Rules vs Flavour

Shawn Kehoe

Explorer
Hey all,

An interesting situation occurred during my group's session last night. They encountered the orc vampire who had been corrupting a local orc tribe to the worship of Orcus. During the battle, the vampire zapped the party's cleric of Pelor with two negative levels. The heroes subsequently defeated the monster, staked it and dragged the coffin into the sunlight. The vampire is unequivocally destroyed.

Now, should the cleric have to make his saves to prevent level loss? A strict reading of the rules tells me it should. On the other hand, lots of vampire stories allow those inflicted by the vampire to recover once the creature is slain. (Dracula & Nosferatu come to mind.) This is also nice because it will motivate the party to hunt down such creatures in future situations rather than fleeing.

What do you think?

-Shawn
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hmmm... I think this is a personal choice. If you want level loss to go away after the creature is killed in your campaign, go for it. As long as its applied fairly, it shouldn't make much of a difference.
 

I like that solution then a simple spell or saving throw solution. So, I say use it, but tell the players you are making the change.
 

If ever there was a monster that benefits from customised abiilties, it's the vampire. Both Ravenloft and Hollywood make a habit of trying to keep vampire specifics unpredictable, and vampires are romantic enough a monster that they're usually slaves to the needs of the story, so I say go for it.

Who's to say the next vampire they meet will follow the same rules, though? Maybe it drains something other than levels, for instance.
 






Olive said:
Is that link Eric's Grandma Approved, O Moderaterly One?

edit: though that does make the flavour comment in the thread title more... interesting.

wow this thread is going down fast... good stuff I'd say.
 

Remove ads

Top