Arcane Prestige class needed.

[Visigani]

Actually if a feat ceases to be functional then all dependent feats abilities and class features also cease to be functional.

If you have 12 str put on a ring of plus 1 str you now qualify for power attack. Take that ring off and you lose power attack.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk

 

[Ashtagon]

True dragons are defined in Races of the Dragon as creature with the Dragon type who gain power with age catagories. A venerable Dragonwraught Kobold is more powerful than an adult Dragonwraught Kobold, since bonuses acrue while penalties do not. Thus, they meet all of the prereqs.

The only definition for a true dragon in that book is on page 103, which shows a list of all true dragons published to that date, which is notably lacking in any kobolds, dragonwrought or otherwise.

I did, however, manage to find your definition elsewhere. It was in wikipedia. Not really the place to go for D&D rules disputes.

 

[Visigani]

The only definition for a true dragon in that book is on page 103, which shows a list of all true dragons published to that date, which is notably lacking in any kobolds, dragonwrought or otherwise.

I did, however, manage to find your definition elsewhere. It was in wikipedia. Not really the place to go for D&D rules disputes.

Really this whole debate underscores the inherent tery of the Munchkin.


They want the BROADEST definition when it serves their purposes and the NARROWEST definition when it does not.


The Dread Necromancer cannot be good. It's written, plain as day. Nothing about them changing alignments, it states as written in stone by God above "No Dread Necromancer can have a good alignment". Not "Dread Necromancers can have a good alignment if they put on an alignment changing item". Not some, not "special exceptions". Not "Magic makes me a rather polite and prim and generous and kind Dread Necromancer".

This is why there are no ex dread necromancers. Because there cannot BE an ex dread necromancer. If the answer to the question of "Are you a dread necromancer?" is "Yes" then you cannot have a good alignment. Even if by some bizarre chance you did get programmed amnesia (The Evil Guy wants to become a good guy in pursuit of more power so the powers of good raise him up to the absolute pinnacle of holy goodness...) the fact remains that it is impossible to be a good dread necromancer as stated RAW.


And that's really what this debate is about. It's about munchkins who are all about interpreting certain rules in the absolute loosest fashion possible when it suits their whims and them coming down to the letter of the law when it benefits them.

Mod Note: No, now the debate is about calling people names. Folks, rule #1 is "Keep it civil." Name-calling is not civil. If you cannot keep it civil, it will be kept civil for you. ~Umbran

The game allows for paladins to turn evil, for monks to turn chaotic, for any number of alignment variations. But, as the poster above noted, unlike paladins, monks, bards, barbarians, what have you, there's nothing in RAW for ex dread necromancers. Consequently you cannot assume there can be ex dread necromancers simply because it suits your powergaming needs. It states clearly there can be no good dread necromancers. Game over.

 

[Wyvernhand]

So if you put a helm of opposite alignment on an Evil DN, does it cause a "divide by cucumber" error and force a reboot of the universe?

I'm curious. It's something you say can never happen, yet it is possible to happen. What happens if it happens.

And again...WHY DO YOU CARE?

 

[kitcik]

So if you put a helm of opposite alignment on an Evil DN, does it cause a "divide by cucumber" error and force a reboot of the universe?

I'm curious. It's something you say can never happen, yet it is possible to happen. What happens if it happens.

They become UNDREAD of course.

 

[Wyvernhand]

Oh, and I found the relevant citation. It's not in Races of the Dragon, its in the Draconomnomnomnomicon. Specifically, the sidebar on page 4 I think.

And dragonwraught kobolds are not on the list because they are not a race. Tough humans are not a race, they are just humans with Toughness. Kobolds are not true dragons, so they would not be on the list. That doesn't mean that a dragonwraught kobold isn't. They do fit all of the criteria in the Draconomicon.

You might not like it, and you might interpret or rule it otherwise, but that doesn't make it untrue. As written, it can be interpreted as legal.

And I resent being called a munchkin.

 

[Thrallherd]

They become UNDREAD of course.

So they become an Undread Necromancer? Because in no cases does someone lose levels from alignment change.

 

[kitcik]

So they become an Undread Necromancer? Because in no cases does someone lose levels from alignment change.

A druid who... changes to a prohibited alignment... loses all spells and druid abilities...

Not saying I disagree about DN, but...

 

[Ashtagon]

Oh, and I found the relevant citation. It's not in Races of the Dragon, its in the Draconomnomnomnomicon. Specifically, the sidebar on page 4 I think.

And dragonwraught kobolds are not on the list because they are not a race. Tough humans are not a race, they are just humans with Toughness. Kobolds are not true dragons, so they would not be on the list. That doesn't mean that a dragonwraught kobold isn't. They do fit all of the criteria in the Draconomicon.

You might not like it, and you might interpret or rule it otherwise, but that doesn't make it untrue. As written, it can be interpreted as legal.

And I resent being called a munchkin.

Here's some quotes from that sidebar you mentioned:

...

For the most part, this book concerns itself with the ten varieties of true dragon described in the Monster Manual—the five chromatic dragons (black, blue, green, red, white) and the five metallic dragons (brass, bronze, copper, gold, silver). True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older. ...

... In addition, Appendix 2: Index of Dragons provides a complete list of all true dragons that have been presented in official sources. ...

So, that very same sidebar specifically says only ten true dragons were described in the Monster Manual. Kobolds are in the MM, but aren't noted in that paragraph as true dragons. But it also refers us to a list of true dragons in its appendix. Let's flip the pages and look at page 286-8... nope, no kobolds there either (dragonwrought or otherwise).

Essentially, anywhere there is a list of creatures that are true dragons, there is also a notable lack of kobolds.

Also, the Dragon Wrought feat from RotD does not say the character becomes a true dragon -- merely that he gains the dragon type.

If you took an actual true dragon and applied the necropolitan template as your character build does, he'd lose the dragon type anyway, and thus would automatically lose the status of being a true dragon.

 

[Thrallherd]

[/FONT]

Not saying I disagree about DN, but...

Hmm... Very true. However, you technically have the levels.