D&D 4E Why Vampires Suck in 3.X, and How 4e Can Fix Them

[Rechan]

If that's what the OP's after, he needs to start from a 4e standpoint, not just making general complaints that go against the very nature of how vampires have worked in the past. For example, how do you make the transitions described work in a system where monsters will not be following the same rules and creation system that PCs do? Or, how can you describe vampires as a talent tree? How can you fit vampires into any of the flavor that we've seen? What part role can a vampire fit, and how are vampires supposed to work in the new settings?

Really simple.

The Monster Manual presents Monster rules. However, we have been told several times that there will be PC Race rules written for several monster entries - including the gnome, shifter, etc.

So if a monster can be converted into a PC race, then a vampire can too.

Given that races have racial abilities you gain as you level, it should be easy to convert.

 

[Rechan]

If a DM doesn't consent to a vampiric PC, he has no reason to make one.

Unless of course the vampire kills the PC with its drain/negative levels, at which point it just rises as a spawn. No choice from the vampire there.

But, agreed. If a DM doesn't a vampire PC in the game, he says 'gimmie your character sheet, you're now an NPC." If he doesn't want a vampire PC in the game and teh player does, the DM says: "No."

But if the DM does want a vampire PC in the game, people in this thread are saying "No, it should not be."

 

[Zamkaizer]

Unless of course you're playing in Eberron and you're playing an Orc, or a Hobgoblin, or a goblin.

Or you're in Ravenloft, where it's just Appropriate.

Didn't Races of the Dragon have Kobolds as an option? OMG MONSTERS END OF THE WORLD.

Your point would be valid if the quoted poster was referring to monstrous adventurers in general. Instead he refers specifically to undead fueled by dark magic, feral werebeasts, and other creatures uniquely unsuited for players. While Creatures of the Night are thematically appropriate for Ravenloft and other horror campaigns, they're still mechanically unsuited for player characters. For truly "monstrous" adventurers to be viable, significant changes must be made to either the flavor and mechanics of monsters, or the nature of characters' abilities. Would you mind enlightening us as to which of these two options was taken for your ghost samurai?

I apologize, but if you're going to try make another poster sound ridiculous, please ensure you fully comprehend his argument beforehand.

 

[Rechan]

Your point would be valid if the quoted poster was referring to monstrous adventurers in general. Instead he refers specifically to undead fueled by dark magic, feral werebeasts, and other creatures uniquely unsuited for players.

And I fail to see why it's unsuitable for players.

Just because it does not fit in Heroic Good vs Evil Epic Tolkien-style campaign does not mean it is not unsuitable for PCs. The OP clearly wants the option. Assuming he is a DM, who are you to tell him "No"?

And, once more, need I point out that tieflings and warlocks are in the 4e PHB? A class that gets its power from making deals with devils. That's pretty much dark magic right there.

So I do not think that the OP is out of line whatsoever.

 

[Hella_Tellah]

Your point would be valid if the quoted poster was referring to monstrous adventurers in general. Instead he refers specifically to undead fueled by dark magic, feral werebeasts, and other creatures uniquely unsuited for players. While Creatures of the Night are thematically appropriate for Ravenloft and other horror campaigns, they're still mechanically unsuited for player characters. For truly "monstrous" adventurers to be viable, significant changes must be made to either the flavor and mechanics of monsters, or the nature of characters' abilities. Would you mind enlightening us as to which of these two options was taken for your ghost samurai?

I apologize, but if you're going to try make another poster sound ridiculous, please ensure you fully comprehend his argument beforehand.

Why are vampires, lycanthropes and ghosts uniquely unsuited for use by players? Couldn't the mechanics behind them be designed to fit their flavor and mesh with the scale of players' abilities? Tolkien presented wizards and elves as inherently more powerful than humans, yet D&D has been designed to incorporate them into the system.

Yes, "creatures of the night" are mechanically unsuited for player characters in 3.5. How would you go about reforming them, mechanically, while retaining their fundamental flavor?

 

[Imaro]

Why are vampires, lycanthropes and ghosts uniquely unsuited for use by players? Couldn't the mechanics behind them be designed to fit their flavor and mesh with the scale of players' abilities? Tolkien presented wizards and elves as inherently more powerful than humans, yet D&D has been designed to incorporate them into the system.

Yes, "creatures of the night" are mechanically unsuited for player characters in 3.5. How would you go about reforming them, mechanically, while retaining their fundamental flavor?

Create a "vampire" talent tree, the Pro is that the only thing you have to worry about is balancing it with the talents normally available to a character's class, since he gives one up to select the vampire talent.

The Con is that it might be hard to balance the vampire out like this without gimping it, and it is another set of talents which must be considered in conjunction with everything else, in the game, that can affect it.

 

[Gort]

Okay, I'll try and illustrate my problem with "balanced vampire PCs".

1. Bob the Badass level 8 fighter gets dominated alone by a Vampire Lord, who drinks his blood and turns him into a vampire.

2. Bob the Badass later confronts his erstwhile party and they all go, "Oh no! Bob was a really skilled fighter, how on earth will we defeat him now that he's evil and has all the powers of vampirism at his command?!"

3. Since Bob is still balanced with himself as a level 8 fighter (fewer HD for example) the party defeat him easily, because they are 3 level 8 guys and he is only one level 8 equivalent guy. The party all go, "Oh, that was a lot easier than we expected."

Vampirism needs to make characters more powerful or you seriously degrade how strong vampires are supposed to be. And if being infected with vampirism makes you more powerful, you're no longer a balanced player character.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Check out "Denizens of Dread"; the Vampire is presented with age categories, and there are different vampire variants for the various races.

Oh, I know there are a gazillion ways to fix vampires - I've been working on it since the mid-90's! I just hold out hope that D&D will actually get them substantially the way I want them in the core rules in 4E - finally.

 

[WhatGravitas]

If I want to play a vampire, I'll play VtM - where ALL players play such monstrosities. D&D doesn't do those things well, and I don't think it should.

1) If we look at 4E, a gnome is, RAW, probably also a monstrosity (by the virtue of being in the MM only).
2) VtM does it well, and it is popular. What's wrong if we take such a popular choice and include it, because
3) In 4E, D&D perhaps DOES DO those things well.

=> 4E talks about options. What's wrong with giving the option for a playable vampire, as long as it doesn't take any choices away (like some criticise the inclusion of tiefling/eladrin/warlock, because we lose gnome and classes)? I mean, as long as it's only an option, one can still say 'no', just as now. But if a DM happens to say 'yes', they get more stuff they like, without being detrimental for those who say 'no'.

If the process is gradual (let's say it forces you to take a 'vampire-class'), we get the following possibilities:
1) Vampire bites, character turns into vampire and becomes a NPC (as now).
2) Vampire bites, character turns into vampire (but not full-fledged yet) and remains a PC, until he's a "full vampire" - gives a RP-wise opportunity to play the struggle for a cure/whatever
3) Vampire bites, character turns into a vampire, remains PC, even after all vampire levels.
________________

=> Instead of one playable solution, we get three - but we lose nothing, so where's the problem?

Unless that vampire thing CANNOT be implemented into 4E seamlessly. If that's the case, ditch it. But with a new system, where "race matters", we have to chance to get this at nobody's expense. And such an opportunity should be used.

Therefore, I think vampires should be reworked in a way, that they can be handled as PCs. I like my heroes human, but if I still get my human heroes AND other people get their vampire PCs, we're both happy, why deny it to them?

Cheers, LT.

 

[Zamkaizer]

And I fail to see why it's unsuitable for players.

Just because it does not fit in Heroic Good vs Evil Epic Tolkien-style campaign does not mean it is not unsuitable for PCs. The OP clearly wants the option. Assuming he is a DM, who are you to tell him "No"?

Any character that by it's very nature negatively affects it's allies is unsuitable for players. Undead are sustained by a type of energy diametrically opposed to that which sustains normal creatures. As such, casters able to channel both types of energy must juggle their resources accordingly. Undead are vulnerable to even allied turning, disabling an important weapon in clerics' arsenals. Most undead get weaker if they don't perform rituals that are morally ambiguous at best. Most undead have severe sunlight issues. Most undead can't interact socially without recourse to illusory magic. To say undead are opposites of your typical adventurer is not exaggeration. Any party that finds it fit to include one must bend over backwards to do so.

As for lycanthropes, essentially every folktale concerning their various incarnations has them slaughtering wholesale those closest to them. While a werebeast with control over their curse might make a suitable character - aside from being in grave danger should anyone discover their secret - it would be exceedingly difficult to have player begin to turn without killing an ally or being killed themselves.