Can a vampire become a Dragonborn of Bahamut?

[eyebreaker7]

Assuming (s)he is somehow good, say a helm of opposite alignment or something. If they undergo the ritual and become a Dragonborn what would they lose and what would they keep?

"Other Racial Traits: You lose all other racial traits of your original race, including bonus feats, skill bonuses, attack bonuses, save bonuses, spell-like abilities, and so forth. Two specific instances warrant clarification. "

What's considered racial for a vampire? Just his/her starting/original race (in this case a goblin)? The vampire is a template so I'm guessing he doesn't lose much? Would he just be a good aligned dragonborn vampire with all of it's abilities?

[daremetoidareyo]

The racial abilities are overwritten by the dragonborn template, but the stat mods remain along with the d12 hp and absence of con score

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The racial traits granted by the undead type stay, too, so you get all those immunities and the vulnerability to turning and control (via control undead and similar) that come with being unalive, but not the other benefits and penalties that come with being a vampire.

Honestly, as with most races and templates that come prior to becoming dragonborn, it's a very poor fit.

Now, you can have a dragonborn that later becomes a vampire, and that would work just fine, although you're likely to lose your Good alignment and thus Bahamut's favor. Even if you were to later become Good, he doesn't strike me as someone who much cares for undead abominations, so it depends on how your DM plays him as to whether you can work your way back into his good graces or not.

[Nifft]

Note that by the rules, your type is Humanoid, and also by the rules your type doesn't change.

This is functional if your type is constrained to Humanoid before you start the transformation; otherwise it's dysfunctional.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Note that by the rules, your type is Humanoid, and also by the rules your type doesn't change.

This is functional if your type is constrained to Humanoid before you start the transformation; otherwise it's dysfunctional.

Absolutely untrue (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070112a), Dragonborn was written under the assumption that only humanoids would take it, but that doesn't state that becoming a dragonborn changes your type to humanoid.

[Nifft]

Absolutely untrue (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070112a), Dragonborn was written under the assumption that only humanoids would take it, but that doesn't state that becoming a dragonborn changes your type to humanoid.

Sage Advice is now supposed to be accepted as Errata?

When did that sanity-shattering change occur?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Sage Advice is now supposed to be accepted as Errata?

When did that sanity-shattering change occur?

It's not sanity-shattering, and it's not errata, it's simply a clarification on confusing wording. It explains that the statement that a dragonborn is a humanoid doesn't mean it always turns the creature into a humanoid, because the other text already said your type is unchanged.

[Nifft]

It's not sanity-shattering, and it's not errata, it's simply a clarification on confusing wording. It explains that the statement that a dragonborn is a humanoid doesn't mean it always turns the creature into a humanoid, because the other text already said your type is unchanged.

That's not a clarification, though.

It contradicts some actual rules text.

Errata is how they do that sort of thing.

[torrasque666]

That's not a clarification, though.

It contradicts some actual rules text.

Errata is how they do that sort of thing.

The actual rules text contradicts itself.


A dragonborn combines some of the racial traits of her original race and her new form. Only those traits gained from transformation are given here; see also the Mechanics of Rebirth sidebar....Humanoid (dragonblood): Dragonborn are humanoids with the dragonblood subtype and any other subtypes they had before undergoing the Rite of Rebirth. For all effects related to race, a dragonborn is considered a dragon and a member of her original race.


Type, Subtype, and Race: You retain your original type and subtypes, gaining the dragonblood subtype. You still count as a member of your original race for the purpose of any effect or prerequisite that depends on race.

So which is it? Per the text, their type is Humanoid, but also retains the original type and subtypes with no mention of Augmented anything. And you can't have two types, which puts the text itself at odds with itself when it comes to any non-humanoid taking the Rite of Rebirth. The only thing that the two entries agree on is retaining subtypes and gaining the dragonblood subtypes.

[Nifft]

So which is it? Per the text, their type is Humanoid, but also retains the original type and subtypes with no mention of Augmented anything. And you can't have two types, which puts the text itself at odds with itself when it comes to any non-humanoid taking the Rite of Rebirth. The only thing that the two entries agree on is retaining subtypes and gaining the dragonblood subtypes.

Answered above:


Note that by the rules, your type is Humanoid, and also by the rules your type doesn't change.

This is functional if your type is constrained to Humanoid before you start the transformation; otherwise it's dysfunctional.

There's no contradiction if and only if your original type was Humanoid.

It's a poor way to write a rule, as you need to think like a logician to understand it, but once you understand the implicit constraint it is consistent.


=== === ===

That said, I would personally allow a Warforged Dragonborn, because it's freakin' awesome to be a dragon-robot, and also because there's no particular balance issue above what a Warforged would bring in itself.

I would allow it not because the rules say I should -- they don't -- but because I don't see much of a balance problem in allowing this exception.

[Remuko]

i think that line about dragonborn in the text being "humanoid" meant such in general parlance, not in game definition. humanoid not Humanoid.

but thats just me throwing a possibility out there without doing any real research into it, so take with a grain of salt.

[KillianHawkeye]

i think that line about dragonborn in the text being "humanoid" meant such in general parlance, not in game definition. humanoid not Humanoid.

but thats just me throwing a possibility out there without doing any real research into it, so take with a grain of salt.

That doesn't work because it uses the notation Humanoid(dragonblood) and goes on to immediately mention the dragonblood subtype and the keeping of whatever other subtypes they had previously. It's clearly referring to the Humanoid creature type in that sentence.

[Remuko]

That doesn't work because it uses the notation Humanoid(dragonblood) and goes on to immediately mention the dragonblood subtype and the keeping of whatever other subtypes they had previously. It's clearly referring to the Humanoid creature type in that sentence.

yeah rereading it i see that now. i still like my interpretation as it fits with the latter bit about keeping your typing etc that implies you dont need to be humanoid tho.

[Doctor Despair]

That doesn't work because it uses the notation Humanoid(dragonblood) and goes on to immediately mention the dragonblood subtype and the keeping of whatever other subtypes they had previously. It's clearly referring to the Humanoid creature type in that sentence.

That it creates a rules dysfunction doesn't PRECLUDE non-evil non-humanoids with an int of 3 from taking it, however, right? It just makes it the DM's problem to figure out how they want it to work. You're clearly eligible by the prerequisites listed.