Vampire PC in a standard fantasy campaign

[Thrawn4]

So a fighter, a mage and a vampire enter a bar, and...
... the vampire combusts because he cannot bear sunlight
... the fighter and mage are bruised and tired, because they have to adapt to the living conditions of their party member but are ill-suited for travel at night
... the fighter and mage have a coffin outside and solve an important part of the adventure without the vampire
... the vampire is with them because vampirism is just a mild condition

Long story short, in your average fantasy setting a PC can theoretically turn into a vampire, but the implications can easily ruin the fun, as a vampire is usually portrayed as something that is quite powerful at night but very limited during the day, meaning that the party as a group is fairly limited in their actions and balancing is very problematic.

Did anyone ever have a vampire in an otherwise normal fantasy campaign, or does anyone have ideas as how to solve that issue?

EDIT: Just forgot, there are of course some high fantasy settings where the vampire can be protected by magic, but I always feel like that is taking the punch out of being a vampire, and it also aggravates the balancing problem.

[Karl Aegis]

You could just not play a vampire. It's not like being a failure or a scared child is cool.

[TheCountAlucard]

Actually, the "combustion/turn to dust in sunlight" thing is an advent of Hollywood - its presence doesn't extend to all RPGs. Bram Stoker's Dracula assumed that vampires simply didn't have full access to their entire suite of supernatural powers during the day, but hey, he could go adventuring during the day about as well as the Fighter or Rogue could.

[Red Fel]

You could just not play a vampire.

Kinda this.

Look, if you're in a setting where there are ways to compensate (there are a number of methods in D&D, for example), that's one thing. Then it falls on you, the player of the vampire, to accommodate everyone else by paying for or casting whatever protections you need from the Burning Hate. Fine.

But if those options are not available, if the only way for your vampire PC to function is for the entire party to make accommodations to you, then you are prioritizing your personal fun over that of the table overall, which tends to end badly.

It's like Contrary Joe, who deliberately picks the concept that doesn't go well with the party. Party is composed of LG Paladins and Clerics? Joe wants to play a CE Assassin and kill random NPCs. Party is composed of combat-oriented Space Marines ready to wreck some Xeno face? Joe wants to play a scrawny scientist with no combat or survival skills. Party is composed of a team of paranoid inspectors who burn every book they see and shoot cultists with prejudice? Joe is a secret cultist, and has been saving the worst books. Party is composed of racially homogenous beings in a highly xenophobic country? Joe wants to play a Drow. Not just any Drow, but a Drow who is upfront and in your face about it.

Joe is a problem.

Whenever a player chooses a concept that deviates sharply from the rest of the party, the burden is on that player to either (1) do what it takes to function peacefully and effectively alongside the party, or (2) roll another character. The table should not have to bend over backwards to accommodate one player's choices, no matter how cool they are.

That's the solution. Don't be Contrary Joe, and don't play a vampire unless you can make up for the weaknesses yourself.

[Ralanr]

Kinda this.

Look, if you're in a setting where there are ways to compensate (there are a number of methods in D&D, for example), that's one thing. Then it falls on you, the player of the vampire, to accommodate everyone else by paying for or casting whatever protections you need from the Burning Hate. Fine.

But if those options are not available, if the only way for your vampire PC to function is for the entire party to make accommodations to you, then you are prioritizing your personal fun over that of the table overall, which tends to end badly.

It's like Contrary Joe, who deliberately picks the concept that doesn't go well with the party. Party is composed of LG Paladins and Clerics? Joe wants to play a CE Assassin and kill random NPCs. Party is composed of combat-oriented Space Marines ready to wreck some Xeno face? Joe wants to play a scrawny scientist with no combat or survival skills. Party is composed of a team of paranoid inspectors who burn every book they see and shoot cultists with prejudice? Joe is a secret cultist, and has been saving the worst books. Party is composed of racially homogenous beings in a highly xenophobic country? Joe wants to play a Drow. Not just any Drow, but a Drow who is upfront and in your face about it.

Joe is a problem.

Whenever a player chooses a concept that deviates sharply from the rest of the party, the burden is on that player to either (1) do what it takes to function peacefully and effectively alongside the party, or (2) roll another character. The table should not have to bend over backwards to accommodate one player's choices, no matter how cool they are.

That's the solution. Don't be Contrary Joe, and don't play a vampire unless you can make up for the weaknesses yourself.

I feel like this could apply to anytime you have a player that wants to play a race (Can I even call Vampires that? If they only reproduce by biting people then aren't they more of a disease/infection?) not available.

Drama is all fine and good (It is a role playing game usually. So drama is a key aspect there) but it shouldn't be 24/7.

[VoxRationis]

"Inquisitor who secretly saves what he is supposed to burn" is a worthy character and plot.

[Maglubiyet]

I can't see most vampires wanting to play as part of a team, especially with mortal companions. They would see them as their servants, slaves (Igor!), or food. Undead usually hate the living.

Also, sunlight isn't your only problem. Satisfying your unique dietary needs is bound to draw the attention of any local authorities wherever you happen to go. Only an evil party would go along with helping you acquire your daily meals.

That said, if you *must* be that special little undead snowflake, then you could bypass the major problems of vampirism by spending all your time underground, exploring dungeons, conquering sections of the Underdark, eating goblins and cave trolls.

I couldn't see that being satisfying enough for the typical vampire. One of the things they want is MORE...vampires are usually the embodiment of unchecked carnal desires and cravings. They're the ultimate addict -- constantly bringing more trouble down on themselves because they can't stop being who they are. If they're ever heroes, they're the tragic kind. I guess these days they're just seen more as brooding goths with superpowers.

[Lord Loss]

As a DM, I would probably go out of my way to propose options to the player that allowed them to play a vampire without becoming a burden upon the rest of the party. These include the creation of a Dayheart, as in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft and a variety of other protective magical options. Especially if the character was transformed into a vampire during the game and did not choose to become on from the get-go.

Provided the player immediately wanted to create a vampire PC, I would propose alternatives less likely to monopolize play, such as the Half-Vampire, or perhaps Necropolitan if the player merely wanted to play an Undead character.

[Red Fel]

I feel like this could apply to anytime you have a player that wants to play a race (Can I even call Vampires that? If they only reproduce by biting people then aren't they more of a disease/infection?) not available.

Drama is all fine and good (It is a role playing game usually. So drama is a key aspect there) but it shouldn't be 24/7.

Not always. "Not available" means "not available," for one thing - so if there are no Warforged, or no Eldar, or what have you, at my table, that's a full stop. But some concepts are simply "unusual" or stick out a little. Again, Warforged is an example - they're basically robot-people. In a sci-fi campaign, nobody balks at having Mega Man in the party, but when your team consists of an Elf, a Dwarf, and a magical cat-person? I personally love it, but it may stick out a bit.

But unusual isn't inherently bad. I generally have no problem with someone who wants to play an unusual race or template at my tables. It's when the choice isn't simply unusual, but disruptive, that it becomes a problem. Vampire is a perfect example. If we have an all-Cleric team, and they're throwing around Turn Undead like holy water, this guy is going to be in the way. If part of the campaign theme is that it's not safe to travel at night, this guy is going to be uncomfortable. Yes, there are ways to work around it, and I expect the player to do exactly that. Want to play a scrawny skillmonkey in a combat-oriented campaign? Better invest in some sniping skills and find a safe spot. Want to play a closeted evil character in a high heroic campaign? Better be able to prioritize your friends over your goals, or experience a face-heel-turn. Want to play a giant turtle the size of an island when the rest of the party is normal-sized people? Better be willing to invest in shape-changing methods and act as a mode of transportation.

I encourage my players to think differently, but the line is drawn between "my character is unusual" and "and therefore you all need to accommodate me."

[Thrudd]

Long story short, in your average fantasy setting a PC can theoretically turn into a vampire, but the implications can easily ruin the fun, as a vampire is usually portrayed as something that is quite powerful at night but very limited during the day, meaning that the party as a group is fairly limited in their actions and balancing is very problematic.
.

If a PC in AD&D gets turned into a vampire, they become an NPC/monster. Same with any of the other undead types, a wight or wraith or whatever. Being a weaker or enthralled version of a monster is not something that will work well for adventuring. Of course, if the other PCs somehow find a way to save the lost soul and get the body Resurrected or recreated, then that character could come back as a PC. In the meantime, the player has another character.

[Hiro]

Or you can pull and Oots

"Protection from Sunlight" 1st level arcane or divine spell. Booya.

[Mr.Moron]

I feel like the "Must kill people to continue to exist" part of your standard vampire is probably a bigger problem than "Can't go out in sunlight" part of your standard vampire, for your typical fantasy game.

[Ralanr]

I feel like the "Must kill people to continue to exist" part of your standard vampire is probably a bigger problem than "Can't go out in sunlight" part of your standard vampire, for your typical fantasy game.

Can vampires not drink animal blood? That's something that always bothered me.

[Mr.Moron]

Can vampires not drink animal blood? That's something that always bothered me.

Well certainly in some mythologies they can, in others they can just kind of snack on blood without killing people. I've always tended to think of "Must drain people into shriveled husks" as the default. You could certainly go for a lighter touch with the blood drain if you want a PC of that kind, but you could also do the same thing with sunlight (making it a minor penalty or cosmetic problem).

However since this thread seems to be about taking a straight-up default vampire I'm not sure rounding out the edges in either case really "Counts".

[Red Fel]

However since this thread seems to be about taking a straight-up default vampire I'm not sure rounding out the edges in either case really "Counts".

Oof. Fangs for the pun.

[Keltest]

Well certainly in some mythologies they can, in others they can just kind of snack on blood without killing people. I've always tended to think of "Must drain people into shriveled husks" as the default. You could certainly go for a lighter touch with the blood drain if you want a PC of that kind, but you could also do the same thing with sunlight (making it a minor penalty or cosmetic problem).

However since this thread seems to be about taking a straight-up default vampire I'm not sure rounding out the edges in either case really "Counts".

If I were to run it, I would make it so that they theoretically can survive without fully draining a person, but doing so would be sort of like holding the last bite of your favorite kind of cheeseburger in your hand without being able to put it down. Its going to be REALLY hard to just say no to that last drop.

[CombatBunny]

I find funny how most of the replies avoid giving you an answer and instead pose new problems.

Kind of like: “How can I introduce a technologic device on my campaign?”

“Why would you do that?” “Don’t do it; that will hinder your campaign” “Ask yourself if you really need to include that on your world”.

I had players that don’t want to get disruptive, but they really want to portray vampires. As always, you will have to talk to your group to get to a resolution that satisfies everyone. You will need the cooperation of the group and of the vampire characters, but there are many options in which you could make it work.

“Lord Loss” proposed using an item like Dayheart, that’s a good option. Another one could be to make all the adventures at night, and not penalizing the rest of the characters for changing their activities so they can sleep at day and adventure at night. Batman does it, and he is not a vampire.

Another one could be that a cosmic, cataclysmic event happened in the world you are playing, that magic dark clouds covered the sky (or a permanent eclipse or something like that), making the sun no longer a threat.

Also, you could take your adventures to take place on underground landscapes. The earth is so large and it is so unexplored, that the surface is but an insignificant fraction of it, you could dwell in the underground for years or for your entire life. Read “Journey to the Center of earth”, and you will see that with your imagination, anything can happen in the bowels of earth, you can justify almost anything, from forests made of fungus, to oceans, clouds, mountains, sources of light very similar to the sun, and anything you can imagine.

You can as well send your adventurer to another dimension where the source of light isn’t provided by the sun, the manual of the planes has a lot of examples of this.

Also, and risking myself to be impaled, you can use “twilight” mechanics LOL

What I want to say is that there are as much ways to make a vampire work in your world, as your imagination allows it, and having the support of your players.

[VoxRationis]

Well certainly in some mythologies they can, in others they can just kind of snack on blood without killing people. I've always tended to think of "Must drain people into shriveled husks" as the default. You could certainly go for a lighter touch with the blood drain if you want a PC of that kind, but you could also do the same thing with sunlight (making it a minor penalty or cosmetic problem).

However since this thread seems to be about taking a straight-up default vampire I'm not sure rounding out the edges in either case really "Counts".

Of course, if they drain someone fully (in 3e), they come back as another bloodsucker, which creates a nasty population explosion problem. I would assume vampires, for pure self-interest, have techniques to avoid such things.

[Gavran]

Batman does it, and he is not a vampire.

Except when he is.

But yeah, I agree with this post. It's plenty workable. Doesn't mean a player can/should do it in every game, but just saying "nope" in this case rubs me the wrong way.

[goto124]

I feel like the "Must kill people to continue to exist" part of your standard vampire is probably a bigger problem than "Can't go out in sunlight" part of your standard vampire, for your typical fantasy game.

Considering the lifestyle of the typical adventurer, I don't see the problem :smallbiggrin:

Anyway, I think of:
- Don't be a jerk
- Talk to the DM
- Talk to the party

Some settings are better for vampire PCs than others. How did the DM rule vampires in her setting? Will you get plenty of opportunities to feed on e.g. monsters you were going to kill anyway? Does most of the campaign take place in a hot desert or the underground Underdark? Do you have easy access to Protection from Sunlight, or just don't have such a vulnerability? Do the cities/towns/people in general attack vampires on sight? Can you cover/disguise yourself easily?

'Ask the DM' is always a good choice.

[Lord Raziere]

this makes me think of the Vetala from Anima Beyond Fantasy

poor Vetala Nephilim....they're not actually vampires and don't need to drink blood even if they have a psychological craving for it sometimes, but they still get burn injuries when exposed directly to sunlight. worse they are born that way. in addition they have a decreased resistance to disease, and they only have two benefits to being one: they drink a lot of blood to enter a temporary super-mode of fighting awesome which has the downside of like, putting them unconscious afterwards. their other benefit is that they have a resistance to critical hits. thats it.

the actual Vetala, rather than their Nephilim (Nephilim are humans with the souls of Vetala and other fantasy races that died and reincarnated and have some traits of that race because of the soul thing but reduced) suck even worse, because while they have more classic vampiric powers, they are also more vulnerable and actually need blood, worse they live forever....but they don't stay mobile forever, as they grow older, they begin to age and eventually enter a corpse-like state without actually dying, and can only become mobile again from large amounts of blood and even then, only temporarily because drinking blood to keep themselves young has diminishing returns as they age.

which makes one wonder what they were thinking when they wrote the Vetala in Anima. the Vetala Nephilim would have problems even in an all Nephilim party. but then again this is also the game where you can tap into the powers of pure void and undeath that are anti-thetical principles to the entire rest of existence without any moral judgements whatsoever, so....weird.

of course that didn't stop me from making Nihilon Terminus. but his life is basically designed to suck in so many ways its hilarious.

but yeah, have good communication with the GM. I doubt I'll be able to get someone like Nihilon into just ANY game, for example.

[Thrawn4]

Lots of interesting input, so thank you. It's great to be able to ask so many people who are familiar with roleplaying theory. (And special mention to the people bringing the puns.)

I am mostly curious because I haven't decided yet how vampires are going to work in my setting. Currently I am considering to make it something of a slow disease that turn the body over the years, which would allow for minor changes in a PC that was recently turned and for making old vampires really powerful.

But then I realized that changing a PC might significantly change the concept and the player might dislike it, so I should ask him before. That however kind of ruins the surprise effect.

Any ideas on the disease approach and the surprise effect?

[icefractal]

But then I realized that changing a PC might significantly change the concept and the player might dislike it, so I should ask him before. That however kind of ruins the surprise effect.

Any ideas on the disease approach and the surprise effect?If it's reversible - maybe only until it fully takes effect - then you're probably fine. The PC gets infected, and the player either goes with it if they're cool with that, or hunts down a cure if they're not. If it isn't - then yeah, you should ask them. Surprises are cool, but not cool enough to risk capsizing a campaign for.


On the OP - it depends what you mean by "standard fantasy". In some D&D games, a Vampire could be one of the more normal party members. And they certainly are a classic element, if not typically as a protagonist.

[goto124]

Don't spring surprises on the player.

It's highly unlikely to be good for the player.

And when it's bad... it's really bad.

[Mr.Moron]

Lots of interesting input, so thank you. It's great to be able to ask so many people who are familiar with roleplaying theory. (And special mention to the people bringing the puns.)

I am mostly curious because I haven't decided yet how vampires are going to work in my setting. Currently I am considering to make it something of a slow disease that turn the body over the years, which would allow for minor changes in a PC that was recently turned and for making old vampires really powerful.

But then I realized that changing a PC might significantly change the concept and the player might dislike it, so I should ask him before. That however kind of ruins the surprise effect.

Any ideas on the disease approach and the surprise effect?

"There is some stuff about Vampires in this setting I don't really want put on the table yet. Go ahead and start with this <vampire rules> just keep in mind, you might not be getting every piece of information you'd otherwise think is relevant. If you're OK with that great! If you'd rather not chance getting hit with changes or twists that you don't know about beforehand, it's probably best to go with something other than a vampire."

[Eldan]

Actually, the "combustion/turn to dust in sunlight" thing is an advent of Hollywood - its presence doesn't extend to all RPGs. Bram Stoker's Dracula assumed that vampires simply didn't have full access to their entire suite of supernatural powers during the day, but hey, he could go adventuring during the day about as well as the Fighter or Rogue could.

That's what I would go with. I'd create a player vampire that got some mild drawbacks during the day, with some mild bonuses during the night and the power to drink blood for a temporary power up or for healing. That's it.
Then more vampire powers as, say, feats or class levels.

[TheCountAlucard]

Surprises really only work well when you know your players really well. If you have no clue how a surprise is going to turn out for a given player, by the Burning Hate, don't try and surprise them! You'll be lucky if all you get is a series of "I quit"s from your players!

(If you're unlucky, you might get sucker-punched in the larynx or even stabbed.)

[goto124]

In real life? Yikes....

[Gritmonger]

I don't like the stance that DM and all the rest of the players have to drop everything to make it easier for the one guy. Humans don't have darkvision - put it all at night or in the dark and you make the torch bearing human the prime target or the effective blind man, or they are the one constantly downing draughts of potions of darkvision.

The one who picks vampire takes good with bad - the other options just make it seem like a personal campaign just for them and to heck with any of the other players. If it was just DM and one player, go nuts. Otherwise, it seems like everyone else is held hostage to one persons whims.

[Maglubiyet]

I don't like the stance that DM and all the rest of the players have to drop everything to make it easier for the one guy. Humans don't have darkvision - put it all at night or in the dark and you make the torch bearing human the prime target or the effective blind man, or they are the one constantly downing draughts of potions of darkvision.

The one who picks vampire takes good with bad - the other options just make it seem like a personal campaign just for them and to heck with any of the other players. If it was just DM and one player, go nuts. Otherwise, it seems like everyone else is held hostage to one persons whims.

Absolutely!

And since the only characters who would willingly partner with a vampire are going to be evil themselves, how could the vampire trust them? Eventually traveling with a blood-sucking undead is going to become a problem -- the local constables, clergy, and paladins will be trying to track down the beast that is attacking their citizens at night. An evil party is going to see those REWARD posters and cash in by dropping off their "buddy" in his casket at the local temple one sunny morning.

[Grim Portent]

Absolutely!

And since the only characters who would willingly partner with a vampire are going to be evil themselves, how could the vampire trust them? Eventually traveling with a blood-sucking undead is going to become a problem -- the local constables, clergy, and paladins will be trying to track down the beast that is attacking their citizens at night. An evil party is going to see those REWARD posters and cash in by dropping off their "buddy" in his casket at the local temple one sunny morning.

Evil PCs aren't motivated solely by money you know, they could have any number of reasons to partner with a vampire over a long period of time.

Things like conquering the world, bringing about an undead apocalypse, usurping a throne, seeking vengeance on an order of knights, plunging the elf lands into eternal winter and so on are all goals that would positively benefit from having the skills and abilities of a vampire around.

[TheCountAlucard]

Or it could even be that the vampire is your friend. :smalltongue:

[goto124]

My PCs are girlfriends with a good (both small-g and big-G) vampire.

Wait. Not standard fantasy campaign. Ignore me?

[Maglubiyet]

Evil PCs aren't motivated solely by money you know, they could have any number of reasons to partner with a vampire over a long period of time.

Things like conquering the world, bringing about an undead apocalypse, usurping a throne, seeking vengeance on an order of knights, plunging the elf lands into eternal winter and so on are all goals that would positively benefit from having the skills and abilities of a vampire around.

True, but they would have to be very dedicated to their goal given the problems the vampire is likely to bring down on them. The other PC's could probably make it work for a while, it's the vampire that would likely be the problem.

Unless the companions are much more powerful than the vampire or his dominated slaves, I don't see a hateful undead tolerating mortals for very long. Especially since the built-in weaknesses mean he will have to trust them to take care of him half the time when he's most vulnerable. He would have to be equally fanatical to suffer that loss of control.

[Mr.Moron]

True, but they would have to be very dedicated to their goal given the problems the vampire is likely to bring down on them. The other PC's could probably make it work for a while, it's the vampire that would likely be the problem.

Unless the companions are much more powerful than the vampire or his dominated slaves, I don't see a hateful undead tolerating mortals for very long. Especially since the built-in weaknesses mean he will have to trust them to take care of him half the time when he's most vulnerable. He would have to be equally fanatical to suffer that loss of control.

"Evil" is not the same thing as a "Total **** with no loyalties". You can be a band of terrible, awful people and/or people-like entities that do horrific things and still be loyal to each other and cool to hang out with if you're not on the target list.

Simply being an awful person doesn't require you to be emotionless, pragmatic or completely self-oriented.

[goto124]

Also, humans can be just as terrible as vampires. Don't be racist :P

[Maglubiyet]

"Evil" is not the same thing as a "Total **** with no loyalties". You can be a band of terrible, awful people and/or people-like entities that do horrific things and still be loyal to each other and cool to hang out with if you're not on the target list.

Simply being an awful person doesn't require you to be emotionless, pragmatic or completely self-oriented.

I'm not talking about Evil, I'm talking about Undead, whose main characteristic is that they hate the living.

At least, it used to be. Nowadays it's all about abilities. "Vampire" is just another template to slap on a character to give him some cool new superpowers. Apparently there's no role-playing aspect anymore.

[Grim Portent]

I'm not talking about Evil, I'm talking about Undead, whose main characteristic is that they hate the living.

At least, it used to be. Nowadays it's all about abilities. "Vampire" is just another template to slap on a character to give him some cool new superpowers. Apparently there's no role-playing aspect anymore.

The main characteristic of undead varies depending on which mythology you look at. Norse undead went through a stage of being hateful ghosts that sought to murder people and later became passive spirits of drowned sailors who didn't cause anyone harm, similarly the ancient egyptian mythology didn't portray undead as hating the living.

The usual portrayal of vampires is one of domination and control, in most stories they don't want to destroy the world of man, they want to rule it and to crush the empires of day under the smothering blanket of night.

Warhammer Fantasy for example has three vampires as primary antagonists in it's fluff, the first wanted to rule the human empire with a preference for living subjects, the second just wanted to murder stuff with ruling the empire as a secondary concern, the third wanted to rule the empire but was less concerned with having living subjects than the first.

Being the founder/co-founder of an evil empire is a perfectly good concept for a vampire PC and is one that plays very well with other PCs, be they alive, dead or outside the realms of mortality, who can help further the goal of domination and conquest.

[Maglubiyet]

The main characteristic of undead varies depending on which mythology you look at.

As per the thread title, I thought we were talking about a "standard fantasy campaign". Those usually put vampires firmly in the "monster" category.

[Grim Portent]

As per the thread title, I thought we were talking about a "standard fantasy campaign". Those usually put vampires firmly in the "monster" category.

Nothing about the word monster implies hatred of the living. Many monsters are just out to benefit themselves or exist as incarnations of various concepts humans fear and/or have tried to demonize over the years.

[Mr.Moron]

As per the thread title, I thought we were talking about a "standard fantasy campaign". Those usually put vampires firmly in the "monster" category.

Which is fair but monsters come in all stripes. Certainly some undead hate the living as matter of their default fluff, but I've never really seen vampire depicted that way. The most I see it reach is general jealously or anger with the living in an underlying sense, but not really overt hatred.

Certainly they're not usually the "Kill all humans!" sort in the way say your stereotypical Orc is.

[Keltest]

Which is fair but monsters come in all stripes. Certainly some undead hate the living as matter of their default fluff, but I've never really seen vampire depicted that way. The most I see it reach is general jealously or anger with the living in an underlying sense, but not really overt hatred.

Certainly they're not usually the "Kill all humans!" sort in the way say your stereotypical Orc is.

Most "classic" settings im familiar with portray the vampire-mortal relationship similarly to one between a farmer and his cows (or pigs). Respectful of the fact that they give their lives to be food, but more or less unconcerned with the food's thoughts on the relationship. Whether or nor they actually appreciate the humans for it or laugh at them for being stupid animals depends on the vampire.

[Maglubiyet]

Nothing about the word monster implies hatred of the living. Many monsters are just out to benefit themselves or exist as incarnations of various concepts humans fear and/or have tried to demonize over the years.

Since the beginning of RP games, Undead have been associated with the Evil, the Negative Energy Plane, and draining life. They were predators who fed off of the living and were always repelled by Protection from Evil.

Only recently did they become poor "misunderstood" lost children trying to find their way in a hostile world.

Here are some quotes from the 1e MM:
"Spectre...hate sunlight and living things. Daylight makes them powerless. Life makes them lament their unlife."

"Shadow...attack living things without hesitation in order to gain the life force of their prey."

"Ghost...hate goodness and life, hungering to draw the living essences from humans."

"Banshee...The spirit returns to harm the living."

"Mummy...their unholy hatred of life..."

"Vampire...The most dreaded of the chaotic evil undead..."

[Grim Portent]

Since the beginning of RP games, Undead have been associated with the Evil, the Negative Energy Plane, and draining life. They were predators who fed off of the living and were always repelled by Protection from Evil.

Since the beginning of D&D games you mean. A game series which is about as accurate to the folklore and literature it draws from as 300 is to the Spartans.


Only recently did they become poor "misunderstood" lost children trying to find their way in a hostile world.

Who in this thread has been suggesting they be anything like that? My given example for vampires was Warhammer Fantasy ones, which rip peoples throats out for not bowing before them and then raise their corpse as a shambling flesh puppet.


Here are some quotes from the 1e MM:
"Spectre...hate sunlight and living things. Daylight makes them powerless. Life makes them lament their unlife."

"Shadow...attack living things without hesitation in order to gain the life force of their prey."

"Ghost...hate goodness and life, hungering to draw the living essences from humans."

"Banshee...The spirit returns to harm the living."

"Mummy...their unholy hatred of life..."

"Vampire...The most dreaded of the chaotic evil undead..."

D&D is not the same as all fantasy settings, has the least sophisticated portrayals of evil outside of Power Rangers, and is almost entirely inconsistent with 5000 years of human folklore and stories. It's not a good benchmark for how undead should act in any fantasy campaign.

[Maglubiyet]

Since the beginning of D&D games you mean. A game series which is about as accurate to the folklore and literature it draws from as 300 is to the Spartans.

Accurate or not, it defined many of the tropes within fantasy RPG's. If you interpret "standard fantasy campaign" to mean something else than D&D then let's hear it.

[Grim Portent]

Accurate or not, it defined many of the tropes within fantasy RPG's. If you interpret "standard fantasy campaign" to mean something else than D&D then let's hear it.

Hmm, I don't really have a system that I think of as the standard for fantasy campaigns, though my standard for a fantasy setting is probably Warhammer since that's deeply ingrained in British gamer culture, followed by Middle Earth for obvious reasons, the Discworld because it's a commonly known fantasy setting and the Edgeworld since it was pretty much the first true fantasy setting I was introduced to and is possibly still one of the most fantastical I know of.

LotR, Discworld and Warhammer have arguably had more of an influence on gamer culture and fantasy tropes here in the UK than D&D has by quite a margin.

[Karl Aegis]

I thought the standard lore for vampires was someone was about to die so they threw a hissy-fit temper tantrum and now have to run away from final rest so they can continue to throw their tantrum like a crying little baby. They failed at true eternal life, so they try to fake it by stealing others' mortal essence.

[Maglubiyet]

LotR, Discworld and Warhammer have arguably had more of an influence on gamer culture and fantasy tropes here in the UK than D&D has by quite a margin.

You've got your timeline mixed up. Warhammer and Discworld are direct spin-offs of D&D.

Games Workshop was the official vendor for D&D in the UK for years before they came up with their own version. TSR and GW were even going to merge at one point. Warhammer is essentially GW's private D&D world, with pretty much all the 1e core races. The only original races are Skaven and Beastmen.

Terry Pratchett DM'ed D&D games before he published his first Discworld book. The series heavily parodies D&D tropes.

LotR, of course, pre-dates all of these, and inspired many of the standards in D&D.

[Lord Raziere]

LotR, Discworld and Warhammer have arguably had more of an influence on gamer culture and fantasy tropes here in the UK than D&D has by quite a margin.

Brah, thats kind of like saying you have been influenced more by Japan than China. Sure, its technically a different nation, but that nation is so heavily influenced by China themselves, that its more like your being influenced by China through a Japan themed filter. I mean sure, anime came up with all those cool action shows with ki blasts and such, but those are really just wuxia taken up to eleven in various different ways, I mean for petes sake, Dragonball is based off Journey to the West so much, that they don't even try to hide it: Son Goku sounds very similar to Sun Wukong, and is basically him- but as an alien.

Warhammer is basically DnD with the heroism taken out and a lot of darkness and grittiness put in, and Discworld is basically DnD with action taken out and a lot of absurdity and satire put in. Lord of the Rings, well, yes its predates it, but it has all the things that DnD took from it and uses to this day: halflings, dwarves, elves, orcs, wizards, trolls, dragons, magic swords and artifacts, black and white morality, dark lords, quests to the save the world, all set in a darker age after a golden age long passed away because of something the previous civilization did which was prideful and bad or something. people to this day complain about things being too Tolkienian fantasy, which is perpetuated mostly by DnD.

[Grim Portent]

You've got your timeline mixed up. Warhammer and Discworld are direct spin-offs of D&D.

Games Workshop was the official vendor for D&D in the UK for years before they came up with their own version. TSR and GW were even going to merge at one point. Warhammer is essentially GW's private D&D world, with pretty much all the 1e core races. The only original races are Skaven and Beastmen.

Terry Pratchett DM'ed D&D games before he published his first Discworld book. The series heavily parodies D&D tropes.


Warhammer is basically DnD with the heroism taken out and a lot of darkness and grittiness put in, and Discworld is basically DnD with action taken out and a lot of absurdity and satire put in.

By the time I was introduced to it Warhammer had been removed from D&D influence for so long it possessed barely any of the tropes D&D commonly invokes in favour of it's own ones. The Discworld only references D&D in the Colour of Magic and thereafter skips completely to satirising the same source material that inspired D&D, until later becoming a platform for commenting on prevailing politics and the history of Britain and British literature.


LotR, of course, pre-dates all of these, and inspired many of the standards in D&D.


Lord of the Rings, well, yes its predates it, but it has all the things that DnD took from it and uses to this day: halflings, dwarves, elves, orcs, wizards, trolls, dragons, magic swords and artifacts, black and white morality, dark lords, quests to the save the world, all set in a darker age after a golden age long passed away because of something the previous civilization did which was prideful and bad or something. people to this day complain about things being too Tolkienian fantasy, which is perpetuated mostly by DnD.

Possessing the same races and a similar concept for many of the settings doesn't mean that D&D invokes many, or indeed any, of the same tropes and concepts as the various writings of Tolkien do (my primary thoughts when I think of Tolkien and Middle Earth are actually of the Hobbit and the Silmarillion, rather than LotR, neither of which inspired much of D&D generally, and which have a very different tone and concept.)

[Komatik]

Well certainly in some mythologies they can, in others they can just kind of snack on blood without killing people. I've always tended to think of "Must drain people into shriveled husks" as the default. You could certainly go for a lighter touch with the blood drain if you want a PC of that kind, but you could also do the same thing with sunlight (making it a minor penalty or cosmetic problem).

However since this thread seems to be about taking a straight-up default vampire I'm not sure rounding out the edges in either case really "Counts".

If I were to run it, I would make it so that they theoretically can survive without fully draining a person, but doing so would be sort of like holding the last bite of your favorite kind of cheeseburger in your hand without being able to put it down. Its going to be REALLY hard to just say no to that last drop.

This is good, I think. Some of you've seen BBC's Sherlock, right? How he gets excited about mysterious bad things happening. It's not decent, but it's fun. Now imagine even a more decent vampire getting the excuse to drain some poor sod dry. Bound to upset even more understanding folk, while not being disruptive to party cohesion, per se.


I had players that don’t want to get disruptive, but they really want to portray vampires. As always, you will have to talk to your group to get to a resolution that satisfies everyone. You will need the cooperation of the group and of the vampire characters, but there are many options in which you could make it work.

“Lord Loss” proposed using an item like Dayheart, that’s a good option. Another one could be to make all the adventures at night, and not penalizing the rest of the characters for changing their activities so they can sleep at day and adventure at night. Batman does it, and he is not a vampire.

What I want to say is that there are as much ways to make a vampire work in your world, as your imagination allows it, and having the support of your players.


Or you can pull and Oots

"Protection from Sunlight" 1st level arcane or divine spell. Booya.


Actually, the "combustion/turn to dust in sunlight" thing is an advent of Hollywood - its presence doesn't extend to all RPGs. Bram Stoker's Dracula assumed that vampires simply didn't have full access to their entire suite of supernatural powers during the day, but hey, he could go adventuring during the day about as well as the Fighter or Rogue could.

This is the way I did it in my template: Sunlight doesn't harm vampires, per se, but the template has a ton of really cool SLAs that can't be used while exposed to the sun or strong magic imitating it. The vampire can function during the day, but only as a more or less normal person. You want to do really vampire-y shenanigans? Better wait for the night or find a really dark cellar or a closed room deep in some building.


"Evil" is not the same thing as a "Total **** with no loyalties". You can be a band of terrible, awful people and/or people-like entities that do horrific things and still be loyal to each other and cool to hang out with if you're not on the target list.

Simply being an awful person doesn't require you to be emotionless, pragmatic or completely self-oriented.

THIS. Thisthisthisthisthisthisthisthis. This. Just like Lawful Good doesn't mean Lawful Stupid, Evil doesn't mean Murder-obsessed drop-of-a-hat-traitorous sociopath.


Warhammer Fantasy for example has three vampires as primary antagonists in it's fluff, the first wanted to rule the human empire with a preference for living subjects, the second just wanted to murder stuff with ruling the empire as a secondary concern, the third wanted to rule the empire but was less concerned with having living subjects than the first.

Being the founder/co-founder of an evil empire is a perfectly good concept for a vampire PC and is one that plays very well with other PCs, be they alive, dead or outside the realms of mortality, who can help further the goal of domination and conquest.

Speaking of which, Warhammer has some of the best vampires around, as far as flavour goes. Plenty of things around them are drawn nicely from myth, there's many different archetypes and they're still people, not flanderizations.


D&D is not the same as all fantasy settings, has the least sophisticated portrayals of evil outside of Power Rangers, and is almost entirely inconsistent with 5000 years of human folklore and stories. It's not a good benchmark for how undead should act in any fantasy campaign.

<3


I thought the standard lore for vampires was someone was about to die so they threw a hissy-fit temper tantrum and now have to run away from final rest so they can continue to throw their tantrum like a crying little baby. They failed at true eternal life, so they try to fake it by stealing others' mortal essence.


"By becoming a vampire, I obtained eternal life! It was my revenge against God!"
"Revenge against God?"
"We have risked our life and fought for the sake of God, but God mercilessly stole away the one I loved most, when all I ever wished for was Elisabetha's safety... If limited life is God's decree, then I shall defy it! And within that eternity, I shall curse him forevermore!"




Warhammer is basically DnD with the heroism taken out and a lot of darkness and grittiness put in

By the time I was introduced to it Warhammer had been removed from D&D influence for so long it possessed barely any of the tropes D&D commonly invokes in favour of it's own ones. The Discworld only references D&D in the Colour of Magic and thereafter skips completely to satirising the same source material that inspired D&D, until later becoming a platform for commenting on prevailing politics and the history of Britain and British literature.

Possessing the same races and a similar concept for many of the settings doesn't mean that D&D invokes many, or indeed any, of the same tropes and concepts as the various writings of Tolkien do (my primary thoughts when I think of Tolkien and Middle Earth are actually of the Hobbit and the Silmarillion, rather than LotR, neither of which inspired much of D&D generally, and which have a very different tone and concept.)

I concur. Warhammer =/= D&D, Middle-Earth =/= D&D. They're quite different in style and plainly just better than most D&D fare.

[TheCountAlucard]

And if we're talking derivative here, more or less the last century's fantasy is derived from the good Lord Dunsany (even if few remember him for it).

[BWR]

I concur. Warhammer =/= D&D, Middle-Earth =/= D&D.

True.


They're quite different in style than most D&D fare.
Arguable, but mostly as a matter of comparison. They all have far more in common than any of those have with, say, the Culture-verse.


They're plainly just better than most D&D fare.

Very arguable.

re: Dunsany, I know Lovecraft was a big Dunsany fan (just witness his dream stories), but I'm not sure you can point to things like the Mythos stories, Howard's and Burroughs' big beefy barbarians, Eddison, Tolkien, Lewis or even somewhat later stuff like Leiber or Vance as examples of derivatives of Dunsany's work. I would not be surprised to learn that those authors had read Dunsany and were in someway influenced, but calling it derivative is a bit much.

[Maglubiyet]

Warhammer =/= D&D, Middle-Earth =/= D&D. They're quite different in style and plainly just better than most D&D fare.

Stylistic differences on the same basic themes. Anyone looking at the cover art of any of these books would put them all in the same pile.

[VoxRationis]

Warhammer is basically DnD with the heroism taken out and a lot of darkness and absurdity and grittiness put in,

Fixed that for you.

[TheCountAlucard]

@BWR: I didn't say everything. Just many things.


re: Dunsany, I know Lovecraft was a big Dunsany fan (just witness his dream stories), but I'm not sure you can point to things like the Mythos stories…The Jorkens story, "The Walk to Lingham." "Our Distant Cousins. "Where the Tides Ebb and Flow." "The Ghosts." Compare Azathoth and MĀNA-YOOD-SUSHĀĪ.

One of the most significant points about Lovecraft's horror isn't so much the intricate cosmology he's constructed for his universe, but the sense of wrongness that pervades his protagonists as they come to uncover a mystery. These revelations are part and parcel of Dunsany.


…Howard's and Burroughs' big beefy barbarians…"The Fortress Unvanquishable, Save for Sacnoth" is the story of a guy killing a dragon at the behest of a wizard, for the sake of making a sword with which he can go kill a more powerful wizard. Sounds appropriately Howardian to me. Plus a lot of elements of the sort you see in Howard's (and others') stories, like thrones carved from a single massive gem, towers made of a single piece of ivory, a traveler finding himself in a fantastical city thought lost to history (which is home to some terrible thing or monster of old), all are present in Dunsany's works. Hell, "Our Distant Cousins" is a story of a man who travels to Mars, finds he has amazing strength, and sees strange and wondrous and terrible sights.


…Tolkien…Do you not see Dunsany's influence in Tolkien?


I would not be surprised to learn that those authors had read Dunsany and were in someway influenced, but calling it derivative is a bit much.To be fair, I was indeed exaggerating a wee bit; like I said earlier, few even know the name of Edward John Moreton Drax Plunkett, 18th Baron Dunsany in this day and age, so the disapproving connotations the word "derivative" now contains would indeed not apply. But you can't deny his presence in them.

And to clarify, Dunsany isn't an island either - he, too, got where he was by standing on the shoulders of countless crafters of story before him. My point is more that if you want to talk about fantasy influences, Tolkien's hardly at the front of the line.

Overall, I think Dunsany would appreciate the legacy he left, even if the name goes unremembered - after all,


We must be content with whatever memory we can get when we are gone.

[Grim Portent]

Stylistic differences on the same basic themes. Anyone looking at the cover art of any of these books would put them all in the same pile.

They're all fantasy, but the three have barely anything in common, and a lot in opposition, when looking at tone, themes, symbolism and morals.

[BWR]

*snip*
So it's really the interpretation of the word "derivative" that's the issue here. Mine seems to be a bit stricter than the one you used here, since I interpreted 'derivative' as 'would not exist without' rather than 'influenced by', and (though I may be wrong) I believe that the authors mentioned would still have produced something quite similar to their existing works even without Dunsany.

[TheCountAlucard]

I believe that the authors mentioned would still have produced something quite similar to their existing works even without Dunsany.We won't be finding out unless you're willing to track down a time machine. :smallwink:

[BWR]

I'm game if you are.

[Lord Raziere]

They're all fantasy, but the three have barely anything in common, and a lot in opposition, when looking at tone, themes, symbolism and morals.

in all three however, it is plausible that a band of adventurers will form to go out and kill some orcs, which is what DnD is all about. Warhammer does it with more Everything Sucks, but still basically the same thing, and while no specific Discworld ever did that, they do touch upon it "black and white ganged up on green." so it would probably still happen but with more satire.

[Maglubiyet]

They're all fantasy, but the three have barely anything in common, and a lot in opposition, when looking at tone, themes, symbolism and morals.

Elves, orcs, goblins, dragons, dwarves, trolls, undead, demons, and humans in a fictional pseudo-medieval world with sword-wielding heroes and powerful wizards.
It's a pretty narrow niche of sword and sorcery, high heroic fantasy that's spawned numerous clones (World of Warcraft anyone?) The narratives all sound the same in the telling, regardless of what kind of spin you want to put on it.

You can get a lot more different even within the genre. The Narnia Chronicles, Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, Elric of Melnibone are obvious examples that don't much resemble the typical "orc hacking" fantasy worlds.

[Thrudd]

In a "standard" fantasy game, which can reasonably be assumed to mean a "standard" D&D setting, vampires would also be assumed to be "standard", ie have the expected abilities, weaknesses and motives.
So, not using modified vampires that make it expressly easier to fit them in as a playable creature.

In such a game, if a PC got turned into a vampire, they would be enthralled to the vampire that made them. Even if that was overcome, the original vamp killed or released them or whatever, in order for the character to go on adventuring the game would need to revolve around them and their new issues. Everything the party does now needs to take into account this one character's unique requirements; their activities limited or at the very least spending significant amounts of time where the vampire PC isnt present, the player sitting there waiting for in-game dusk.

Yes, it is doable if the players are willing to make such adjustments, or the DM makes it easy by shifting the campaign so everything is more convenient for the vampire. But the "standard" for a "normal" D&D setting, I feel, should be to consider that character dead and an npc/monster, until/unless the party determines to rescue and resurrect them from that dark fate. If such is even possible, given the corrupting nature of undeath.

[endur]

So we had a player who used to have his character do all of the vampire role playing stuff ... pale skin ... ride in carriage with the curtains drawn... reclusive noble.... but we generally think that the player wasn't a real vampire, just a spellcaster acting like a vampire ....

So he got the cool role playing aspects ... and there were no balance issues.

[Eldan]

Eh. Again, Vampire doesn't have to mean Hollywood Vampire. They could be stumbling corpses, or incorporeal shades, or blood-drinking witches who turn into wolves. Vampire legends are really, really diverse.

I remember a quite memorable game where one of my players had a vampire scythe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_pumpkins_and_watermelons) as an item familiar. And not a warscythe either, the agricultural tool. Quite useless as a weapon, but they found it in a field around a village that had a problem with desecrated fields and wanted to keep it.

[Thrudd]

Eh. Again, Vampire doesn't have to mean Hollywood Vampire. They could be stumbling corpses, or incorporeal shades, or blood-drinking witches who turn into wolves. Vampire legends are really, really diverse.


They could be, but in a "standard" D&D game they are the Hollywood type vampire as found in the monster manual. If they weren't, it would no longer be a standard game. How to deal with standard vampires killing and turning a PC in a standard game? NPC.

How to make it easier or more interesting for players to play as vampire characters? Don't use standard D&D vampires.

[Eldan]

Doesn't say D&D in the OP, though.

[Thrudd]

Doesn't say D&D in the OP, though.

As I said "standard fantasy" can pretty much be assumed to be D&D. Unless there is another fantasy RPG out there that is older or better represents what gamers today think of as "generic" fantasy. And if so, how does that game portray vampires differently from the D&D/Hollywood stereotype? What sort of vampire would be more "standard" than that?

Being killed and turned into a vampire should be thought of no differently than being eaten by a purple worm or disemboweled by a troll. It is just one more of many ways for adventurers to die. Except in this case, they not only weaken the party by their absence but also by turning into a monster and attacking their former allies.

[Gavran]

As I said "standard fantasy" can pretty much be assumed to be D&D. Unless there is another fantasy RPG out there that is older or better represents what gamers today think of as "generic" fantasy. And if so, how does that game portray vampires differently from the D&D/Hollywood stereotype? What sort of vampire would be more "standard" than that?

Being killed and turned into a vampire should be thought of no differently than being eaten by a purple worm or disemboweled by a troll. It is just one more of many ways for adventurers to die. Except in this case, they not only weaken the party by their absence but also by turning into a monster and attacking their former allies.

I rather agree that it's safe to assume D&D in a lot of cases, but I completely disagree with the idea that D&D has "definitely not PC-able" vampires as standard. Perhaps it's because I don't read D&D novels or generally play in established settings, but the idea that any creature is going to be the same across every table playing D&D is completely absurd to me.