Vampire in play

[AbdulAlhazred]

Would the vampire become a better striker if it were able to add it's riders more often during battle because it has more healing surges to burn?

Well, it wouldn't make a huge difference since all the 'use a surge' powers are encounter powers or daily powers. It makes SOME difference since you're more likely to have the spare surges to use those powers/kickers. It won't boost your DPR incredibly though.

The thing is vampires are fine in heroic tier. They can dish out a pretty fair amount of damage, and are quite accurate. They just lack a lot of ways to access the traditional optimizations that earlier classes use to crank that up. There aren't multi-attacks or minor action attack powers and you're using either a holy symbol or a ki focus, neither of which are known for having incredibly damage enhancing enchantments. You CAN optimize, but not a lot. Given you have very few power choices either you can't easily access swaps that would get you something extra. A half-elf can pick up Twin Strike of course, and using a ki focus you could use it fairly effectively, but that only gains you a little bit.

Honestly my feeling is that for the most part vampire is more in line with the original intended power curve where there are some decent options but they just can't be piled one atop the other with multi-attack tricks to get DPR sky high. You'll note too that other Essential style strikers like the Slayer have some similar issues, though not to the same degree.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Well, it wouldn't make a huge difference since all the 'use a surge' powers are encounter powers or daily powers. It makes SOME difference since you're more likely to have the spare surges to use those powers/kickers. It won't boost your DPR incredibly though.

The thing is vampires are fine in heroic tier. They can dish out a pretty fair amount of damage, and are quite accurate. They just lack a lot of ways to access the traditional optimizations that earlier classes use to crank that up. There aren't multi-attacks or minor action attack powers and you're using either a holy symbol or a ki focus, neither of which are known for having incredibly damage enhancing enchantments. You CAN optimize, but not a lot. Given you have very few power choices either you can't easily access swaps that would get you something extra. A half-elf can pick up Twin Strike of course, and using a ki focus you could use it fairly effectively, but that only gains you a little bit.

Honestly my feeling is that for the most part vampire is more in line with the original intended power curve where there are some decent options but they just can't be piled one atop the other with multi-attack tricks to get DPR sky high. You'll note too that other Essential style strikers like the Slayer have some similar issues, though not to the same degree.

I think the vampire would have been better if it was a weapon using class instead of a predetermined damage class. Then you could apply holy symbols like the "Fist of Kord" on top of the weapon pluses and feats.

Well I would have given it at least one weapon using At-will, encounter and Daily power to choose from. The vamp could essentially wield a one handed weapon and still attack with his bare hand. You don't have to hold a holy symbol or a Ki focus.

 

[Aegeri]

Would the vampire become a better striker if it were able to add it's riders more often during battle because it has more healing surges to burn?

Not really. It brings them above OAssassin levels, but not much else as they only can do this limited times (encounter powers and some dailies allow it).

You'll note too that other Essential style strikers like the Slayer have some similar issues, though not to the same degree.

Slayers have nowhere near the problems that vampires do and pull ridiculous DPR with trivial amounts of optimization. For one thing, Slayers can take huge die weapons, like d12 mordenkrads, fullblades or the gouge. The slayer is ridiculously accurate: I've been able to get a 80% even chance to hit a monster of the same level trivially and this is without CA. Slayers are naturally one of the best chargers in 4E, with a stance that gives +2 accuracy on charging and +2 speed (this is really the major factor that makes them ridiculously good at this). Charging at +3 to hit all day? With all the delicious delicious charge cheese in 4E? That's not good. That is flat out amazing.

Not to mention that slayers have a very effective damage scaling bonus, stances that add extra damage that scale very well (though in fairness, many slayers will just abuse the +2 to hit and speed on charging stance), they can get rain of blows for a strong multiple attack at higher levels and on top of all this, they add dex onto all of their attacks too. Take surprising charge - conveniently enough there is a 2d6 brutal 1 spear AND axe in the game just for that - did I mention expertise that adds +1/+2/+3 damage on that as well on charging? - for charges that do 4d6 brutal 1 natively (from heroic tier pretty much) and later in epic 6d6 brutal 1 natively. That's your basic charge, doing 3[W] with beyond ridiculous accuracy to boot. You'll notice I've not even mentioned power strike, but by epic that right there is 12d6 brutal 1 on a charge (as power strike will add a flat 3[W]). If we don't assume the gouge is available, you'll still get 5d12 with something like a fullblade - plus is more accurate (as it's +3). So scaling wise, the slayer is flying into epic with huge horrible teeth - the vampire is limping in and is barely able to keep up.

Quite frankly, the slayer is nowhere near in the same ballpark as the vampire when you are *that* built for charging. Of course you might argue that charging needs to be looked at in general, because if you are built to use charging in any manner it's just ridiculous how much better you are than someone not built for charging. Then again, the slayer feels like it was made to abuse charging. The slayer isn't known for having problems inflicting ridiculous amounts of damage. I mean I think the slayer is boring, but I'll never criticize its ability to deal damage. The only thing more obscene for pure base every single round effectiveness is the thief. Both of whom with the feat article last month have options for minor action attacks or multiple attacks too.

The question of course is, where does the vampire go wrong? This is actually simple to answer:

1) The vampire has no native accuracy boosting feature, unlike the Slayer and Rogue (who gain a natural +1 bonus to pretty much everything they want to do). The vampire does get its choice of NADs, but the Thief can turn all of his attacks into targeting reflex and with his ridiculous accuracy as well.

2) The vampire uses implement attacks. This means he's restricted to smaller dice, except on a precious few encounter powers and similar. You can't make the same use out of the options like charging that the slayer can (and the slayer frankly, also enjoys +2 accuracy from the charge stance as well).

3) The vampires secondary damage mechanics don't scale anywhere near that of essentials strikers.

4) The vampire relies heavily on being able to burn surges for extra damage - hence why durable is really important. More surges = more burning = better encounter nova. Of course the best encounter novas of the vampire are getting into territory of the worst efforts of some of the other strikers - which is why they get so criticized on this (especially towards paragon). Durable solves this though in fairness, but it's one of the other reasons its so important aside from low level survival.

5) The vampire, as you mentioned Abdul, doesn't have the options for multiple attacks and minor actions/interrupts that some others do. Now the slayer/thief aren't great at this either, but they make up for it with so much ridiculous front loading that they don't have to care. Slayers and thieves don't approach multiple attacking strikers, but oh boy do they hold their own easily. The vampire does not.

My solutions now I've seen enough of Mr. Vampy:

1) Give the vampire a much bigger static increase to damage as he levels up. Vampires can't abuse charging. They can't get many multiple attacks and they are entirely locked into a linear route. Giving them a better damage scaling mechanic would work wonders. Blood drinker IMO could go to 2d8/3d8/4d8 in fact (instead of 1d8/2d8/3d8 as it is now). I mean that's not the biggest increase in the world, but it's something at least on top of their charisma (which I think should get a bigger static bonus to help their damage).

2) I would like to see them get more ways of burning surges for extra damage in general. Maybe just another power or so where they can spend a surge, to throw on some d10s onto an attack. It would still fit the mechanics of the class and really enforce their desperation to get surges.

3) I am unsure if vampires or anything in these essentials books will ever get class feats, but a bunch of class feats to give them more accuracy, or higher damage or something could go such a long way to helping the vampire. Part of the reason slayers/thieves really are not equivalent in problems to the vampire is all that previous support. Surprising charge for example, is plainly ridiculous for a slayer and was published a really long time ago (martial power in fact). Vampires have 0 support in terms of feats, which is partly why they fall so far behind as slayers/thieves have the genius move of being fighters/rogues. They get delicious delicious support, so it's little wonder that slayers and thieves have the options to pull their damage ahead, despite things we'd think of as "problems" with optimizing damage. Again the lack of immediate interrupts, minor action attacks and multiple attacks don't bother the slayer/thief at all. They front load literally everything so much they get away with it. This should be the approach the vampire should take.

The vampire could use a lot of support and does in fact really need it at paragon and above. This is about the time that the OAssassin becomes laughably bad as well (coincidence? I think not). I think most of the vampires damage issues could be easily solved, but it's up to wizards to do it with good focused support where it needs it. As we've seen with the Runepriest or Seeker though - it's not a good idea to count on support fixing your class.

But in fairness, at least the vampire isn't the binder!

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Not really. It brings them above OAssassin levels, but not much else as they only can do this limited times (encounter powers and some dailies allow it).
Slayers have nowhere near the problems that vampires do and pull ridiculous DPR with trivial amounts of optimization. For one thing, Slayers can take huge die weapons, like d12 mordenkrads, fullblades or the gouge. The slayer is ridiculously accurate: I've been able to get a 80% even chance to hit a monster of the same level trivially and this is without CA. Slayers are naturally one of the best chargers in 4E, with a stance that gives +2 accuracy on charging and +2 speed (this is really the major factor that makes them ridiculously good at this). Charging at +3 to hit all day? With all the delicious delicious charge cheese in 4E? That's not good. That is flat out amazing.

Not to mention that slayers have a very effective damage scaling bonus, stances that add extra damage that scale very well (though in fairness, many slayers will just abuse the +2 to hit and speed on charging stance), they can get rain of blows for a strong multiple attack at higher levels and on top of all this, they add dex onto all of their attacks too. Take surprising charge - conveniently enough there is a 2d6 brutal 1 spear AND axe in the game just for that - did I mention expertise that adds +1/+2/+3 damage on that as well on charging? - for charges that do 4d6 brutal 1 natively (from heroic tier pretty much) and later in epic 6d6 brutal 1 natively. That's your basic charge, doing 3[W] with beyond ridiculous accuracy to boot. You'll notice I've not even mentioned power strike, but by epic that right there is 12d6 brutal 1 on a charge (as power strike will add a flat 3[W]). If we don't assume the gouge is available, you'll still get 5d12 with something like a fullblade - plus is more accurate (as it's +3). So scaling wise, the slayer is flying into epic with huge horrible teeth - the vampire is limping in and is barely able to keep up.

Quite frankly, the slayer is nowhere near in the same ballpark as the vampire when you are *that* built for charging. Of course you might argue that charging needs to be looked at in general, because if you are built to use charging in any manner it's just ridiculous how much better you are than someone not built for charging. Then again, the slayer feels like it was made to abuse charging. The slayer isn't known for having problems inflicting ridiculous amounts of damage. I mean I think the slayer is boring, but I'll never criticize its ability to deal damage. The only thing more obscene for pure base every single round effectiveness is the thief. Both of whom with the feat article last month have options for minor action attacks or multiple attacks too.

There is also giving the Slayer a Vanguard Executioners Axe, Iron Armbands and a Horned Helm for even more damage with a charge.

 

[Aegeri]

Actually you don't need Iron Armbands as you can simply make or buy Bracers of Mighty Striking, which are a common item that does the exact same thing for you. Only cheaper and you don't need to rely on your DM giving you it, as Iron Armbands are a uncommon item. This also means you can leave the Iron Armbands for another party member who isn't going to be spamming MBAs and could really use it more.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

3) The vampires secondary damage mechanics don't scale anywhere near that of essentials strikers.

I was building a leech and noticed that, at 5th level, its damage was about the same as my psion's.

This seemed rather absurdly low.

(I think that I could get a two-point advantage on the vampire had I not spent a feat on Durable.)

Brad

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Not really. It brings them above OAssassin levels, but not much else as they only can do this limited times (encounter powers and some dailies allow it).
Slayers have nowhere near the problems that vampires do and pull ridiculous DPR with trivial amounts of optimization. For one thing, Slayers can take huge die weapons, like d12 mordenkrads, fullblades or the gouge. The slayer is ridiculously accurate: I've been able to get a 80% even chance to hit a monster of the same level trivially and this is without CA. Slayers are naturally one of the best chargers in 4E, with a stance that gives +2 accuracy on charging and +2 speed (this is really the major factor that makes them ridiculously good at this). Charging at +3 to hit all day? With all the delicious delicious charge cheese in 4E? That's not good. That is flat out amazing.

Not to mention that slayers have a very effective damage scaling bonus, stances that add extra damage that scale very well (though in fairness, many slayers will just abuse the +2 to hit and speed on charging stance), they can get rain of blows for a strong multiple attack at higher levels and on top of all this, they add dex onto all of their attacks too. Take surprising charge - conveniently enough there is a 2d6 brutal 1 spear AND axe in the game just for that - did I mention expertise that adds +1/+2/+3 damage on that as well on charging? - for charges that do 4d6 brutal 1 natively (from heroic tier pretty much) and later in epic 6d6 brutal 1 natively. That's your basic charge, doing 3[W] with beyond ridiculous accuracy to boot. You'll notice I've not even mentioned power strike, but by epic that right there is 12d6 brutal 1 on a charge (as power strike will add a flat 3[W]). If we don't assume the gouge is available, you'll still get 5d12 with something like a fullblade - plus is more accurate (as it's +3). So scaling wise, the slayer is flying into epic with huge horrible teeth - the vampire is limping in and is barely able to keep up.

Quite frankly, the slayer is nowhere near in the same ballpark as the vampire when you are *that* built for charging. Of course you might argue that charging needs to be looked at in general, because if you are built to use charging in any manner it's just ridiculous how much better you are than someone not built for charging. Then again, the slayer feels like it was made to abuse charging. The slayer isn't known for having problems inflicting ridiculous amounts of damage. I mean I think the slayer is boring, but I'll never criticize its ability to deal damage. The only thing more obscene for pure base every single round effectiveness is the thief. Both of whom with the feat article last month have options for minor action attacks or multiple attacks too.

The question of course is, where does the vampire go wrong? This is actually simple to answer:

1) The vampire has no native accuracy boosting feature, unlike the Slayer and Rogue (who gain a natural +1 bonus to pretty much everything they want to do). The vampire does get its choice of NADs, but the Thief can turn all of his attacks into targeting reflex and with his ridiculous accuracy as well.

2) The vampire uses implement attacks. This means he's restricted to smaller dice, except on a precious few encounter powers and similar. You can't make the same use out of the options like charging that the slayer can (and the slayer frankly, also enjoys +2 accuracy from the charge stance as well).

3) The vampires secondary damage mechanics don't scale anywhere near that of essentials strikers.

4) The vampire relies heavily on being able to burn surges for extra damage - hence why durable is really important. More surges = more burning = better encounter nova. Of course the best encounter novas of the vampire are getting into territory of the worst efforts of some of the other strikers - which is why they get so criticized on this (especially towards paragon). Durable solves this though in fairness, but it's one of the other reasons its so important aside from low level survival.

5) The vampire, as you mentioned Abdul, doesn't have the options for multiple attacks and minor actions/interrupts that some others do. Now the slayer/thief aren't great at this either, but they make up for it with so much ridiculous front loading that they don't have to care. Slayers and thieves don't approach multiple attacking strikers, but oh boy do they hold their own easily. The vampire does not.

My solutions now I've seen enough of Mr. Vampy:

1) Give the vampire a much bigger static increase to damage as he levels up. Vampires can't abuse charging. They can't get many multiple attacks and they are entirely locked into a linear route. Giving them a better damage scaling mechanic would work wonders. Blood drinker IMO could go to 2d8/3d8/4d8 in fact (instead of 1d8/2d8/3d8 as it is now). I mean that's not the biggest increase in the world, but it's something at least on top of their charisma (which I think should get a bigger static bonus to help their damage).

2) I would like to see them get more ways of burning surges for extra damage in general. Maybe just another power or so where they can spend a surge, to throw on some d10s onto an attack. It would still fit the mechanics of the class and really enforce their desperation to get surges.

3) I am unsure if vampires or anything in these essentials books will ever get class feats, but a bunch of class feats to give them more accuracy, or higher damage or something could go such a long way to helping the vampire. Part of the reason slayers/thieves really are not equivalent in problems to the vampire is all that previous support. Surprising charge for example, is plainly ridiculous for a slayer and was published a really long time ago (martial power in fact). Vampires have 0 support in terms of feats, which is partly why they fall so far behind as slayers/thieves have the genius move of being fighters/rogues. They get delicious delicious support, so it's little wonder that slayers and thieves have the options to pull their damage ahead, despite things we'd think of as "problems" with optimizing damage. Again the lack of immediate interrupts, minor action attacks and multiple attacks don't bother the slayer/thief at all. They front load literally everything so much they get away with it. This should be the approach the vampire should take.

The vampire could use a lot of support and does in fact really need it at paragon and above. This is about the time that the OAssassin becomes laughably bad as well (coincidence? I think not). I think most of the vampires damage issues could be easily solved, but it's up to wizards to do it with good focused support where it needs it. As we've seen with the Runepriest or Seeker though - it's not a good idea to count on support fixing your class.

But in fairness, at least the vampire isn't the binder!

It's a fine analysis. I didn't mean to imply that the Slayer was in the same ballpark with the Vampire, only that they share a trait in common in lacking access to certain types of damage stacking. The common accepted wisdom in these parts also being that they do fall somewhat short of the top tier of striker damage at high levels, though they're quiet respectable. Chargers also have a habit of being hot and cold, either you're in a situation where you can charge and you do great, or you're not and you don't, at which point the Slayer is still pretty good, but definitely falls quite far behind the top tier strikers.

In any case I think the jury is out on what support we'll see for the Vampire. If players clamor for more support then I think we'll see it. While class and race specific feats GENERALLY are being deemphasized I don't think we should write them off as dead yet. They're still likely to appear in specific contexts where they're a good fit. We could also see more powers and entire additional builds for vampires (perhaps alternative traditional variations of vampire, there are a lot of them out there).

Another thing that I think is true with the vampire, and a couple other classes to some extent, is that they are just very straightforward and there isn't much to optimize. This definitely makes them boring for people who like to tinker around with optimization. I think charops often runs into a problem where they hate something simply because they can't do much with it, not because it is intrinsically bad.

As far as binders go, I've seen a couple of perfectly competent builds, even right up to 30. The real issue with them isn't that they're bad, it is just that you can build a hexblade or PHB1 warlock that is better and can manage pretty much the same concept. There's also a perception in charops that only the 'hardest' control options matter. Thematically the binder is very solid. Honestly the binder is what the warlock should have been in many ways, but in an attempt to justify its existence it ended up with a fairly rotten 'curse' mechanic and a sub-par accuracy feature. Honestly I think they'd have been best off to have just said "this is now the warlock" slapped curse on it, provided the other existing pact types for it, given it access to all the existing powers, and called it a day.

 

[Aegeri]

Now you're saying what I do about the binder! Which is basically that the original Warlock does everything it does, with better control and more damage. That's what makes the binder awful, because it just doesn't do anything in the game that another class doesn't do better. At least the Vampire unequivocally deserves its own little unique niche in the game.

Plus the Warlock is about to get a boost to its damage dealing power soon anyway!

 

[Saracenus]

So, I have finally played a vampire in my first D&D Encounters (DDE) session. Granted DDE has its own little quirks that a home game doesn't but experience is experience.

First off, with my wife playing a Human Blackguard of Fury my Human Vampire doesn't pump out the vomitius amounts of damage she does (he does alright). But I had a blast role-playing him with the rest of the group.

I played up the cheezy Eastern European accent and made some obligatory snarky comments about not sparkling...

Mine was a tragic story, Zlatrazar was from a long line of vampire hunters and his father and brothers took him on a "mission" to blood him... unfortunately things didn't go well and in an act of cruelty the vampire his family was hunting turned the tables on them and turned Zlatrazar in front of his father and siblings before killing them.

Zaltrazar was a horrible hunter, he is even less of a vampire. Left to fend for himself he now tries to figure out his new powers and dreams of a time when he can kill the very vampire that turned him...

Yep, I definitely took Durable because I was not sure who was going to show up at the table. Good thing I did, we had the following:

Human Blackguard (Paladin)
Human Cavalier (Paladin)
Human Executioner (Assassin)
Shade Star Pact Binder (Warlock)
and my Human Vamp...

Here is my PC, Zlatrazar:

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Human, Vampire
Human Power Selection Option: Heroic Effort

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
STR 10, CON 12, DEX 18, INT 10, WIS 10, CHA 16

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
STR 10, CON 12, DEX 16, INT 10, WIS 10, CHA 16


AC: 16 Fort: 13 Ref: 15 Will: 15
HP: 24 Surges: 4 Surge Value: 6

TRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +9, Bluff +8, Stealth +9, Religion +5, Thievery +9

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +0, Athletics +0, Diplomacy +3, Dungeoneering +0, Endurance +1, Heal +0, History +0, Insight +0, Intimidate +3, Nature +0, Perception +0, Streetwise +3

POWERS
Basic Attack: Melee Basic Attack
Basic Attack: Ranged Basic Attack
Human Racial Power: Heroic Effort
Vampire Attack: Blood Drinker
Vampire Attack 1: Swarm of Shadows
Vampire Attack 1: Dark Beckoning
Vampire Attack 1: Taste of Life
Vampire Attack 1: Vampire Slam

FEATS
Level 1: Durable
Level 1: Ki Focus Expertise

ITEMS
Ki Focus x1
Cloth Armor (Basic Clothing) x1
Crossbow x1
Adventurer's Kit
Crossbow Bolts
Thieves' Tools
Holy Symbol
====== End ======

 

[Incenjucar]

Since people like anecdotes: Tonight, at Encounters, the DM killed the first PC he has EVER killed after years of gaming. The halfling vampire. While fighting an even level skirmisher.

My badly-designed Evoker who started the encounter off adjacent to a +2 level lurker that moved with him (thus making him unable to with more than a stick) survived and was vastly more effective.

So yay to anecdotal evidence.