Does a ring of sustenance work for a vampires desire for blood?

[eyebreaker7]

Sustenance
This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep. The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.

It says "life-sustaining" but a vampire isn't "alive" so would the ring work for it's need for blood?

[Tzardok]

Probably not. A vampire has no metabolism. It (probably, depends on GM) doesn't need the blood to continue it's existence. It just drinks and draws power from it.

[Bayar]

Sustenance
This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep. The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.

It says "life-sustaining" but a vampire isn't "alive" so would the ring work for it's need for blood?

The answer is "Ask your DM".

This question has been posted around the web numerous times. Vampires from the Monster Manual I have a blood drain ability but nowhere in their rules does it say they NEED to drink blood. There are variant rules for dietary needs of various undead in Libris Mortis, but those are just that, Variant Rules. Thus, the DM has the final say if vampires actually require to feed.

If they require to feed, then the DM has to rule if a ring of sustenance is enough to satisfy the hunger of a vampire.

[Ettina]

At our table, we ruled that certain creatures, like vampires and illithid, have a more metaphysical hunger they need to feed, and a magic item designed to sustain ordinary humanoids and such can't give them the kind of sustenance they need. Vampires likely feed on the inherent energy within living creatures, while illithid feed on psychic energy generated by a mind thinking and experiencing things.

[MR_Anderson]

Sustenance
This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep. The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.

It says "life-sustaining" but a vampire isn't "alive" so would the ring work for it's need for blood?

If the DM is running straight D&D Vampires, I would argue that it does not work, because they are not “Living.”

However, if they are running a different version or variant of Vampires then maybe.


Probably not. A vampire has no metabolism. It (probably, depends on GM) doesn't need the blood to continue it's existence. It just drinks and draws power from it.

The ring isn’t limited by a metabolism need.


At our table, we ruled that certain creatures, like vampires and illithid, have a more metaphysical hunger they need to feed, and a magic item designed to sustain ordinary humanoids and such can't give them the kind of sustenance they need. Vampires likely feed on the inherent energy within living creatures, while illithid feed on psychic energy generated by a mind thinking and experiencing things.

Vampires are questionable because of the “Life-sustaining” power and whether or not the Vampire is “Living” but a Mind Flayer would be sustained because it is Living and the ring does provide mind rejuvenation.


The answer is "Ask your DM".

Best Answer

[RandomPeasant]

By RAW, a Vampire has no mechanical need to feed. Draining the CON out of someone gives the vampire temp HP, but it's not required for them to continue functioning. As such, a ring of sustenance would not do anything, for the same reason that it wouldn't help someone deal with social isolation or boredom.

[Tzardok]

The ring isn’t limited by a metabolism need.


How do you know?

[Psyren]

Pathfinder specifically has rules for this:


A carnivorous or otherwise life-draining undead may safely go a number of days equal to its Hit Dice without a dose of its preferred meal before it starts to feel the effects of hunger. Each additional day after this grace period, the undead must make a Will save (DC 10 + 1/2 the undead creature’s Hit Dice, + 1 for each previous check). If the undead creature fails its save, it enters withdrawal and begins to take penalties according to the Withdrawal Penalties table (see page 23). It must continue to save each day until it feeds again. Additional failed checks increase the penalties as shown on the table. Feats and abilities that affect mortal hunger (such as Endurance or a ring of sustenance) do not apply to vampire hunger.

3.5 has rules for "feeding" undead too, but they are a variant sidebar in LM, and they don't specify the effects of the ring, however I'm inclined to use the "life-sustaining" clause as reason to deny it.

[SangoProduction]

I'll just echo what's already been said:

For my games: It's more of a metaphysical compulsion - a curse of sorts, inherent to the being of vampires - more than a literal need for nourishment.

[unseenmage]

Does your Ring of Sustenance feed your tapeworms?
Your lice? Your ticks? Your symbionts?

[Zanos]

Libris Mortis has specific rules for how undead hunger works. It's divided into two categories, a mental 'inescapable craving' and a more physiological 'diet dependent'. It's important to note that starvation can't actually kill undead that have either of these types of feeding, they merely become inert until fed once again.Vampires actually have both an 'inescapable craving' for life force, which they feed by draining levels, and are 'diet dependent' on blood. I'd personally rule that a ring of sustenance would take care of the blood since it's sort of a metabolic function, but not the need to drain life force, since that's more of a mental addiction.

However a DM could rule either way. Even if you consider a vampire 'alive', no amount of starvation can actually cause it die. Feeding doesn't sustain their 'life', it sustains their mobility.

[MR_Anderson]

How do you know?

It doesn’t say it, it appears to specifically be written broadly to cover any type of life-sustaining nourishment.


Does your Ring of Sustenance feed your tapeworms?
Your lice? Your ticks? Your symbionts?

Lice or Ticks...no, they are grappling opponents.


Tapeworms or Symbiont...possibly.

I would lean towards no on the tapeworm and yes on the symbiont, but each specific symbiont situation would need to be a DM decision.

[SangoProduction]

Does your Ring of Sustenance feed your tapeworms?
Your lice? Your ticks? Your symbionts?

Depends on how Ring of Sustenance feeds you. Does it just magic the nutrition directly into your cells? Then tapeworms and similar parasites would probable starve, if they are a type that consumes your food. The ring doesn't heal you from damage, so it doesn't help with parasites that drain from you.
And... do symbionts need food? Never saw any hint that they did.

[Zanos]

And... do symbionts need food? Never saw any hint that they did.
Some symbiots specifically damage a point of a given ability score as their daily food, but unless otherwise specified they would need the same amount of food as any creature of their size category, no?

[loky1109]

Does your Ring of Sustenance feed your tapeworms?

I think, you can swallow one ring to put it on tapeworm.

[daremetoidareyo]

I think, you can swallow one ring to put it on tapeworm.

I mean it’s all fun an games until they nope out of your body, get awakened and create a protection racket, threatening to infect anyone who doesn’t get them more rings of sustenance so they can free their family in the old country

[Maat Mons]

I've played with people who don't even believe that a Ring of Sustenance eliminates a human's desire for food. They argue that the ring keeps you alive and healthy, but you still experience increasingly severe hunger pangs the longer you go without food.

[Psyren]

I've played with people who don't even believe that a Ring of Sustenance eliminates a human's desire for food. They argue that the ring keeps you alive and healthy, but you still experience increasingly severe hunger pangs the longer you go without food.

If a GM tried to tell me that bit of fluff, I'd say fine - but the instant he tried to do anything mechanical to my character based on that hunger is when I would grind the game to a screeching halt (or leave.) Because the ring says nothing about any kinds of penalties or drawbacks from not eating continuing to apply.

"Overwhelmed with feelings of hunger, your character reaches for the-" "No."
"As the hunger pangs intensify, you feel a sudden bout of dizzi-" "No."
"Your stomach growls loudly, alerting the-" "No."

[SangoProduction]

I've played with people who don't even believe that a Ring of Sustenance eliminates a human's desire for food. They argue that the ring keeps you alive and healthy, but you still experience increasingly severe hunger pangs the longer you go without food.

I'd call that a "Ring of Fasting" more than a "Ring of Sustenance." (Though I'd certainly find it an interesting, cheap magic item that you'd probably find at a monastery.)

But a lot of people could really use it in many countries where the rate of deaths from heart disease are double digits times as much as from any other disease. Yes, even that one.

Perhaps even a "Ring of Desire to Exercise" would be of use.

[Jay R]

I would make a ruling based on the specific situation, including who the vampire is, how it would affect the PCs, etc. What would be best for the game?

But in general. since my players will never be vampires, and since the PC-affecting aspects of the vampire would not be significantly affected, my NPC vampire would not ever find out, and I would never make the ruling.

When it is not necessary to make a ruling, it is usually best to not make a ruling.

[MR_Anderson]

I've played with people who don't even believe that a Ring of Sustenance eliminates a human's desire for food. They argue that the ring keeps you alive and healthy, but you still experience increasingly severe hunger pangs the longer you go without food.

I don’t have a problem with people still desiring food, because Chicago Deep-Dish Pizza is a thing, but seriously the ring helps the mind so it would help against irrational desires that aren’t needed. I’m not hungry when I am sustained, thus it is okay for me to go shopping.

[Zanos]

I would make a ruling based on the specific situation, including who the vampire is, how it would affect the PCs, etc. What would be best for the game?

But in general. since my players will never be vampires, and since the PC-affecting aspects of the vampire would not be significantly affected, my NPC vampire would not ever find out, and I would never make the ruling.

When it is not necessary to make a ruling, it is usually best to not make a ruling.
I think it's an important thing to consider when designing a setting for verisimilitude whether or not a relatively inexpensive magic item can eliminate the most iconic and horrific aspect of vampirism. Both how NPC vampires act and how vampires are generally viewed by the setting would change, imo, if fairly basic magic item makes it so they no longer have any need to prey on mortals.

[RandomPeasant]

Well, that's not unique to the ring. Vampire's blood drinking does CON drain, which can be healed by restoration. So Vampires don't need to go around draining local peasants dry, they just need to be on good terms with the local church and have a couple of Renfields who volunteer. Spell-Stitched Vampires can even supply restoration themselves, as it is a Conjuration spell.

[Zanos]

Well, that's not unique to the ring. Vampire's blood drinking does CON drain, which can be healed by restoration. So Vampires don't need to go around draining local peasants dry, they just need to be on good terms with the local church and have a couple of Renfields who volunteer. Spell-Stitched Vampires can even supply restoration themselves, as it is a Conjuration spell.
I agree, although I'd argue that setting up an arrangement with a sympathetic church to provide a relatively expensive service(380gp restoration every day to stave off vampiric hunger, per libris mortis, plus whatever you're paying the saps getting eaten) is going to more substantially restrict what vampires can comfortably come to such arrangement. More so than a one time expense of a relatively common magic item that requires no collaboration other than walking into a store and purchasing a common item. And even a metropolis only has a half dozen clerics capable of casting restoration.

So if you want a setting where vampires who aren't complete monsters go substantially out of their way to maintain their income so their needs don't actively result in people's deaths, and they have complex arrangements with the small handful of individuals in the world capable of assisting them, you probably shouldn't let rings of sustenance stand in for vampire hunger.

[Bronk]

By RAW, a Vampire has no mechanical need to feed. Draining the CON out of someone gives the vampire temp HP, but it's not required for them to continue functioning. As such, a ring of sustenance would not do anything, for the same reason that it wouldn't help someone deal with social isolation or boredom.

Looking through the Monster Manual, it doesn't even look like they have a desire for blood at all! Sounds more like a hobby, only a necessity if they want to create spawn.

[RandomPeasant]

I agree, although I'd argue that setting up an arrangement with a sympathetic church to provide a relatively expensive service(380gp restoration every day to stave off vampiric hunger, per libris mortis, plus whatever you're paying the saps getting eaten) is going to more substantially restrict what vampires can comfortably come to such arrangement.

A few things to consider.

First, the way restoration works, you can drain the same guy repeatedly. It tops him up every time, so you can feed as many vampires as you'd want off the one guy in the city with a fetish for it.

Second, you don't really need a sympathetic church, just a not-explicitly-hostile one. Doctrinaire Pelorists probably aren't going to help with the care and feeding of vampires, but if you've got some priests of Hextor or whoever, you can likely get them to do it. I'd expect that what'd happen is the government would maintain a vampire army (because vampires are seriously hard core) and would just pay local priests for healing.

Third, vampires are all at least 5th level, and probably higher because they're immortal and damn hard to kill. There probably aren't that many low-level vampire chumps who can't either make the money themselves or get someone to offer them a good enough salary to pay for it. Basically, vampires are the nobility, not peasants or even rank-and-file soldiers, and nobility had a pretty easy time getting priests to work for them.

Honestly, the big problem with this setup is that it's not intrusive enough. You really want your vampire state to be calling for a Blood Tithe, but if you're feeding vampires off restoration, that won't happen.


More so than a one time expense of a relatively common magic item that requires no collaboration other than walking into a store and purchasing a common item. And even a metropolis only has a half dozen clerics capable of casting restoration.

I mean, they sell Eternal Wands of restoration in stores too.

[Zanos]

A few things to consider.

First, the way restoration works, you can drain the same guy repeatedly. It tops him up every time, so you can feed as many vampires as you'd want off the one guy in the city with a fetish for it.
Vampires need both blood and life force, so you would have to restoration the livestock whenever its in danger of dying from level drain. While it's true that you might be able to get more than 1 feeding per restoration, and you might be able to get a guy with a few HD to volunteer for it, I doubt anyone reasonably powerful is going to go for that kind of arrangement without substantial compensation, reducing the efficiency of your restorations. Too much level drain converts people into wights, after all.


Second, you don't really need a sympathetic church, just a not-explicitly-hostile one. Doctrinaire Pelorists probably aren't going to help with the care and feeding of vampires, but if you've got some priests of Hextor or whoever, you can likely get them to do it. I'd expect that what'd happen is the government would maintain a vampire army (because vampires are seriously hard core) and would just pay local priests for healing.
I am not sure that a Vampire that cares enough about hurting people to set up this expensive and inconvenient arrangement is going to be particularly keen about patronizing a church of Hextor. I think you'd have better luck with some kind of mercantile deity for the ethos to fit. But my point was just that you aren't guaranteed to have a cleric of sufficient level that will actually do this for a vampire in the majority of even very large cities.


Third, vampires are all at least 5th level, and probably higher because they're immortal and damn hard to kill. There probably aren't that many low-level vampire chumps who can't either make the money themselves or get someone to offer them a good enough salary to pay for it. Basically, vampires are the nobility, not peasants or even rank-and-file soldiers, and nobility had a pretty easy time getting priests to work for them.
5th level isn't tremendous but it combined with a vampires natural abilities means that yeah, any vampire is going to be a good amount above any normal person. However, ~400gp every few days is a lot of money. Assuming we need to restoration our livestock once per three days(if they don't mind walking around with negative levels), that's still nearly 50k gold per year, which is more than the entire wealth of a 10th level PC, and more than the wealth of a 14th level NPC. Per year.


Honestly, the big problem with this setup is that it's not intrusive enough. You really want your vampire state to be calling for a Blood Tithe, but if you're feeding vampires off restoration, that won't happen.
Weirdly enough I don't think anything actually prevents vampires from feeding on animals, so a pragmatic vampire state could probably just eat cows.


I mean, they sell Eternal Wands of restoration in stores too.
No they don't, it isn't a 3rd level or lower arcane spell for any class.

[Bayar]

Lesser restoration is though.

[Psyren]

Lesser restoration is though.

That's useless for vampires as it does nothing about con drain or level drain.

[Maat Mons]

It is possible to put Restoration into an Eternal Wand, but it's convoluted. Restoration is a 3rd-level spell on the Healer spells list. But Eternal Wands only store arcane spells. So you still need some way to port it from one spell list to another.

If you're going to be doing this on any scale though, it would be more economical to instead by a Bed of Restoration (Stronghold Builder's Guide, p71). That's a hefty 38,000 gp, but it gets you Restoration on one person every three rounds.

Actually, if you're going to be ambitious, I'd spring for a Platform of Healing (Draconomicon, p85). It's a whopping 78,000 gp, sure, but it gives you a full-on Heal spell as fast as you can get people onto and off of it. At that point, you probably don't even need to pay anyone anymore.

"Ah, so you've been diagnosed with cancer, but these so-called 'Good' churches won't help you unless you pay them 4-years-worth of a common man's income? Well us vampires have your back! We'll get you fixed up good as new, and it won't cost you a dime. Just a smidgen of blood, and you'll be getting that blood right back anyway, because we'll heal you again straight away."

Heck, go all-in and buy some Everful Larders (Stronghold Builder's Guide, p76). You could found a city where everyone has free food, free housing, and free healing. All they need to do is occasionally help sustain their undead benefactors. Not that you might want to keep a 9th-level Bard around, so you can safely level-drain 1st-level Commoners.



Anyway, is it really necessary to maintain this lore of vampirism's immortality and power coming at terrible cost when the game has plenty of other ways to gain immortality and power without such cost already?

[Zanos]

I know it's possible to convert spells via shenanigans, Wyrm Wizard or Dragonblood Spell-Pact plus some other stuff, but I think it's pretty fair to assume niche abuses of relatively rare spells and class features isn't typical. Or at least, isn't assumed under all the other rules for constructing magic items.

And all of those solutions cost tens of thousands of gold. Could a cabal of wealthy vampires do such a thing? Sure. Is it guaranteed, or even likely, that a group of obligatory Evil predatory undead that love to devour the living will set aside their differences to create a health utopia for the living when it's pretty trivial for them to just snack on commoners? I'm skeptical.

I call out the ring of sustenance only because it's extremely cheap(for a magic item) and requires no particularly shenanigans or complicated plots. You buy one, you're done.

[RandomPeasant]

Vampires need both blood and life force, so you would have to restoration the livestock whenever its in danger of dying from level drain.

Is that some extra rule thing from Libris Mortis? Because the MM lists the blood drain as just doing CON damage, and frankly if the rules say vampires can't survive just by drinking blood, I'm inclined to call those rules dumb and ignore them. Vampires drink blood. They don't also have to punch people in the face (I acknowledge that this is not a RAW argument before anyone dogpiles me).


I am not sure that a Vampire that cares enough about hurting people to set up this expensive and inconvenient arrangement is going to be particularly keen about patronizing a church of Hextor.

The vampire doesn't have to care about not hurting people as a terminal value. In fact, I would not a expect a system like this to arise from such motivations. Instead, I would expect it to arise from self interest. A vampire that feeds by grabbing random people in alleys and guzzling their lifeblood is not a part of society. They're a predator, and they survive only insofar as society is unable to destroy them. But a vampire who gets their blood from the Church of Hextor Blood Drive, which is organized because they fight in defense of their nation or use their magical powers on behalf of the people, is a part of society. When vampire hunters show up, the peasants aren't going to shelter them and tell them about the back entrance into the vampire's castle, they're going to report them to the authorities.

I also don't think the arrangement is really less convenient for vampires. Sure, you can't grab a random peasant of the streets and suck him dry. But you can instead go to the Temple of Hextor and pick up your blood ration, without any muss or fuss. Ask yourself, would you rather have to hunt down every meal you have, or be able to go to McDonalds?


Assuming we need to restoration our livestock once per three days(if they don't mind walking around with negative levels), that's still nearly 50k gold per year, which is more than the entire wealth of a 10th level PC, and more than the wealth of a 14th level NPC. Per year.

Once we start talking about economics WBL is not the appropriate comparison. A single 9th level vampire Wizard casting fabricate can make that much money fairly trivially.


No they don't, it isn't a 3rd level or lower arcane spell for any class.

Oh, right. Then Schema I think is the thing? I know there's something in the the Eberron rules that gives you whatever repeatable spells from a magic item you want, but I haven't read them in a while. In any case, there are other strategies, like the Spell-Stitching I mentioned (by far the best, as it makes your vampires self-supporting).


Anyway, is it really necessary to maintain this lore of vampirism's immortality and power coming at terrible cost when the game has plenty of other ways to gain immortality and power without such cost already?

I would say yes. The fact that your immortality and power comes at a terrible cost is the point of being a vampire instead of being something else. But I do think having ways to work around it so that vampires are productive members of society rather than undead parasites is good. The big tweak I would make is to make the blood drain cause CON damage instead of CON drain, explicitly need to come from intelligent creatures, and allow vampires to drink stored blood. I think that fits how you want vampire society to look, with the Sanguinary Priests circulating between insolated villages to collect the Blood Tithe that goes to the vampiric protectors of the nation, who are feared and loved in equal measure.

[Bayar]

I know it's possible to convert spells via shenanigans, Wyrm Wizard or Dragonblood Spell-Pact plus some other stuff, but I think it's pretty fair to assume niche abuses of relatively rare spells and class features isn't typical. Or at least, isn't assumed under all the other rules for constructing magic items.

And all of those solutions cost tens of thousands of gold. Could a cabal of wealthy vampires do such a thing? Sure. Is it guaranteed, or even likely, that a group of obligatory Evil predatory undead that love to devour the living will set aside their differences to create a health utopia for the living when it's pretty trivial for them to just snack on commoners? I'm skeptical.



That's basically Vampire the Masquerade.

[Zanos]

Is that some extra rule thing from Libris Mortis? Because the MM lists the blood drain as just doing CON damage, and frankly if the rules say vampires can't survive just by drinking blood, I'm inclined to call those rules dumb and ignore them. Vampires drink blood. They don't also have to punch people in the face (I acknowledge that this is not a RAW argument before anyone dogpiles me).
It's con drain, and yes it's from LM. I'd argue that draining someone's levels(and apparently it's two levels, not one) is a bit different from punching people in the face. Although honestly I don't know why vampires drain levels to begin with. I don't recall being touched by a vampire to sap your life being an important part of any of the folklore.



The vampire doesn't have to care about not hurting people as a terminal value. In fact, I would not a expect a system like this to arise from such motivations. Instead, I would expect it to arise from self interest. A vampire that feeds by grabbing random people in alleys and guzzling their lifeblood is not a part of society. They're a predator, and they survive only insofar as society is unable to destroy them. But a vampire who gets their blood from the Church of Hextor Blood Drive, which is organized because they fight in defense of their nation or use their magical powers on behalf of the people, is a part of society. When vampire hunters show up, the peasants aren't going to shelter them and tell them about the back entrance into the vampire's castle, they're going to report them to the authorities.
It can be a matter of practicality, but an individual vampire who is clever doesn't really need to do all that much. The average medieval metropolis has a lot of people that society does not really care about them going missing.


I also don't think the arrangement is really less convenient for vampires. Sure, you can't grab a random peasant of the streets and suck him dry. But you can instead go to the Temple of Hextor and pick up your blood ration, without any muss or fuss. Ask yourself, would you rather have to hunt down every meal you have, or be able to go to McDonalds?
The issue is the expense and setup. Again, we're assuming the vampire has the connections to set this up, and that a 7th+ level cleric of Hextor even exists where he (un)lives.


Once we start talking about economics WBL is not the appropriate comparison. A single 9th level vampire Wizard casting fabricate can make that much money fairly trivially.
I don't accept arguments that there are tricks that grossly violate the logic of the printed economy as valid in this scenario. If wealth is functionally unlimited, then very little of D&D 3.5 actually works. You might as well half commoners selling 10ft poles built from sawed in half ladders to fund their infinite supply of dual wielded partially charged wands. If we're just getting all our money from WBL tricks, there's no reason to be a vampire at all. Just buy yourself a contingent true resurrection and buy a big stack of other magic items that you can use to get one of the many other alternative immortalities that don't suck.

If you want a more 'fair' comparison you'd have to look at how much a character can make rather than how much a character has. I don't think the business ownership rules or training hireling salaries are going to keep up with blowing 50k a year.


Oh, right. Then Schema I think is the thing? I know there's something in the the Eberron rules that gives you whatever repeatable spells from a magic item you want, but I haven't read them in a while. In any case, there are other strategies, like the Spell-Stitching I mentioned (by far the best, as it makes your vampires self-supporting).
Not arguing there aren't other approaches, just that all the alternatives are very expensive, which is something that usually matters.


I would say yes. The fact that your immortality and power comes at a terrible cost is the point of being a vampire instead of being something else. But I do think having ways to work around it so that vampires are productive members of society rather than undead parasites is good. The big tweak I would make is to make the blood drain cause CON damage instead of CON drain, explicitly need to come from intelligent creatures, and allow vampires to drink stored blood. I think that fits how you want vampire society to look, with the Sanguinary Priests circulating between insolated villages to collect the Blood Tithe that goes to the vampiric protectors of the nation, who are feared and loved in equal measure.
The idea that some people apparently think that feeding on mortals isn't a necessary part of vampire theming in a fantasy setting truly baffles me. Or I guess it doesn't. There's always the guy that wants his super-ultra power fantasy character who is a vampire with none of the turmoil or weaknesses that go with it.

Changing it to con damage and adding a sentient requirement is a good idea. It's actually very odd that you never recover from a vampire drinking your blood without magical assistance. Plus it prevents a lot of the cool things vampires do in fiction, like keeping favorite bloodbags around and such.


That's basically Vampire the Masquerade.
It's very different. The Camarilla in VtM was set up to protect the most powerful elders from the wrath of humanity as human technology and organization advanced to the point where Vampires could no longer openly rule over and prey on mortals. It does not provide sustenance for its members. If you can't get blood yourself and violate the masquerade feeding on a human, the local vampire rulers will most likely just have you executed unless you hold tremendous political sway yourself. But a vampire with political sway can just call in a favor and probably not wind up in that situation to begin with. Setting up a blood supply, if you can't covertly hunt yourself, is a large facet of vampire politics.

And the Camarilla is far from setting aside their differences, there's internal assassinations all the time and half the factions within are threatening to break off, even in oWoD.

[Metastachydium]

It's con drain, and yes it's from LM. I'd argue that draining someone's levels(and apparently it's two levels, not one) is a bit different from punching people in the face.

Well, it should be, but the thing is that vampires drain levels with their slam attacks, so if the Book of Bad Latin is to be believed (and I'd argue that it shouldn't be), vampires feed via punching people.

[Tzardok]

Well, it should be, but the thing is that vampires drain levels with their slam attacks, so if the Book of Bad Latin is to be believed (and I'd argue that it shouldn't be), vampires feed via punching people.

How is that different from wights feeding by using their punch?

[Metastachydium]

How is that different from wights feeding by using their punch?

That's just silly too (as is the MM-version of the wight in general). I think I'd give them a weak bite attack. But that's not the point. Wights are nowhere near as well established mythical monsters as vampires are (if indeed we can even consider them mythical monsters). „And now vampires are dependant on punching people to survive” is just ridiculous and not something I'd call a net positive addition to preexisting lore.

[Fouredged Sword]

I don’t have a problem with people still desiring food, because Chicago Deep-Dish Pizza is a thing, but seriously the ring helps the mind so it would help against irrational desires that aren’t needed. I’m not hungry when I am sustained, thus it is okay for me to go shopping.

I personally fluff it based on my experience being on IV food for a week. You want to eat because your stomach is empty, but you never really get more than peckish. It feels like you are skipping lunch after a solid breakfast, not skipping food for days.

You want to eat because your body wants food. You never suffer actual hunger though.

[Maat Mons]

Okay, I just reread the Undead Hunger variant rules in Libris Mortis. It's been a while, and I'd forgotten what a weaksauce excuse for a "need" they create.

Make a DC 15 Will save every 3 days to never need to drink blood? Easy. Just acquire the Moment of Perfect Mind maneuver through a feat, dip, or magic item. Take 10 on the Concentration check. Done. They didn't even make the DC increase the longer you go without blood!

Make a DC 25 Will save every day to never need to drain levels? A little more challenging, but still quite doable. You'll probably want ranks in Concentration and a Tunic of Steady Spellcasting. But +15 Concentration isn't that hard for a (minimum) 5-HD character, as long as you've got it as a class skill and you didn't dump Charisma.

Or just buy an Orb of Mental Renewal and heal the Wisdom damage your take from not feeding and failing those saves. The thing only costs 3,100 gp, and it easily outpaces the needs of even a very weak-willed vampire. Mortal starvation has a clause to prevent magical healing, but these "inescapable" cravings are surprisingly escapable.

Or, if gold is in short supply and you think succeeding on Will saves is for squares, take a level of Binder, and bind Naberius so you heal a point of Wisdom damage every round. Even in the worst-case scenario, if you fail both Will saves and roll max damage, you're only losing 12 Wisdom at a time. You'll get that back in 12 rounds, less than 2 minutes. Whoo boy, that is one long-lived bout of madness! ... Unless you have 13+ Wis, in which case you're actually incapable of experiencing even brief madness under the worst possible rolls.

Even if you just enjoy feeding, it looks like you get full benefits from drinking the blood of someone who is protected against Constitution drain. (Hello, Strongheart Vest!) The situation is less clear for energy drain, but there's definitely no reason a vampire couldn't have a gimp with the Lasting Life feat, for magic-free rapid restoration of negative levels. Actually, the wording of the Enduring Life feat may allow him to survive temporarily with more negative levels than he has hit dice. And then if his saves from Lasting Life go well, those negative levels will be gone before the protection from Enduring Life wears off.

[wilphe]

If a GM tried to tell me that bit of fluff, I'd say fine - but the instant he tried to do anything mechanical to my character based on that hunger is when I would grind the game to a screeching halt (or leave.) Because the ring says nothing about any kinds of penalties or drawbacks from not eating continuing to apply.

"Overwhelmed with feelings of hunger, your character reaches for the-" "No."
"As the hunger pangs intensify, you feel a sudden bout of dizzi-" "No."
"Your stomach growls loudly, alerting the-" "No."

Well in the same way that there is no explicit mechanical penalty for living off trail rations, everlasting rations or a Mulrynds spoon.

Or for that matter sleeping on a wooden pallet, never washing and wearing rags.

I believe some very talented guy did a comic on that

Your character is going to want something else eventually, how badly that manifests itself depends on their personality

[RandomPeasant]

I'd argue that draining someone's levels(and apparently it's two levels, not one) is a bit different from punching people in the face.

The levels are drained by their slam attack. I suppose you could kick people, or maybe grab them, but the point is that it isn't coming from the blood-sucking, which is the thing vampires iconically do.


It can be a matter of practicality, but an individual vampire who is clever doesn't really need to do all that much. The average medieval metropolis has a lot of people that society does not really care about them going missing.

Sure, you can lurk in the shadows, eating beggars and orphans. But if you do that, the hunt is on the second anyone finds out who (or what) you are. As a vampire, you want allies who can do things like "go out in daylight". You can rely on mind-controlled pawns for that, but it's a risky proposition. Increasing the vampiric carrying capacity of your society also benefits an individual vampire, because it gives them a coalition of powerful allies whose interests are tightly bound to their own. Most people, if given the option, would rather periodically volunteer for community service than be serial killers.


The issue is the expense and setup. Again, we're assuming the vampire has the connections to set this up, and that a 7th+ level cleric of Hextor even exists where he (un)lives.

Sure. And buying a Ring of Sustenance assumes you can find one of those. You can make arguments about magic item availability, but those arguments also apply to restoration-producing items that can support much larger numbers of vampires.


I don't accept arguments that there are tricks that grossly violate the logic of the printed economy as valid in this scenario.

I don't accept arguments that require abilities characters have that interact with the economy to not be used to interact with the economy. If you want to have a discussion of fantasy economics, you can't wall off parts of the magic system that interact with guidelines the rules lay down that were never considered in the context of the economy.

But even if we do ignore fabricate and wall of iron and planar binding and all the other things a vampiric spellcaster could do to make money, crafting magic items creates 500 GP of value every day. That's enough to pay for the vampire's restoration.


If wealth is functionally unlimited, then very little of D&D 3.5 actually works.

I don't think that's correct. You can certainly use the vast wealth magic can produce to break the game, but the way you do that is by buying magical equipment that itself breaks the game. The problem isn't really that you can make 1,000,000 GP casting fabricate repeatedly. It's that there are items you can buy for 1,000,000 GP that allow you to trivialize level-appropriate encounters (after all, you could also steal those items, or persuade someone to give them to you). The game desperately needs to sever wealth from personal power. Not just because linking them means we all have to pretend economic magic doesn't exist, but because it means that we can't have adventures that are set in cities of gold or diamond castles, and that Dragons have hoards which are insultingly small.


Wights are nowhere near as well established mythical monsters as vampires are (if indeed we can even consider them mythical monsters).

I think the best-known Wights in fantasy are Tolkein's Barrow-Wights, and those guys survived for hundreds of years sealed in a tomb which presumably didn't have anyone to eat inside it. So I would say that Wights just shouldn't have any need to feed.

[Psyren]

Your character is going to want something else eventually

That will be my decision for my character.

[Jay R]

Some people here are working awfully hard to turn an iconic, eerie, horrific, ominous fantasy monster into something mundane and trivial.

Why? What good does this do the game?

[Maat Mons]

Where have you been? Vampires haven't been eerie, horrific, or ominous in a long time. Now they're misunderstood heartthrobs (heh). It all started with the writings of Ann Rice, which went mainstream when Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise appeared onscreen as sympathetic, emo vampires. The final nail in the coffin (heh) was when the Twilight movies popularized vampires who not only don't drink human blood, but also aren't harmed by sunlight (and sparkle in very non-macabre fashion). Embrace change. We no longer run from vampires. We hug and comfort them.

[Bayar]

Some people here are working awfully hard to turn an iconic, eerie, horrific, ominous fantasy monster into something mundane and trivial.

Why? What good does this do the game?

Go back and reread the vampire entry in the Monster Manual. We're not trivializing vampires, they are trivial in a world of dungeons and dragons.

[RandomPeasant]

Where have you been? Vampires haven't been eerie, horrific, or ominous in a long time. Now they're misunderstood heartthrobs (heh). It all started with the writings of Ann Rice, which went mainstream when Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise appeared onscreen as sympathetic, emo vampires. The final nail in the coffin (heh) was when the Twilight movies popularized vampires who not only don't drink human blood, but also aren't harmed by sunlight (and sparkle in very non-macabre fashion). Embrace change. We no longer run from vampires. We hug and comfort them.

It depends on your source material. It's true that some of the biggest vampire media has had relatively sympathetic vampires, but there are still plenty of scary vampires out there. You can clearly see the evolution from Buffy's Angel to Twilight's Edward, but the modal Buffyverse vampire is still a bloodthristy sociopath. Penny Dreadful and the TV version of From Dusk Til Dawn have pretty monstrous vampires. Jay's certainly wrong to say that "horrible monster" is the only way for vampires to be, but it's a supported way for them to be even today.