Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anthtriel" data-source="post: 3873597" data-attributes="member: 13764">In most vampire fiction, people who are much weaker than vampires get turned into vampires and thus become stronger. What happens if you are already stronger than them, why should you become stronger?In most stories, the heroes are the only ones who can compete with the vampires, and the heroes rarely get turned. And if I'm not mistaken, if they do, they do get stronger, but not terribly much. They still need to remain weaker than the BBEG, so if they were close before, they cannot get much of a boost. What powers he does get can be handwaved with a free level gain for NPCs.  And a wizard's advancement is usually tied to his studies, not killing a few kobolds in the dungeons. D&D works oddly in the regard of advancement, but it needs to. Actually, super strength and the like, though common, is not present in all vampire fiction. A Ventrue vampire in VtM is not that terribly strong for example. Not all that "corner case". It has been done a couple of times before, especially in fiction with dominant vampires, or different kinds of them. In older novels, the sun vulnerability isn't nearly as prominent as in film. Carmilla, 1872, the inspiration for Bram Stoker's Dracula, and thus one of the most important works in vampire fiction, the titular vampire doesn't turn into ash when exposed to sunlight. She still sleeps most of the day and is most active during the night, but she has no fatal weakness either. Exactly. It's the road that is taken less often, but it would work fine.Since when? I'm more familiar with the idea that even vampire children, or former weakling are supernaturally strong, no matter what they were before.The "proportionate boost" is completely alien to me. I cannot come up with any example. Care to give one? Where there clearly is a "proportionate boost"?Thinking about it, there was Interview with a Vampire, and I think Claudia didn't become super powerful. But I cannot remember that the other vampires there had super strength either, so it would be a moot point.  Most Vampires in Vampire the Masquerade are more detailed, so for many clans, what additional powers they do get are based on stealth or charisma, and not on brute strength or even reflexes.And in many of the old stories, vampires flee from humans attacking them. Even completely ordinary humans can fight with vampires without getting immediately killed by their "superhuman strength".  Buffy and Blade and the like have popularized the vampire as the brute, but in the early stories, they were more about their shapeshifting, passing through walls  And I have already addressed it. As we can see from this, there are very different concepts what a vampire actually should be. We certainly disagree on that. Your version seems more like the modern vampires of films and comics, whereas I tend to like the older versions more. That's not meant as an insult, I don't think you are wrong, but as we can see, it is very hard to do vampires proper justice.D&D could include a lot of options and make everyone happy, but I think that would require a seperate splatbook. We will definitely see a monster entry for Vampires in the MM, and there will definitely be rules for combining class levels with them. What remains to be seen is if they devoted enough spaces to make them work with PCs and then have a "Vampires as PCs" sidebar, or if they didn't. My money is on the latter option, for what it's worth.edit: Oh, d'oh. Stoker's vampires walk in daylight to. So as we can see it's a fairly recent development and not part of the genre-defining works.</blockquote>

Verification