If a vampire hunter meets a vampire lord...

[John Q. Mayhem]

I'd be almost inclined to not let the Vampire Hunter feat work against vampire lords at all. That feat commits what I consider to be a cardinal sin of game design-balancing over-powered-ness by situationality. The idea that a single feat with laughable prerequisites renders you immune to vampiric domination, and lets you automatically ID vampires...I don't like it.

 

[moritheil]

I side with the Vampire Hunter. When the feat was written, the writer probably was not thinking about an old 3.0 article on Wizards website. He didn't think a vampire would have any form of domination other than gaze, so that's the only one he mentioned.

More importantly if the player spent the feat on it, he should be able to reap the rewards of it. Saying it doesn't work because of this little techincallity will be frustrating.

Different things are frustrating to different people. Moreover, a DM cannot prove that something is not frustrating to a given player. "It's frustrating that we have to walk to the dungeon!" Does that mean that the DM should ignore the walk? No. Frustration, though clearly a valid human issue, cannot be considered as a Rules issue.