Nasty vampires
- Thread starter pbd
- Start date
Infiniti2000
First Post
No save? Ouch. The only one I can think of is one you made yourself. Call it a Master Vampire and give it CR +2 (only +2 because death ward presumably still protects against it).pbd said:
Nyeshet
First Post
I'm not sure about permanence, but there is a Vampire Lord template. It deals 3 negative levels - along with several additional specials, resistances, etc. It wouldn't be that far of a stretch (considering how powerful it is) to state that one of the three levels is permanent (ie: the fort save against it 24 hours later auto-fails).
Be careful about using this, however, as even without permanent level drain this template is quite powerful. In fact, I would rather increase the Fort DC by +4 (to DC 21) or even higher rather than make it automatically permanent. Especially since - on a critical - the number of negative levels is doubled (2 permant levels lost and 4 possible permanent levels lost).
Be careful about using this, however, as even without permanent level drain this template is quite powerful. In fact, I would rather increase the Fort DC by +4 (to DC 21) or even higher rather than make it automatically permanent. Especially since - on a critical - the number of negative levels is doubled (2 permant levels lost and 4 possible permanent levels lost).
Geoff Watson
First Post
pbd said:
No, and there won't be any. A save to regain them is part of the rules for negative levels.
You could, of course, make up some house rules.
Geoff.
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
The penalty caused by the negative levels applies to the save to remove them, doesn't it?
I'd think that if you have a lot of negative levels, just statistics ensures that some of them will result in level loss.
I'd think that if you have a lot of negative levels, just statistics ensures that some of them will result in level loss.
Artoomis
First Post
Cheiromancer said:
Yep - it's a double whammy. You get the negative level AND a reduced chance at the Fort save to have it not becaome permanent.
As for me, I've never like level loss mechanics at all. It's a mess to reduce a level on a character. I do like the "negative level" mechanic becasue it's easy to do. I think permanent level loss should be similar - something easy to do.
Nyeshet
First Post
On the other hand, the 3e "level loss" (as opposed to the 3.5e "negative level") can allow for some interesting role playing. I recall a cleric that permanently lost a few levels. Instead of taking cleric levels again, he took first ranger levels and then Hunter of the Dead levels. Such is impossible to do with the "negative level" mechanic, as 3-4 levels later (possibly months or even years of game time) the character is less likely to still have the same intensity - especially with all that has likely occurred since then.
That's why - each time a level is gained - a 'master copy' of the prior level (abilities, skill ranks, specials, etc) is written up for storage. Later, should a level be lost, the former level can be taken out and used without any hassle, etc.
For an example of my prior statement, consider a PC that permanently loses 4 levels. In the 3e system, if - due to differing circumstances - they decided upon their next few level ups to persue a different path, that would be entirely possible. After having fallen due to a magical trap, I can see a PC deciding to take a level or two or Rogue. After nearly being slain by a creature, I can see another PC deciding upon a level or two or Ranger.
With the current "negative level" mechanic of 3.5e, however, they would be forced to effectively retake their prior class levels rather than the ones they wish. You may as well tell a new PC that they must choose - in advance - their first five class levels, and further tell them that no deviation from this initial decision will be allowed. Some may work well with this (particularly those that have a final destination / PrC in mind and intend to lead their character towards it regardless of what they encounter), but others will balk against it, seeing it as railroading or - at best - non-allowance of natural growth of the character (due to the circumstances affecting the character at each instance a level is gained).
It's really a difference in view on the very concept of character creation. I've known several that would not have a problem with detailing all twenty levels of their character (and all feats and skill ranks, for that matter) at first level - not deviating (except perhaps for an occational skill rank, or perhaps a single less important feat) at all no matter what type of adventures the character encounters. And I've known others that could not even imagine doing such a thing.
So I use the Level Loss mechanic rather than the Negative Level mechanic. Those that have already mapped their character's future are not adversely affected, for they will just choose the same classes, abilities, feats, and skill ranks again, while those that are more spontaneous in their character creation at leveling time are similarly not adversely affected, for they once again can pick and choose as they wish. The difference, perhaps, between Judgers and Perceivers, as described in the MBTI.
That's why - each time a level is gained - a 'master copy' of the prior level (abilities, skill ranks, specials, etc) is written up for storage. Later, should a level be lost, the former level can be taken out and used without any hassle, etc.
For an example of my prior statement, consider a PC that permanently loses 4 levels. In the 3e system, if - due to differing circumstances - they decided upon their next few level ups to persue a different path, that would be entirely possible. After having fallen due to a magical trap, I can see a PC deciding to take a level or two or Rogue. After nearly being slain by a creature, I can see another PC deciding upon a level or two or Ranger.
With the current "negative level" mechanic of 3.5e, however, they would be forced to effectively retake their prior class levels rather than the ones they wish. You may as well tell a new PC that they must choose - in advance - their first five class levels, and further tell them that no deviation from this initial decision will be allowed. Some may work well with this (particularly those that have a final destination / PrC in mind and intend to lead their character towards it regardless of what they encounter), but others will balk against it, seeing it as railroading or - at best - non-allowance of natural growth of the character (due to the circumstances affecting the character at each instance a level is gained).
It's really a difference in view on the very concept of character creation. I've known several that would not have a problem with detailing all twenty levels of their character (and all feats and skill ranks, for that matter) at first level - not deviating (except perhaps for an occational skill rank, or perhaps a single less important feat) at all no matter what type of adventures the character encounters. And I've known others that could not even imagine doing such a thing.
So I use the Level Loss mechanic rather than the Negative Level mechanic. Those that have already mapped their character's future are not adversely affected, for they will just choose the same classes, abilities, feats, and skill ranks again, while those that are more spontaneous in their character creation at leveling time are similarly not adversely affected, for they once again can pick and choose as they wish. The difference, perhaps, between Judgers and Perceivers, as described in the MBTI.
Similar Threads
