Kiss of the Vampire = Energy Draining defense ?

[ruleslawyer]

From the energy drain spell...

"An undead creature struck by the ray gains 2d4x5 temporary hit points for 1 hour."

From the enervation spell...

"An undead creature struck by the ray gains 1d4x5 temporary hit points for 1 hour."

Ah! My bad.

They are indeed affected, by a side-effect, no less; a side-effect implemented by the very rules of the energy drain and enervation spell, just like the inflict spell.

No, NOT like a side effect, because the cure/inflict thing is specified completely above and apart from any discussion of "spells and effects that specifically affect undead."

The errata makes no distinction between those and inflict spells. Is says "it doesn't work", while at the same time, making no change to the part of the spell stating "it works".

No. The errata changes the spell description to say, as I said earlier, that:

1) You are affected by spells and effects that specifically affect undead.

2) You are healed by inflict spells and harmed by cure spells, which are NOT, last I checked, "spells [or] effects that specifically affect undead."

3) You can be turned or rebuked.

These are NOT in conflict with each other.

The way I see it, as errata'd, the spell is in complete conflict with itself. It would be like the invisibility spell saying "the target becomes invisible", then one sentence later, saying "the target can be seen as normal". I don't see them as mutually exclusive.

Actually, it's more like the invisibility spell saying "the target becomes invisible" and then saying "creatures may make a Spot check (DC 20) to notice the target's presence." You could IMPLY a context in which a contradiction exists, but there isn't necessarily one.

 

[kreynolds]

Ah! My bad.

It's cool.

No, NOT like a side effect, because the cure/inflict thing is specified completely above and apart from any discussion of "spells and effects that specifically affect undead."

Okay, specifically mentioned side effect then. We're on the same page here. Trust me.

No. The errata changes the spell description to say, as I said earlier, that:

1) You are affected by spells and effects that specifically affect undead.

2) You are healed by inflict spells and harmed by cure spells, which are NOT, last I checked, "spells [or] effects that specifically affect undead."

3) You can be turned or rebuked.

These are NOT in conflict with each other.

They are indeed if the Energy Drain spell doesn't grant you temporary hit points. You said...

"The cure/inflict thing and the turning vulnerability are side effects of the spell, and in the case of energy drain, I see no reason for the creation of a non-specified side effect with a substantial game benefit."

Now, unless I'm reading that wrong (which is possible...wording is a little funky at the end), you're saying that the cure/inflict part of KotV is fine, but that an energy drain spell will still apply negative levels.

Did I read that wrong? If not, do you still take that stance? Has your stance on energy drain against someone with KotV changed now that you know energy drain and enervation specifically affect undead in a different way than other creatures? I ask because Energy Drain vs KotV is what I've been arguing.