Hi everyone,
I'm trying to clarify the wording of the Wyrmscourged alternate racial trait for dwarves.
The trait reads:
Dwarves with this racial trait gain a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +2 dodge bonus to AC and on saving throws against the extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities of dragons. They also gain a +2 racial bonus on Knowledge (arcana) checks to identify dragons and can make such checks untrained. This racial trait replaces defensive training, hatred, and stonecunning.
I'm interested specifically in the first sentence and whether the +1 attack bonus and +2 dodge bonus to AC are unconditional, or whether they are intended to apply only against dragons.
My reading of the wording is that RAW gives:
- +1 on all attack rolls
- +2 dodge bonus to AC in general
- +2 on saving throws against the extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities of dragons
The reason is the grammatical structure: “a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +2 dodge bonus to AC and on saving throws against ...”
The phrase “against the extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities of dragons” appears to modify the saving throws, rather than the preceding attack rolls and AC.
If the attack and AC bonuses were intended to apply only against dragons, I would expect wording such as: “a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +2 dodge bonus to AC against dragons ...” or something similar.
Also it seems pointless to get an attack bonus against extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities. As well as mostly pointless to get an AC bonus against those.
However, I can also see a reasonable RAI argument that the +1 attack and +2 AC bonuses were intended to be bonuses against dragons.
The racial trait is called Wyrmscourged, replaces three standard dwarf racial traits, and is obviously intended as a dragon-focused alternative. Giving a dwarf a permanent +1 to attack and +2 dodge AC is quite a substantial benefit, especially since the trait also gives a bonus to saves against dragon abilities.
So I can understand someone reading the trait as conceptually meaning:
- +1 attack against dragons
- +2 AC against dragons
- +2 saves against dragon abilities
The problem is that this is not what the actual sentence says. Even if I read the grammer wrong, it still just says to get an attack bonus against dragon abilites, not against dragons.
There is another thing that makes me wonder whether the wording may have been influenced by the existing svirfneblin racial traits.
Dwarves and svirfneblin have quite a few similarities in their racial traits. Both are Underdark-associated races and both have, among other things:
- Stonecunning
- Defensive Training
- Hatred
- Darkvision
- the ability to choose the language of the other race as a bonus language
The particularly interesting part is Defensive Training.
For dwarves, Defensive Training is the racial ability being replaced by Wyrmscourged. The dwarf version gives a dodge bonus to AC against giants.
Svirfneblin also have a racial trait called Defensive Training, but their version provides a general +2 dodge bonus to AC, rather than a bonus restricted to a particular enemy type.
So it might be possible, that the author had the Svirfneblin race in mind while creating this racial trait and intended it to be just as powerfull.
What do you think?
How would you interpret Wyrmscourged RAW?
And separately, what do you think was intended RAI?
My current interpretation would be:
RAW:
- +1 attack rolls, universally
- +2 dodge AC, universally
- +2 saves against dragon extraordinary/supernatural/spell-like abilities
- +2 Knowledge (arcana) to identify dragons
Likely RAI:
- +1 attack against dragons
- +2 dodge AC against dragons
- +2 saves against dragon extraordinary/supernatural/spell-like abilities
- +2 Knowledge (arcana) to identify dragons
Thanks!
Ii would say that these bonuses are clearly intended to apply vs dragons only. Grammatical games aside, no racial trait for a standard race gives an unconditional +1 attack and +2 ac, not ever.
Ii would say that these bonuses are clearly intended to apply vs dragons only. Grammatical games aside, no racial trait for a standard race gives an unconditional +1 attack and +2 ac, not ever.
As pointed out before, the Svirfneblin do get an unconditional +2 to AC.
They also get an unconditional +1 to attack. As all small races do, due to their size.I totally see reading it as if the AC and attack bonus applies against dragons. But this is simply not what it says. Skipping all gramatics and trying hard to apply this to dragons, which I would really like to do, I end up with a bonus on attack roles and AC vs. extraordinary, supernatural, and spell-like abilities of dragons. Which is just confusing.
Sadly it never says against dragons.
It only ever says against ... abilities of dragons
Sverfneblin are several steps more powerful than normal races, like dwarves, so comparing their stats isn't relevant. You and your table can do whatever, no skin off my parts, but you asked for what others thought.
Yes the wording is less than good, but if we look at the context of other standard race abilities it is clear, at least to me.
Happy gaming!
Sorry, I didn't read carfully enough before.
So, as I understand your argument now, you're saying that the general power level of the standard races in the Core Rulebook is the reason you consider an unconditional +1 to attack and +2 AC unlikely to be intended. In other words, you're using the surrounding racial abilities and the general power level of standard races as an argument for the RAI interpretation that these bonuses are meant to apply against dragons.
If that's what you mean, then yes, I understand your point, and I agree that it makes the RAI interpretation quite plausible.
And you are right, I did ask for your oppinion and appreciate you taking the time.
The idea behind the alternative racial trait is that the character is trading abilities of equal or near equal power. It is not to upgrade the power of the character. Giants are a lot more common than dragons so the dodge bonus is lowered for balance. Orcs and goblins are more common but at higher level they are usually not threats, dragons are threats at almost all levels. The bonus to identify Dragons is about as powerful as stone cutting. So, if the bonuses only apply to dragons, it balances out what you gain against what you lose fairly well.
If you get a +1 on all attacks and a +2 dodge bonus to your AC against all foes that is significantly more powerful than what you lost.
The idea behind the alternative racial trait is that the character is trading abilities of equal or near equal power. It is not to upgrade the power of the character. Giants are a lot more common than dragons so the dodge bonus is lowered for balance. Orcs and goblins are more common but at higher level they are usually not threats, dragons are threats at almost all levels. The bonus to identify Dragons is about as powerful as stone cutting. So, if the bonuses only apply to dragons, it balances out what you gain against what you lose fairly well.
If you get a +1 on all attacks and a +2 dodge bonus to your AC against all foes that is significantly more powerful than what you lost.
I understand your argument as an argument for RAI as well. That makes sense to me. Thank you.
Dwarf race then down to [PFS] Wyrmscourged (Alt. Racial Trait) which replaces Defensive Training, Hatred, Stonecunning.
It's clear the +1 (no type) atk, +2 dodge AC, and +2 saves vs (Ex, Su, SLA) apply (only) versus dragons and effects from dragons. The key is "and" after the last comma. Then Know(Arcana) +2 racl even with 0 ranks for knowledge about dragons.comma use in lists {aggregate commentary}:
There's no such thing as RAI. That is just a byproduct of interpretation.
If I had to guess an editor said, "Oh, it's a list!", and applied the oxford comma.
If I understand your point correctly, you're saying that the Oxford comma resolves the grammatical ambiguity in the sentence. I can see how that could be read that way. However, I think there is still a conceptual issue: it would seem to imply that the attack bonus applies against the abilities of dragons, which doesn't really make sense to me either.
Dwarven alternate racial traits could all do with some language polish. There's also Deep Tradition that's in a similar boat, in my opinion:
While some dwarves focus their early years on training against one specific foe of the dwarven kingdoms, others know that there are many enemies who would destroy dwarvenkind if given the opportunity. A dwarf with this racial trait gains a +1 bonus on melee attack rolls and a +1 bonus to AC against attacks of opportunity made by drow, duergar, creatures of the aberration type, or creatures of the giant or orc subtype.
That said, it doesn't really pass the smell test - a blanket +1 to melee attack rolls for Hatred and Defensive Training seems too good to be true.