Vampire Questions

[Joker]

Yep the best way to take out vampires is with greater turning or spells like disintegrate, sunbeam, anger of the noonday sun, etc.

Or Blade.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

... excepting, of course, that this combo never worked the way people thought it did.

Still works out to be a very tough opponent to defeat, my players can tell you. High AC, high saves, fast healing and damage reduction are great

 

[Thanee]

... excepting, of course, that this combo never worked the way people thought it did.

Ah, because monk attacks and the vampire's slam attacks don't mix, I suppose?

Well, that's probably right.

Bye
Thanee

 

[IndyPendant]

Well, this brings up a question for my own edification. Vampire Blackguard, wielding a greatsword. I was having him Slam a (relatively) low-AC PC, then Smite with his sword with his second iterative attack. The cha bonus offset the -5 iterative penalty neatly, allowing a second high-probability hit. One of my players though figured you couldn't mix-and-match attacks like that. I ruled you could, and the player didn't feel certain enough to try arguing further during combat. We were going to discuss it afterwards but either he forgot--or looked it up, realized I was right, and dropped it! : )

Anyways, question is: did I in fact handle it right? Assuming a BAB of, say +6, could a vampire Slam at +6, then use his Greatsword at +1?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Ah, because monk attacks and the vampire's slam attacks don't mix, I suppose?

Or, rather, he can punch you a lot, and he can slam you once, but only one of those attacks will inflict negative levels. Slams are not unarmed strikes, and vice versa.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Anyways, question is: did I in fact handle it right? Assuming a BAB of, say +6, could a vampire Slam at +6, then use his Greatsword at +1?

No.

...

But, he can use the rules for mixing manufactured and natural weapons, meaning he could make two attacks with his greatsword (+6 / +1) and a single slam attack (+6-5=+1).

His slam attack is based off of his highest BAB, but it is treated as a secondary weapon and therefore takes a -5 penalty on attack rolls. Additionally, he may only apply 1/2 of his Strength bonus to damage with it.

There's no required order for the slam attack vs. greatsword attacks.

 

[Alzrius]

Or, rather, he can punch you a lot, and he can slam you once, but only one of those attacks will inflict negative levels. Slams are not unarmed strikes, and vice versa.

He doesn't need to slam at all, since he can use the negative level drain with an unarmed strike.

Also, to avoid those one-shot kills with sunlight spells, consider making your next vampire a Vampire Lord.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

He doesn't need to slam at all, since he can use the negative level drain with an unarmed strike.

No, he can't. Have you not been following the thread?

Energy Drain (Su): Living creatures hit by a vampire’s slam attack (or any other natural weapon the vampire might possess) gain two negative levels. For each negative level bestowed, the vampire gains 5 temporary hit points. A vampire can use its energy drain ability once per round.

An unarmed strike is not a slam attack or other natural weapon. Accordingly, the vampire cannot use it to inflict negative levels.

 

[Alzrius]

No, he can't.

Yes, he can.

An unarmed strike is not a slam attack or other natural weapon. Accordingly, the vampire cannot use it to inflict negative levels.

Wrong.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

And we can bicker about the exact nature of what it means to "improve" a weapon (since having it inflict negative levels certainly seems like an improvement), but that aside, this seems pretty open and shut; unarmed strikes can inflict energy drain.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You're going to need to prove that Energy Drain is an effect that improves a natural weapon in order for the monk's ability to function.

Hand-waving it away does not prove your point.