Dhampir Paladin = Bite Smite etc

[da newt]

So with the UA Gothic Lineages' Dhampir, what can you add to the BITE attack to increase it's damage and HP regain?

It's specifically both a natural weapon and counts as a simple weapon for which you are proficient, so that makes any bite attack = a melee weapon attack right? So if you are under the influence of spells like Divine Favor, HM, any Smite, etc would add to the bite's damage, right?

Hex and Spirit Shroud don't care what type of attack it is, so I know those are in play. Any others like that?

The natural weapon, melee attack, melee weapon attack kerfuffle always messes me up.

Vampiric Bite. Your fanged bite is a natural
weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon
with which you are proficient.
You add your
Constitution modifier to the attack and damage
rolls when you attack with your bite. Your bite
deals 1d4 piercing damage on a hit. While you
are missing half or more of your hit points, you
have advantage on attack rolls you make with
this bite.
When you use your bite and hit a creature that
isn’t a Construct or an Undead, you can empower
yourself in one of the following ways of your
choice:
• regain hit points equal to the damage dealt by
the bite
• gain a bonus to the next ability check or attack
roll you make; the bonus equals the damage
dealt by the bite
You can empower yourself with your bite a
number of times equal to your proficiency
bonus, and you regain all expended uses when
you finish a long rest.

[Amnestic]

It works as a monk weapon, which means its dice can upgrade from a d4 to, eventually, d10 with monk levels.

The Insignia of the Claws magic item (Hoard of the Dragon Queen) gives a +1/+1 to unarmed strikes and natural weapons and makes them magical.

[Angelalex242]

Bite Smite?

THOU EVIL FIEND, I CHOMP THEE!

*CHOMP*

You sense your deity, Pac Man, is pleased with you.

[ftafp]

RAW, you can have alchemic silver or adamantine coating applied to your teeth as they're classified as a simple weapon. If you do this, your fangs will have a price tag, and you can use them with Booming Blade or Green Flame Blade

It works as a monk weapon, which means its dice can upgrade from a d4 to, eventually, d10 with monk levels.

The Insignia of the Claws magic item (Hoard of the Dragon Queen) gives a +1/+1 to unarmed strikes and natural weapons and makes them magical.

RAW in the UA version it's not an unarmed attack or a natural weapon oddly enough. Stuff like insignia of the claws or the eldritch fang tattoo don't work on it

[Valmark]

RAW, you can have alchemic silver or adamantine coating applied to your teeth as they're classified as a simple weapon. If you do this, your fangs will have a price tag, and you can use them with Booming Blade or Green Flame Blade

RAW in the UA version it's not an unarmed attack or a natural weapon oddly enough. Stuff like insignia of the claws or the eldritch fang tattoo don't work on it

It's a natural weapon (in the opening post there is the text quoted in full)

I'm not sure smiting counts- it's not damage made by the bite (though I'd let it work if only for the giggles).

[Amnestic]

RAW in the UA version it's not an unarmed attack or a natural weapon oddly enough. Stuff like insignia of the claws or the eldritch fang tattoo don't work on it

Eldritch Claw tattoo doesn't work* but Insignia of the Claws does - the text in the OP says bite is a natural weapon.

*okay it half works, specifically the Eldritch Maul part, but the Magical Strikes (+1/+1 and magical) doesn't since it specifies unarmed strikes but not natural weapons.

Eldritch Claw Tattoo effects:

Magical Strikes. While the tattoo is on your skin, your unarmed strikes are considered magical for the purpose of overcoming immunity and resistance to nonmagical attacks, and you gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls with unarmed strikes.

Eldritch Maul. As a bonus action, you can empower the tattoo for 1 minute. For the duration, each of your melee attacks with a weapon or an unarmed strike can reach a target up to 15 feet away from you, as inky tendrils launch toward the target. In addition, your melee attacks deal an extra 1d6 force damage on a hit. Once used, this bonus action can't be used again until the next dawn.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Use your smite bite to fight the plight right. Fill the site with light and give fright to wights as a knight of the night, teeth white; mission forthright, evil in flight. Despite the blight within, you perform the rite, ignore any contrite slight, fangs alight, soul bright.

That sight is dynamite.

[da newt]

Thanks all (especially Waterdeep for the 'ode to masticate'), but could someone please help me with the RAW ruling? Does the BITE count as a melee weapon attack?



My PC was disintegrated last session and my planned replacement PC is a lvl 9 Dhampir Vengeance Pali. This will help me finalize my build decision.

I know it won't be OP, but the RP/theme of a dude who was turned into a Dhampir against his will, trapped in a pocket dimension for years, and is out for vengeance seems interesting (ToA btw).

I've named him REND at this point, but I'm open to better suggestions.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Thanks all (especially Waterdeep for the 'ode to masticate'), but could someone please help me with the RAW ruling? Does the BITE count as a melee weapon attack?



My PC was disintegrated last session and my planned replacement PC is a lvl 9 Dhampir Vengeance Pali. This will help me finalize my build decision.

I know it won't be OP, but the RP/theme of a dude who was turned into a Dhampir against his will, trapped in a pocket dimension for years, and is out for vengeance seems interesting (ToA btw).

I've named him REND at this point, but I'm open to better suggestions.

In the very first line of the paragraph on Vampiric Bite- "Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient." Smite require a melee weapon attack, which is why it doesn't work with unarmed attacks but specifically would here since it's called out as being a melee weapon. I might be missing something, but I believe it's very clearly RAW that this works.

EDIT: Smite not working with unarmed attacks is also pretty debatable. Jeremy Crawford says otherwise, but he uses language that isn't actually in the description of Divine Smite by claiming it requires a 'weapon', and thus unarmed strikes don't count. Regardless of which side of the fence you come down on, even Crawford relents and says natural weapons are, by definition, weapons, and thus work with Divine Smite. So RAW or RAI, you're safe. Just ask your DM to be absolutely sure.

[Valmark]

Thanks all (especially Waterdeep for the 'ode to masticate'), but could someone please help me with the RAW ruling? Does the BITE count as a melee weapon attack?



My PC was disintegrated last session and my planned replacement PC is a lvl 9 Dhampir Vengeance Pali. This will help me finalize my build decision.

I know it won't be OP, but the RP/theme of a dude who was turned into a Dhampir against his will, trapped in a pocket dimension for years, and is out for vengeance seems interesting (ToA btw).

I've named him REND at this point, but I'm open to better suggestions.

Ask your DM. It definitely counts as a melee weapon attack, but wether the Smite counts as damage from the bite for the purpose of healing is up to them- consider that you recover hit points "equal to the bite's damage" while Divine Smite deals damage "in addition to the weapon's damage" which implies it's separated from it (in this case the bite would be the weapon).

Imo I would let it work but if I were to be strict it shouldn't work.

In the very first line of the paragraph on Vampiric Bite- "Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient." Smite require a melee weapon attack, which is why it doesn't work with unarmed attacks but specifically would here since it's called out as being a melee weapon. I might be missing something, but I believe it's very clearly RAW that this works.

EDIT: Smite not working with unarmed attacks is also pretty debatable. Jeremy Crawford says otherwise, but he uses language that isn't actually in the description of Divine Smite by claiming it requires a 'weapon', and thus unarmed strikes don't count. Regardless of which side of the fence you come down on, even Crawford relents and says natural weapons are, by definition, weapons, and thus work with Divine Smite. So RAW or RAI, you're safe. Just ask your DM to be absolutely sure.

JC's reasoning is based on the fact that Divine Smite says "in addition to the weapon's damage", which implies using a weapon. I personally disagree with him, but I see where he comes from.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Use your smite bite to fight the plight right. Fill the site with light and give fright to wights as a knight of the night, teeth white; mission forthright, evil in flight. Despite the blight within, you perform the rite, ignore any contrite slight, fangs alight, soul bright.

That sight is dynamite.

May I sig that?

[Waterdeep Merch]

Ask your DM. It definitely counts as a melee weapon attack, but wether the Smite counts as damage from the bite for the purpose of healing is up to them- consider that you recover hit points "equal to the bite's damage" while Divine Smite deals damage "in addition to the weapon's damage" which implies it's separated from it (in this case the bite would be the weapon).

Imo I would let it work but if I were to be strict it shouldn't work.


JC's reasoning is based on the fact that Divine Smite says "in addition to the weapon's damage", which implies using a weapon. I personally disagree with him, but I see where he comes from.

I think you're right about the additional damage not adding to the heal part. As for Crawford's ruling, I sort of see it? But yeah, I've been allowing punch smites from the beginning and have no intention to ever stop. Smite slaps are sacred.

May I sig that?

Go for it!

[Lavaeolus]

The text decribes it as "a natural weapon" which "counts as a simple melee weapon".

Is it an attack with a weapon? Since the text says it counts as one, I'll say yes.

Is it a melee attack? Yes: melee weapons are used to make melee attacks by default. Special features or properties like thrown might enable some other options, but not here.

Is it a weapon attack? Yes: attacks with weapons are weapon attacks by default. Unarmed strikes are just also weapon attacks, despite not being weapons.

If it's a melee attack and it's a weapon attack, then it's a melee weapon attack.

For any feature that uses wording along the lines "attack with a weapon", I'd also rule to work. That means I'd rule Smite works fine, although I haven't got a position on whether the added-Smite-damage gets to be part of your bite's healing. Honestly, my main concern there is less one of RAW and more, "Er, does that mean a bite can potentially give you a 6d8 bonus to an ability check? That doesn't sound right..."

[Gale]

I might be wrong in saying this, but I'm not entirely sure that additional damage from sources such as Divine Smite or Hex are actually part of the bite's damage.

If you look at the language for Divine Smite for example, it says it "allows you to deal radiant damage, in addition the weapon's damage." This indicates that this extra damage, despite being part of the attack, isn't part of the weapon's damage itself. It's a small but important distinction, because it affects things like Great Weapon Fighter; you can reroll the damage done by the weapon, but not extra damage dice from Divine Smite, Hex, etc.

Similarly, I would presume when it says you can "regain hit points equal to the damage dealt by the bite," it only means the damage dealt by the bite itself, and not any extra damage that may also be a part of the attack. For clarification, when it says "bite" it's presumably referring to the natural weapon known as a "bite." Therefore, it is not saying "bite" to reference the attack as a whole.

Basically, this means you'll have to find ways to actual increase the bite's damage itself. Monk levels and the Piercer feat are the only things I can think of off the top of my head.

[Rynjin]

Also make sure your DM doesn't agree with Sean K Reynolds about whether it's evil to bite someone as a Dhampir.

If a dhampyr hits an opponent with his bite attack that opponent will bleed in his mouth. If the dhampyr spits the blood out it is not evil, if he swallows it is evil. This makes no sense to me.

We're not talking about eating animated objects made out of chocolate syrup, we're talking about the blood of the living. If you bite someone and swallow human blood, you're saying, "this creature is food to me, I will gain sustenance from drinking its blood." And if you're doing that to an intelligent creature, you're treating intelligent creatures as food. That's evil.

If Rolf has to kill someone in order to defend himself, we accept that.
If Rolf is attacked and has to resort to biting his attacker in order to escape or avoid being killed, we accept that.
If Rolf bites his attacker and decides to swallow the attacker's blood, that's just creepy and inappropriate.
If Rolf swallow's the attacker's blood and his eyes light up with joy and he gets stronger for doing so, that's evil.

I doesn't matter if Rolf is a human, dhampir, half-orc, or gnome; gaining power from drinking a person's blood is creepy and evil.

It's an easy choice: If you're worried about drinking blood being an evil act, (a) play an evil character, or (b) don't take the Blood Drinker feat. Your character lives in a universe where there are absolutes for the alignments, and the physics of that universe says "Feeding on unwilling intelligent creatures is an evil act."

[da newt]

Meat is meat - whether the being it came from was dumb or smart, sentient or not, does not change whether killing for food is good or evil.

As for my PC - vengeance paladin: no oath issues there.

[Amnestic]

Also make sure your DM doesn't agree with Sean K Reynolds about whether it's evil to bite someone as a Dhampir.

I could write a lot in response to that quote from Reynolds. A lot. Yikes, in a number of ways.

[Rynjin]

I could write a lot in response to that quote from Reynolds. A lot. Yikes, in a number of ways.

There's a reason I still remember such a relatively minor forum interaction over 8 years later. The man has/had some...memorable opinions, and a singularly unique way of interacting with people.

Meat is meat - whether the being it came from was dumb or smart, sentient or not, does not change whether killing for food is good or evil.

As for my PC - vengeance paladin: no oath issues there.

You know, I'd kinda blanked on the fact that this was a 5e thread. When did 5e add Dhampir as a playable race?

[Valmark]

There's a reason I still remember such a relatively minor forum interaction over 8 years later. The man has/had some...memorable opinions, and a singularly unique way of interacting with people.



You know, I'd kinda blanked on the fact that this was a 5e thread. When did 5e add Dhampir as a playable race?

It's from the UA- Gothic Lineages.

[Amnestic]

You know, I'd kinda blanked on the fact that this was a 5e thread. When did 5e add Dhampir as a playable race?

They're part of the Gothic Lineage UA.

[Azuresun]

You know, I'd kinda blanked on the fact that this was a 5e thread. When did 5e add Dhampir as a playable race?

It was in a recent Unearthed Arcana.