Vampire as a character

[urmom]

So I have a campaign and part of the story is that one of my players becomes a vampire and has to find out to cure them selves before they completely become evil but I'm not sure there even is one. I've looked in a few source books but can't find it anyone have an answer?

[Venger]

So I have a campaign and part of the story is that one of my players becomes a vampire and has to find out to cure them selves before they completely become evil but I'm not sure there even is one. I've looked in a few source books but can't find it anyone have an answer?

If you kill the vampire and then cast resurrection or true resurrection, you can bring them back as whatever they were before.

[urmom]

If you kill the vampire and then cast resurrection or true resurrection, you can bring them back as whatever they were before.

Is killing them the only way? I'd hate to have to kill them off so they can turn back

[Zanos]

There is no RAW way to cure vampirism that I'm aware of. Not 100% on this last bit, but I don't think acquiring "Always Evil" templates actually force the character to be Evil, or at the very least it doesn't warp their minds extensively. Vampires are Always Evil because to survive they have to drain constitution and levels, which are inherently Evil acts. The character doesn't suddenly turn into a cackling madman.

[Andezzar]

Don't forget "Always Evil" by RAW does not mean tht each and every member of the species is Evil. There is a statistically insignificant portion that is not Evil. especially PCs tend to fall into that category.

Still I would recommend reversing vampirism through the aforementioned method ASAP. +8 LA will hurt the character pretty badly - and that's even before the other party members decide they must slay the evil abomination.

[Mordaedil]

Is killing them the only way? I'd hate to have to kill them off so they can turn back

As a DM, you have unlimited ways at your disposal to turn a player from a vampire back to a normal person, but killing them is the only way in RAW.

If you want encouragement for how to handle a vampire turning back to human, Bram Stoker's Dracula offers hints in its opening and ending, where sufficient love, humility and acceptance of a good deity can put them in the good graces to be forgiven and restored to human.

Keep in mind also that vampires have level adjustment while your regular species might not and that alone can make up the difference in "going back" so you don't have to take levels from them.

Or you can make it a quest for a certain MacGuffin and have it only work partially, etc.

The world is your oyster in these terms, tbqh.

[DedWards]

I don't see anything that specifies what system you're using, but I found this:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/vampire

It goes over a lot of what you're looking to do, and even if you're not playing Pathfinder, it makes for good reference.

Being the GM, you get to make up whatever you want, just be sure to stick to whatever you decide to do.

[Necroticplague]

There are also the rituals in Savage Species that let you change races. You could use that to change yourself from a 'vampire [race]' to just a normal '[race]'.

[Inevitability]

Wish or Miracle is always a good way to handwave such stuff.

[RedMage125]

Well, for starters the new vampire created is under the control of the master vampire, so...while your PC would not become "auto-evil", he or she would certainly become an NPC. At least until the master is destroyed.

As for a means of stopping/curing it...as others have said, there's nothing in the rules, but if you want to borrow from literature, the one thing that ABSOLUTELY must be done is kill the vampire that turned the PC. In Bram Stoker's Dracula, forgiveness of a good deity was not enough, they also had to kill Dracula to save Mina.

Is your PC being turned into one gradually like Lucy Westerna, or is he/she getting vamped in one night?

Either way, you have a lot of options.

While by the RAW, the master has control. You can give the PC a Will save to resist anything he/she would not normally do. You could make the transformation "partial" by not having the PC become fully undead and a vampire until he/she drinks blood for the first time. Until then your PC should still be able to be in sunlight (although it should be uncomfortable). The PC should be subjected to increasingly difficult Will saves (DC goes up by 1 every day) to stave off the hunger for blood, failure means the rest of the party must restrain the fledgling vampire. Too many failures and the fledgling just goes into a blood frenzy. Animal blood should be able to stave off the check (and not raise the DC), but drinking humanoid blood by biting one should be the thing that turns the PC into a full vampire.

I suggest that if they are hunting the master down that the fledgling should be able to locate him (at least know in which direction to travel). If they are not, and the PC already retains his free will, then he should have the option of calling on vampiric strength or powers, with the understanding that doing so will raise the DC to resist drinking blood.

As for a cure, you're looking at making something unique for yourself. Once the master is dead, it should probably involve some kind of rare ingredient, or finding a specific person who is an expert on such things who can do the ritual.

[Segev]

Yeah, D&D distorts the usual "cursed to be stuck as a vampire" plot because it has the ability to bring back the dead. So "destroy vampire, raise (demi)human(oid)" is a valid option in D&D. And often easier than most plots involving restoring a vampire's mortal life make such quests.

Of course, you can make this more of an issue by having the setting have people high enough level to cast raise dead be very rare. Just finding such a person might be a quest of sufficient effort in and of itself. Or you could have it be the focus of a cleric's quest: learn the secrets of not animating, but truly restoring life to the dead. Frame his reaching the right level to do so not as just leveling up, but as the fulfillment of a quest for a specific legendary power.

[Andezzar]

That again would require the setting to be significantly altered. clerics simply get raise dead at level 9. There isn't even really an expiration date on the corpse because the cleric gets Gentle Repose at level 3. while it is possible to encounter a vampire before level 3, this would be an encounter of the Giant Crab kind.

[Segev]

That again would require the setting to be significantly altered. clerics simply get raise dead at level 9. There isn't even really an expiration date on the corpse because the cleric gets Gentle Repose at level 3. while it is possible to encounter a vampire before level 3, this would be an encounter of the Giant Crab kind.

The only alteration to the setting would be a choice that has to be made for every D&D setting: how common are characters of level 9 or higher? If they're rare, then it becomes a valid thing to consider an item of rarity and power.

Sure, mechanically, the cleric achieving level 9 is all that's needed, but a reasonably-well-paced campaign of finding The Secret could have the IC discovery coincide roughly with the mechanical achievement of that level.

Remember, levels are supposed to represent personal improvement achieved through other mechanisms in-story. A wizard doesn't suddenly write two new spells in his spellbook; he's been working on the theory behind them and finally had a breakthrough. A fighter doesn't suddenly gain a new feat; the fighting techniques he's been working on have borne fruit and he's now able to do something routinely that he could barely do in practice before.

[Andezzar]

I didn't mean that the new knowledge suddenly appears but that from level three on the PC cleric basically knows that resurrection is (theoretically) possible. What else would he need Gentle Repose for?

PCs bight be special snowflakes (which is a valid design choice of the DM), they still know what they can do now and should have some idea what they will be able to do after more practice.

[InvisibleBison]

I didn't mean that the new knowledge suddenly appears but that from level three on the PC cleric basically knows that resurrection is (theoretically) possible. What else would he need Gentle Repose for?

PCs bight be special snowflakes (which is a valid design choice of the DM), they still know what they can do now and should have some idea what they will be able to do after more practice.

I can think of plenty of alternate uses for gentle repose:
- Preventing a corpse from smelling bad during a long funeral or similar ceremony
- Keeping meat that you intend to eat fresh
- Averting the decay of undead minions/compatriots/self (not exactly RAW, but an obvious application of the spell)
- Making a dead body look alive (probably in conjunction with other spells)

[Andezzar]

I can think of plenty of alternate uses for gentle repose:
- Preventing a corpse from smelling bad during a long funeral or similar ceremonyWell OK, but if higher level spellcasters are rare, you probably wouldn't use their abilities for such trivial uses.

- Keeping meat that you intend to eat freshClerics also get purify food and drink (level 0 spell) for that. So again, why use such rare resources for a trivial task.

- Averting the decay of undead minions/compatriots/self (not exactly RAW, but an obvious application of the spell)Minions are creatures (without the dead condition), not corpses, so they are not valid targets for the spell. This does not work.

- Making a dead body look alive (probably in conjunction with other spells)Halting decay does nothing for previous decomposition, nor does it help with making a corpse look less dead/more alive.

[prufock]

the one thing that ABSOLUTELY must be done is kill the vampire that turned the PC... As for a cure, you're looking at making something unique for yourself. Once the master is dead, it should probably involve some kind of rare ingredient, or finding a specific person who is an expert on such things who can do the ritual.
Great starting point here.

I'd say that vampires also have no souls. Regaining your soul is a must. Where is your soul? How do you get it back? These are questions only a DM can share, and the PC should research. I would make it somewhat complex, forcing them to collect various items. For example, you must stand inside a circle of mirrors, have someone cast Atonement on you, using a holy symbol as divine focus, while baptizing yourself in garlic-infused holy water, under dawning sun.

[Inevitability]

I'd say that vampires also have no souls.

Incorrect.


While in the magic jar, you can sense and attack any life force within 10 feet per caster level (and on the same plane of existence). You do need line of effect from the jar to the creatures. You cannot determine the exact creature types or positions of these creatures. In a group of life forces, you can sense a difference of 4 or more Hit Dice between one creature and another and can determine whether a life force is powered by positive or negative energy. (Undead creatures are powered by negative energy. Only sentient undead creatures have, or are, souls.)

In other words, a vampire, being a sentient undead creature, has a soul.

Whether it's the base creature's soul is arguable, though.

[prufock]

a vampire, being a sentient undead creature

Not to get into a whole philosophical debate here, but [citation needed]? Is sentience defined anywhere in the rules? It isn't exactly a well-defined and agreed-upon concept in real life. As far as I can find, the only creatures specifically noted as sentient are humans, intelligent items, item familiars, and awakened animals/plants/constructs.

Not that it matters for the sake of plot. You can always replace "your soul" with "portion of your soul" in the ritual-referencing text.

[Venger]

Not to get into a whole philosophical debate here, but [citation needed]? Is sentience defined anywhere in the rules? It isn't exactly a well-defined and agreed-upon concept in real life. As far as I can find, the only creatures specifically noted as sentient are humans, intelligent items, item familiars, and awakened animals/plants/constructs.

Not that it matters for the sake of plot. You can always replace "your soul" with "portion of your soul" in the ritual-referencing text.

if you have an int, you're sentient.

[prufock]

if you have an int, you're sentient.
Again, [citation needed]. What's your source for this rule?

[RedMage125]

In other words, a vampire, being a sentient undead creature, has a soul.

Whether it's the base creature's soul is arguable, though.

This reminds me of the Legacy of Kain series and how vampires were made in that series.

[Mordaedil]

Again, [citation needed]. What's your source for this rule?

A Shield Guardian (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shieldGuardian.htm) has 0 Intelligence, and no soul. As is true with an animated object. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/animatedObject.htm)

The lowest Int for a sentient creature in all of D&D is one with 1 intelligence.

[prufock]

A Shield Guardian (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shieldGuardian.htm) has [...] no soul. As is true with an animated object. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/animatedObject.htm)
Where does it say that these things do not have souls? It seems to be implied, but I can't find any direct quote that this is true. However, it does bring up another group of creatures explicitly stated to be sentient: living constructs.

Regardless, none of this follows to the conclusion I'm requesting. It doesn't say they have no souls because they have no intelligence score, nor the other way around. And souls and sentience are not interchangeable.


The lowest Int for a sentient creature in all of D&D is one with 1 intelligence.
Which creature is this?

[Bohandas]

In some traditions you could turn a vampire back to normal by slaying the vampire that created them

[Zanos]

Where does it say that these things do not have souls? It seems to be implied, but I can't find any direct quote that this is true. However, it does bring up another group of creatures explicitly stated to be sentient: living constructs.

Regardless, none of this follows to the conclusion I'm requesting. It doesn't say they have no souls because they have no intelligence score, nor the other way around. And souls and sentience are not interchangeable.


Which creature is this?
From a rules standpoint, templates only change what they say they do, so the resulting Vampire is sentient if the base creature was. I'm not sure if there's general text for sentience defined anywhere. Are you arguing that vampires are non-sentient, or just playing devils advocate?

[prufock]

From a rules standpoint, templates only change what they say they do, so the resulting Vampire is sentient if the base creature was. I'm not sure if there's general text for sentience defined anywhere. Are you arguing that vampires are non-sentient, or just playing devils advocate?
I agree with your first statement, so at the very least vampires can be sentient, unless some other rule contradicts this.

As for my purpose, I'm really just trying to find out if sentience is a meaningful term in the rules, or if it's just loosely-written jargon. Its inclusion as a limiter on the spell indicates that it should be meaningful, and at least some creatures are specifically called out as sentient, but I can't find any real support for a definition. There are some allusions to it, and some things are implied, but nothing concrete. It doesn't need to be an outright definition, but a chain of rules language could also logically lead to a definition.

Generally, when a word isn't defined in-game, we should resort to real-world language. But sentience as a real-world concept isn't very well constructed. It's basically the ability to feel/sense/perceive. But this would suggest that it's more a Wisdom-based thing than Intelligence-based as people are claiming. Also using a real-world model would indicate that some of the non-intelligent vermin in the rules are in fact sentient. Even plants can be considered sentient depending on how broadly the definition is interpreted.

It's possible the developers conflated sentience with sapience, which would be more intelligence-based in the way the rules are written, but there's no way to know that. So unless there is some game rule governing it, sentience is left to us to interpret as we will, using our own knowledge and assumptions. That's fine, but it means discussing it in rule terms is a bit of a fruitless task (apart from a set list of creatures). For example, the discussion of humanoids eating sentient creatures comes up from time to time, but it's kind of pointless if we can't even determine which creatures are sentient. Using a classical definition, that could include animals, which are nearly universally eaten.

Also, I know I've taken a bit of a detour on this thread, but it came up initially as something that was relevant, I swear!

[Andezzar]

Unless you can somehow remove sentience from "humanlike intelligence" a creature with INT 3+ is sentient:
An animal has an Intelligence score of 1 or 2. A creature of humanlike intelligence has a score of at least 3.

Woops, I too confused sentience with sapience.

[Zanos]

-stuff-
Only thing I could find in core was some stuff in monster manual under ability score descriptions:

Wisdom: Reflects the creature’s level of perception and strength of will. A creature can have a very low Intelligence score and still be very wise. A Wisdom score of 3 or lower indicates a creature that is barely sentient. A score of 4 to 6 represents Wisdom equivalent to that of an unusually foolhardy or unperceptive human. A score of 16 to 18 reflects acute senses and unusual guile. A score of 20 or higher represents superhuman perceptiveness.

Probably not a great metric, as that would mean that constructs and mindless undead are technically sentient, as they have average wisdom scores.

[KillingAScarab]

I'm a little disappointed that the possibility of the player character wanting to stay a vampire (but not necessarily evil) hasn't been raised. If there is a master vampire (there doesn't have to be), the party would likely still need to destroy that before the player would have a choice, but not one link to the Savage Progressions vampire template class (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20030824a)? You aren't undead until the 7th level, which would allow plenty of time for drama over the change. If the player does seek and find a cure which is different from being killed and raised, retraining away levels of the template class could be appropriate.

As for not turning evil, if you feel action must be taken to prevent that there could be a quest to find someone who can cast the attonement spell who wouldn't rather try to destroy the PC.

[Zanos]

Playing as a vampire would be cool. I didn't suggest it because the tone of the original post was such that the entire vampirism thing was done by the DM as a curse, implying the PC was of an alignment that would not want to be a vampire.

Also, it's mechanically terrible.

[Aeson]

Sure, mechanically, the cleric achieving level 9 is all that's needed, but a reasonably-well-paced campaign of finding The Secret could have the IC discovery coincide roughly with the mechanical achievement of that level.
Mechanically, I'm pretty sure that you need the cleric to get to level 13, at least unless you have some other way to get to seventh-level clerical spells; Raise Dead cannot resurrect creatures who have been made into undead creatures and does not have the "unless the undead creature is first destroyed" clause of Resurrection, and, last I checked, vampires counted as undead creatures.

[Bohandas]

The second sample rebuild quest in Player's Handbook 2 deals specifically with converting undead back into living creatures (PHBII pg.203, The Necrotic Cradle)

[prufock]

Probably not a great metric, as that would mean that constructs and mindless undead are technically sentient, as they have average wisdom scores.
Strange and contradictory. If wisdom score = sentient, all creatures are actually sentient, since anything with a nonexistent wisdom is an object, not a creature. I think I'll have to chalk this one up as one of those grey areas that aren't well-defined in the rules.

[Karl Aegis]

What is the problem with being a vampire? They do weird things off-screen. Plenty of characters do weird things off-screen. In the mean time they have to spend their days being an adventurer: Going deep into dungeons to find great loots. Isn't that the point of the game? Never seeing daylight and getting the loots?