Vampire charm defense

[Cutter]

Hello folks,

I apologise if this has been asked before.....I tried searching the forums but potentially my search-fu is off today...as I can't even google a satisfactory answer on this today it seems.

Short version: Our DM is pitting us against a powerful vampire in our next game. We know based on intel we've gathered it will be himself and a number of undead under his command.

My concern is regarding his Vampire charm.
Our meatsticks (barbarian and fighter) will have next to zero chance to pass a Wisdom saving throw against it.
As a Bard I could counter-charm....and basically nothing else during the whole fight but bonus actions and movement. And even then that just gives my team two chances to fail the darned save.

So I was looking for ways to get around this mechanic....considering there's four of us in the party and RAW says he can charm one person per round while his pals beat us down...effectively (if we're unlucky in our rolls) charming all of us in 24 seconds.

Then I looked at the monster manual description of the Vampire ability.

A) "The vampire targets one humanoid it can see within 30 feet of it."....and
B) "If the target can see the vampire, the target must succeed on a DC 17 Wisdom saving throw against this magic or be charmed by the vampire."

So...A) If I have greater invisibility on before the fight....he can't /see/ me right? Sure with a good Perception check he could /detect/ where I am for the purposes of AoE attacks or disadvantage in melee....but he wouldn't be able to /see/ me....right? Thus I can't be charmed?

But more to the point:
B) So....what's to prevent a character from running in on his turn, hitting the vampire....then closing his eyes? Effectively making it so the target doesn't /see/ the vampire when Mr. Fang tries to charm us?
Even with Legendary actions they go at the end of the players turn right? So...end of my turn...I close my eyes. Condition B) is also negated. Target does not /see/ the vampire.

Is it that simple?

Even if say you rule that the charm is an 'always on' effect and that the Vampire can target you if you look at him during /your/ turn.....just fight him the whole fight with your eyes closed?
Sure....impose disadvantage on the player's attack and Mr. Fang gets advantage against you as per the Blinded condition...but that's still better than us not being able to attack him at all if you get charmed?

....and the Barbarian's reckless attack was going to give Mr. Fang advantage on attacks against him anyway....Barbarian reckless advantage to hit cancelled out by disadvantage on being blinded?

Is this the easiest way around this powerful ability?

Thoughts are appreciated.

Thanks!

[Breashios]

I have not looked at Vampires in this edition, but if what you say is correct, I agree with your evaluation. Since he must see you, invisibility could work. Don't forget, he could have a means of seeing invisible targets.

If you are closing your eyes (similar to sealing your ears with wax to avoid hearing the harpy's song), you should likewise avoid the charm. You do have a corresponding penalty for doing so, but if that is your decision, I would certainly allow you to avoid it if I were DM.

Vampires usually have multiple ways to hurt you. He will just have to get you another way.

[Dalebert]

You could try some elaborate plans or you could just, you know, cast Protection from Evil & Good on them to make them immune for the duration. *shrug*

I don't suppose anyone has the Icon of Ravenloft? 30 ft radius constant Protection from Evil and Good against fiends and undead without even attuning. Nice!

[SharkForce]

i would not allow you to close your eyes only on the vampire's turn. we're using a turn-based system to represent a continuously-flowing battle with everyone acting simultaneously.

if you want to just keep your eyes shut for the entire round (taking disadvantage on your own attack rolls), you can get protection. otherwise, you're at risk.

that said, have you considered protection from evil?

or, as a perhaps more acceptable solution... just cast darkness, or fog cloud, or pyrotechnics (as a bonus, no concentration required), or sleet storm, or anything else that makes everyone unable to see. now nobody can see, so everyone has disadvantage to hit + advantage to hit, which equals out. well, except that being a vampire, he probably has giant bat minions that will see just fine, but still, it's much better to have a somewhat harder time with the bats to have a much easier time with the vampire :P

[Chugger]

Don't go in with invis as your only defense. He might be a caster vamp or have a magic item that lets him see invis. The DM could wing that on the spot if he realizes he made a mistake, so to speak, to allow his vamp to get you.

Prot from evil is good. Be careful if the vamp can dispel or has an ally that can dispel.

No Pal aura?

A lot of the tank guides warn about this and suggest taking resil wis as a feat.

[Tanarii]

Then I looked at the monster manual description of the Vampire ability.That ... seems like kinda poor form. Not very proper old chum, wot wot?


So...A) If I have greater invisibility on before the fight....he can't /see/ me right? Sure with a good Perception check he could /detect/ where I am for the purposes of AoE attacks or disadvantage in melee....but he wouldn't be able to /see/ me....right? Thus I can't be charmed?Yes.


But more to the point:
B) So....what's to prevent a character from running in on his turn, hitting the vampire....then closing his eyes? Effectively making it so the target doesn't /see/ the vampire when Mr. Fang tries to charm us?
Even with Legendary actions they go at the end of the players turn right? So...end of my turn...I close my eyes. Condition B) is also negated. Target does not /see/ the vampire.

Is it that simple?IMO if closing your eyes prevented you from seeing things that easily, there'd be rules for it in several places. This is a constantly attempted trick with Medusa as well. My feeling has always been (even when the rules expressly disagreed with me in earlier editions) that if a character tried this in the middle of combat, it's very likely they'd inadvertently open their eyes without intending to. If someone wants their PC to blindfold themselves so they are blinded for the entire fight, that's a different matter of course.

[Danielqueue1]

That ... seems like kinda poor form. Not very proper old chum, wot wot?


agreed. I find that when players are pulling out the monster manual to try to metagame things that closely, DMs have a tendency to homebrew the monsters to deal with such strategies. the "werewolves" were actually a circle of moon druids that were miffed about people disrespecting their holy sites. I wish I could bottle the DM's glare when A player read from the monster manual out loud in session about how the "werewolves" were supposed to be dead, what their AC was supposed to be, and how his silvered weapon should be affecting them more. (we don't play with him anymore.)

but on the topic; bardic inspiration is a beautiful thing that can boost people's saving throws. and you can give it to the people with poor saves before the vampire targets them. protection from evil and good is perfect for this. having a cleric cast bless on the party can get those saves up even further if you have one. prepared bard cleric and paladin in a party can make saving throw abilities particularly difficult to land. 1d20+Ability mod+Paladin CHA mod+ 1d4(bless)+1dX(bardic inspiration)

[Chugger]

If you don't have magic weapons and a way to land radiant damage each round (multiple sources - some should go in w/ lots of holy water), you will struggle w/ that vamp.

They regen in any round where they don't take radiant damage.

[Joe dirt]

Why not recruit the angry mob? if U could convince the locals of the danger I am sure the fire and pitchfork mob would join in the fight. As a bard u are the "face"?

[Battlebooze]

Why not recruit the angry mob? if U could convince the locals of the danger I am sure the fire and pitchfork mob would join in the fight. As a bard u are the "face"?

And, if the fight goes bad, claim the peasants are a blood bribe! Then try to sneak out while the vampire is having a snack.

[lebefrei]

This whole thread is so disappointing. Why can't you just play the game, why do you need to come metagame this fight here? You are asking for strategies on how to cheese a fight with out of game knowledge, after looking at the monster manual. Ugh, I wish your DM would stumble on this and completely change the monster just to mess with you.

I don't like "playing against" my players, but I hate when I've realized they have metagamed to get around some fight. I don't tend to keep players around that do this, frankly, and it's a shame to see. Like another said above, this forces me to homebrew monsters (not my preference) to get around metagaming.

Hey, the MM isn't for players, if you don't DM you shouldn't be messing around with it. And if you want to talk strategy, I recommend doing it with your group as part of normal play, and making rolls for knowledge or investigating. It's more fun that way, more of a mystery, and not cheating, which this thread completely is.

[Pelle]

B) the latest comic is relevant to this question :)

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1103.html

[shuangwucanada]

Textbook metagaming...

[Dalebert]

I don't know. I know without the MM that a vampire can charm you if you meet their gaze. I know it from stories and crap. Wouldn't stories of vampires be at least as common in a world that actually has them? Wouldn't adventurers in particular be more likely to have heard such stories than other folk? Maybe they're more likely to research such things. Maybe they became adventurers because they were privy to many such stories and it inspired them. *shrug* I think some folks get a little too worked up about metagaming.

But I get that actually looking up in the MM to get the exact specifics of how the power works and how to get around it is a bit much.

[Easy_Lee]

I imagine it going something like this:

You: I close my eyes
DM: Okay. The vampire uses his charm on you.
You: he can't! I have my eyes closed so I can't see him, and that means his vampire charm won't work.
DM: Oh yeah? How do you know that?
You: uh...

Go on, tell the DM you metagamed. I'm sure that will prevent him from dropping rocks on you, or just houseruling that vampire charm works anyway.

Now, strategy number two:

You: so guys, I heard vampires can charm people. Whenever I charm people (via the spell), I have to be able to see the person . So, if I drop darkness on the room, he shouldn't be able to charm us. We won't be able to see him, but he can't see us either, so it's an even playing field.

Maybe try that instead.

[Tanarii]

I don't know. I know without the MM that a vampire can charm you if you meet their gaze. I know it from stories and crap. Wouldn't stories of vampires be at least as common in a world that actually has them? Wouldn't adventurers in particular be more likely to have heard such stories than other folk? Maybe they're more likely to research such things. Maybe they became adventurers because they were privy to many such stories and it inspired them. *shrug* I think some folks get a little too worked up about metagaming.To be clear: I agree. The player knowledge of monster abilities "metagaming" problem is usually, to paraphrase Angry DM's 5000 word article on it, a whole lot of AGRLE BARLE.

I assume that some players will be D&D nerds enough, or DMs themselves, they'll have read the MM. Possibly enough to have have some rather esoteric details memorized.

I mean, it's reasonable to assume most PCs know trolls burn and vampire charm people, even without fore-knowledge of specific enemies.

Ultimately it's on the DM to make an encounter challenging, but not based on 'gotcha' surprises from the enemy, especially ones that have generally well known abilities. And when they have fore-knowledge of specific enemies, IMO it's also on the players to have their Pcs do some in-game research when they know they'll be facing specific enemies.


But I get that actually looking up in the MM to get the exact specifics of how the power works and how to get around it is a bit much.Thats what set me back a bit. I was just like ... woah there.

But the OP opens up with that they know they are fighting a Vampire. So I'd expect at the minimum the players to work with the DM to have their PCs do some in-game research. For all we know, the DM just said "go read the MM".

[Dalebert]

I use the carrot vs. the stick approach to metagaming. I don't care if you know something. If you want to say your character knows a useful bit of knowledge, that will obviously help you. But if you want to roleplay that your character doesn't know something and you act on that in good faith, e.g. use Ray of Frost instead of Firebolt on a troll, I might award inspiration.

Unless your character is known for being really dumb a non-worldly, it's just as meta-gamey to say your character hasn't heard the same lore as you as it is to say he has. If your character is a bookworm wizard with genius-level intelligence or a Jack-of-all-trades bard, it would be kind of weird that you knew some factual thing about the world they live in that they didn't. Other than extreme cases, like knowing a specific trap in a specific dungeon because you've DMed it, I really don't get hung up on metagame knowledge.

[Tanarii]

Unless your character is known for being really dumb a non-worldly, it's just as meta-gamey to say your character hasn't heard the same lore as you as it is to say he has.
Yeah. Generally the far bigger problem with player knowledge vs PC knowledge is making sure the players have all the knowledge the Pcs should have. Not the other way around.

Especially when they don't want long winded monologues from the DM about world setting stuff, or to read a book about it.

[Cutter]

Cheers folks!

Sadly, with a party makeup of a barbarian, fighter, bard and ranger.....we don't have access to 'Protection from Evil'. Which would make this apparently a much easier encounter.
As the bard I don't think I have anything in my spell list such as darkness, or fog cloud, or pyrotechnics, or sleet storm....but i'll check with the Ranger to see what she has.

But more than likely we're probably going to be going into this one blind and hope for the best.....

Thanks to those who provided positive feedback!

[Eragon123]

Thanks to those who provided positive feedback!

I feel like he's snubbing those who said it's poor form to look in the Monster Manual.

[Dalebert]

I feel like he's snubbing those who said it's poor form to look in the Monster Manual.

Actually, I think he was insinuating something about your mom.

[Finieous]

Cheers folks!

Sadly, with a party makeup of a barbarian, fighter, bard and ranger.....we don't have access to 'Protection from Evil'. Which would make this apparently a much easier encounter.
As the bard I don't think I have anything in my spell list such as darkness, or fog cloud, or pyrotechnics, or sleet storm....but i'll check with the Ranger to see what she has.


Quest for an instrument of the bards, then go after the vampire.

Kinda weird bards don't have protection from evil and good on their spell list, actually.

[JackPhoenix]

Quest for an instrument of the bards, then go after the vampire.

Kinda weird bards don't have protection from evil and good on their spell list, actually.

What do you mean? Bards have every spell on their spell list. Sometimes before the class it is intended for.