Daylight spells and vampires

[dantiesilva]

Ok so I know if Vampires are exposed to direct sunlight they get to make one last action and then die. What if that vampire though was exposed to the daylight spell?

The object touched sheds light as bright as full daylight in a 60-foot radius, and dim light for an additional 60 feet beyond that. Creatures that take penalties in bright light also take them while within the radius of this magical light. Despite its name, this spell is not the equivalent of daylight for the purposes of creatures that are damaged or destroyed by bright light (such as vampires). If daylight is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a light-proof covering, the spell’s effects are blocked until the covering is removed. Daylight brought into an area of magical darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect. Daylight counters or dispels any darkness spell of

That line counteracts what the vampire lord template states.

A vampire lord is not as vulnerable to sunlight as a normal vampire, and can go about in broad daylight if it desires. Under sunlight, it takes a -4 penalty to all ability scores and on all attacks, saves, and skill checks. Also, a vampire lord in sunlight cannot use any of its supernatural powers. Victims of its domination power are not freed of the vampire lord's control during daylight hours; the vampire lord can verbally command any creature in its thrall even in direct sunlight. Spells that produce sunlight effects cannot harm a vampire lord; only direct light from the sun can weaken it. If the vampire lord is destroyed while exposed to direct sunlight, it seems to die, but unless the body is disposed of as described below, it assumes gaseous form as soon as the sun sets and attempts to return to its coffin.

This would state that regular vampires are damaged by the daylight spell, yet in the description of both they say the opposite. Has anyone in the playground run into this problem, and if so could they tell me what really happens. Because at this point I am using the daylight spell to stop two vampires from killing off a party member, but if Daylight does not work like normal daylight then well we have a problem and I would need to fix my post.

Thank you all for taking your time to read and respond to this.

[Archmage1]

Dantie...
No. just no.


Despite its name, this spell is not the equivalent of daylight for the purposes of creatures that are damaged or destroyed by bright light (such as vampires)
AND
Spells that produce sunlight effects cannot harm a vampire lord; only direct light from the sun can weaken it
imply no contradiction. Daylight is not the sun, and so can't harm a vamp lord, and daylight is a spell, so it still can't harm a vamp lord.

[dantiesilva]

Tarith it says so right in the wording

Spells that produce sunlight effects cannot harm a vampire lord; only direct light from the sun can weaken it

Daylight is a spell that produces sunlight and weakens a vampire. Will not destroy it as the daylight spell says, but all the other effects, doing only one action a turn, being dazed, should still be in effect no?

[Archmage1]

Daylight does not produce sun. it is an upgraded version of the light spell.

[LTwerewolf]

Despite its name, this spell is not the equivalent of daylight for the purposes of creatures that are damaged or destroyed by bright light (such as vampires).

I think you failed your reading comprehension check on this part.

[GolemsVoice]

The spell daylight does not harm Vampires (but it would blind Drow, for example) and it ESPECIALLY doesn't harm Vampire Lords. Where's the problem?

[BowStreetRunner]

The problem, as I see it, is as follows:


The daylight spell states "Creatures that take penalties in bright light also take them while within the radius of this magical light."
The Vampire Lord template states "Under sunlight, it takes a -4 penalty to all ability scores and on all attacks, saves, and skill checks."
The Vampire Lord template further states "Spells that produce sunlight effects cannot harm a vampire lord; only direct light from the sun can weaken it."

So the question would be, does a Vampire Lord take a -4 penalty in a Daylight spell, correct?

[GolemsVoice]

Which it doesn't, see here:


Spells that produce sunlight effects cannot harm a vampire lord; only direct light from the sun can weaken it

[AlanBruce]

Greetings! I am the DM in the above scenario. If I'm reading the spell's decsription right, Daylight affects a touched object, shedding light in a 60ft. radius. The vampires to be affected are flying 200ft. away from the cleric, which, to my understanding of the spells description, would have not reached them. That is without considering the fact that the spell does not affect them already.

[Douglas]

Daylight is not the only light spell that references the sun or day, or that is higher level than a cantrip. The Vampire Lord clause is irrelevant for Daylight because Daylight already, despite its name, is not a "sunlight" effect. Sunburst (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/sunburst.htm), on the other hand...

[AlanBruce]

That is true. However, the PCs currently do not have access to Sunburst.

[The Grue]

Which it doesn't, see here:

As I read, a penalty to attacks, saves and skill checks does not constitute harm. Am I wrong? Furthermore, as previously mentioned, Daylight is not a sunlight effect. The penalty to saves is thus not from a spell that creates sunlight, and the clause mentioned is not applicable. Of course, the penalty doesn't apply in merely "bright light", only sunlight. So the answer is no, but not for the reasons you state.

[GolemsVoice]

I'd define harm as "any negative effect applied on the target" not just "hitpoint loss". So damage to saves would be harm, too. However, there is no RAW definition of harm, I believe, so your version is as good as mine.

Arguing that the penalty does not stem from sunlight would be meaningless, since, as I see it, there IS no penalty. Because if daylight would create sunlight, it would harm Vampires without question. If dalyight did not create sunlight, it would not harm Vampires at all. So there either is a penalty, applied by sunlight, or tehre isn't.

Do I sound confusing? :smalltongue:

Because there are some spells that wrack the target with pain, but, mechanically, only apply mali on saves and stuff. Using that definition of harm would mean a paladin could stand by idly, because no harm is done to anyone :smallbiggrin:

[dantiesilva]

To everyone thank you for your help. And it was merely using the vampire lord references as a point. That it states it does not suffer the same effects a vampire would. The creatures are vampires, not vampire lords. So that is why I was curious. As my DM pointed out I could not do it in this battle but in future ones wanted to see if having the spell was useful or not. Again thank you everyone for your time.

@BowStreetRunner You understand exactly what I was trying to ask. Again thank you all.

[TuggyNE]

This would state that regular vampires are damaged by the daylight spell, yet in the description of both they say the opposite.

There is no contradiction in the sources, and there's no particular way to reason backward from "vampire lord doesn't suffer this penalty in such-and-such a case" to "vampire must therefore suffer this penalty in such-and-such a case": the rules are not infrequently redundant. So yeah, in this situation there's no way to suppose that vampires would be affected by daylight, except perhaps for the disorientation ("Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action...."), as this is a penalty and not damage or destruction.

[nedz]

Your request is difficult because spells don't do 'Sunlight'.

I looked at the BoED and whilst there are several spells there such as: Curtain of Light, Celestial Brilliance, ..., Sunmantle and many more; which produce celestial light which harms evil creatures — none of them produce actual sunlight.

I did think of Scrying for someone who is standing in bright sunlight and then somehow directing that onto the Vampire, but this is quite iffy. AFAIK you cannot scry objects, but then even if you could scrying the sun could easily blind you.

There's always a Silent Image of the Sun, which might work; otherwise you need to make an opening to the sky with Earthquake or Passwall or something ?

[dantiesilva]

Sadly cleric and villian blocked out the sun, not sure how. But they managed it. Was not trying to destroy was just trying to get the single actions from the spell.

[Phelix-Mu]

I just finished a campaign where fights with high-level vampires were a frequent occurrence. I was continually happy that actual production of "sunlight" is virtually impossible, even for accomplished spellcasters.

Simply put, it doesn't seem incorrect to say that light generally doesn't harm vampires, unless it comes directly from the sun, or is generated by a spell that specifically mentions that it harms vampires.

On a related note, I almost had a heart attack when close-reading of the Sun Devotion feat from Complete Champion noted that "[the light created by activating the feat] is true sunlight and affects creatures within a 10-foot radius as such." Had to temporarily houserule that as not applying, and it still seems like the ultimate nerfing of the (admittedly ridiculously overpowered) vampire template. Not sure if I can long-term reinstate the feat as written, though it would quickly rise to the top of every undead slayer's wish list if I did. Way too accessible. I mean, commoners could select this feat, use it on their pitchfork. Granted the vamp could maybe take out one or two of them, but it would quickly spell the end of any area ruled by vampires (the entire theme of my somewhat unoriginal campaign).

[dantiesilva]

Wow wait hold on Rewind say what... I have Sun devotion and its ability is real sunlight....

Evil grins Ohh alan are you ready for two dead vampires XD.