensive version (normally 10k a pop) for free.
It's all about vision and making reality conform to your vision. By dropping a fucking house on it.

Agita's Awesome Poster Compilation
Lycanthromancer's Awesome Poster Compilation