Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WhatGravitas" data-source="post: 3873042" data-attributes="member: 33132">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, because3) 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/whatever3) 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.</blockquote>

Verification