A good vampire.

[gfvelastegui]

Can a vampire be good and at the same time a cleric?

[voska66]

Rules wise there is no problem. It's just change to the letters and the diety they worship. Now explaining why a God is giving powers to cleric who is not a vampire will require some explaining. I know if I was a player and ran into vampire who was cleric of Iomade for example I'd like to know why that is.

[austin thomas]

It all fluff so it all up to your dm if you are the dm then have a reason better then "because"

[gfvelastegui]

So I can do it. Thanks.

[Mojorat]

mechanically all vampires are evil. but as dm you can rule 0 anything if it fits your game

[Rickmeister]

Cleric of an evil deity, why the frig not?

[Pan]

I dont understand the desire to play "good" vampires. These beings take sentient life for sustenance. How can this be good?

[Paul Watson]

Pan wrote:

I dont understand the desire to play "good" vampires. These beings take sentient life for sustenance. How can this be good?

I'm sure cows feel the same way about you.

Also, vampires don't have to kill their victims. Given their high charisma, I could see some giving in willingly. That said a good vampire should be such a rarity as to be almosst unique.

[Toadkiller Dog]

Cows have Int 1-2. Humans have Int 10+. There's a difference.

[Gorbacz]

*has a flashback to early 90's discussions on morality of playing a vampire in WoD*

[Dukeh555]

Pan, it's all the perks. The sun can be dealt with, and there are numerous supremely useful perks to being a vampire. You can dominate people and effectively make them your servants, you can turn into a wolf or dire bat, assume a mist like form indefinitely, clim up walls like a friggin spider, and pretty much make an army of lesser vampire servants that put necromancers undead to shame. It's a very good side ability, and while you might think it makes you vulnerable to clerical spells, vampires get channel resistance. I find vampirism to be exceptional on spell casters, provide them a wolf or bat form to enter the combat and a mist form and spider climb to flee the battle if the need should arise.

[Dukeh555]

Besides, the blood draining is no huge problem, just have your party cleric prepare a restoration each day to heal whoever you suck blood out of.

[Loren Pechtel]

Paul Watson wrote:

Pan wrote:

I dont understand the desire to play "good" vampires. These beings take sentient life for sustenance. How can this be good?

I'm sure cows feel the same way about you.

Also, vampires don't have to kill their victims. Given their high charisma, I could see some giving in willingly. That said a good vampire should be such a rarity as to be almosst unique.

You don't even need the high Charisma if they have enough cleric levels. Drain them and then restore them. Offer enough money and you'll find plenty of willing subjects. I would also not consider it an automatic fall from good to feed upon those that the vampire would otherwise kill anyway--a vampire adventurer.

Since vampires are sentient and free-willed I figure any alignment is possible. While the vast majority follow the standard there will be others.

[HyperMissingno]

A good vampire would probably need to have been turned and the have to feed non-lethally constantly. Blood is less food and more like a hardcore drug to them, and going on without it can drive them to madness.

[Zhayne]

Absolutely.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

[Grammar Cop]

voska66 wrote:

It's just change to the letters and the diety they worship. Now explaining why a God is giving powers to cleric who is not a vampire will require some explaining.

Change "God" to "god". The word "god" is only capitalized when used in reference to a monotheistic religion because in that case, saying "God" is equivelant to saying their name.

This is in the same way that "dad" is lowercase when talking about dads in general, but when used in place of a name, it is capitalized. Ex. "Hey Dad, can you teach me about the ancient greek gods?"

(Sorry - a pet peeve of mine.)

[Anzyr]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

You do know that Helm of Opposite Alignment is a thing right? And would create a RAW Good Vampire.

[Cap. Darling]

Dukeh555 wrote:

Pan, it's all the perks. The sun can be dealt with, and there are numerous supremely useful perks to being a vampire. You can dominate people and effectively make them your servants, you can turn into a wolf or dire bat, assume a mist like form indefinitely, clim up walls like a friggin spider, and pretty much make an army of lesser vampire servants that put necromancers undead to shame. It's a very good side ability, and while you might think it makes you vulnerable to clerical spells, vampires get channel resistance. I find vampirism to be exceptional on spell casters, provide them a wolf or bat form to enter the combat and a mist form and spider climb to flee the battle if the need should arise.

I know this is about vampiers but the thread is 3 years dead why animate it now?

[Charon's Little Helper]

Anzyr wrote:

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

You do know that Helm of Opposite Alignment is a thing right? And would create a RAW Good Vampire.

I'd argue that the helm wouldn't work on a vampire to make them good, though it'd shift them on the law/chaos axis.

If you're human/elf/dwarf etc, you could potentially be any alignment, and you chose one. The helm makes you choose the opposite choice.

If you're a vampire, you can only choose one of the three evil alignments. The helm can simply shift you to another of the three potential choices.

[Deadmanwalking]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

Actually...no, this is completely factually untrue. Blood of the Night (y'know, the book on vampires and dhampirs) specifically notes that while Good vampires are so vanishingly rare as to be nonexistent, you could theoretically have one. Other vampires would likely want to kill them, mind you, but they could exist.

And there are at least a couple of canonical Neutral vampires in Pathfinder books already (there's a LN one in the Kaer Maga book, for example)...so, yeah, any claims that this is against the world lore (or even rules, given that there are likewise proven to be the possibility of a Neutral or Good Demon) are patently false.

There certainly are no sparkly vampires...but there can be friendly ones. They're just way less common than the murderous kind.

[Tiny Coffee Golem]

Gorbacz wrote:

*has a flashback to early 90's discussions on morality of playing a vampire in WoD*

Yea. I had the hardest time understanding the path of humanity. I literally did not get it.

"But I'm an evil bloodsucking creature of the night. Why am I trying not to be?"

[Charon's Little Helper]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

Actually...no, this is completely factually untrue. Blood of the Night (y'know, the book on vampires and dhampirs) specifically notes that while Good vampires are so vanishingly rare as to be nonexistent, you could theoretically have one. Other vampires would likely want to kill them, mind you, but they could exist.

And there are at least a couple of canonical Neutral vampires in Pathfinder books already (there's a LN one in the Kaer Maga book, for example)...so, yeah, any claims that this is against the world lore (or even rules, given that there are likewise proven to be the possibility of a Neutral or Good Demon) are patently false.

There certainly are no sparkly vampires...but there can be friendly ones. They're just way less common than the murderous kind.

Fair enough I suppose. I guess that I should know better than to make statements without having read EVERY supplement book EVER. :P

(I will say though - per the beastiary alone I'd be right.)

[boring7]

Like the vampire, this thread is dead.

*waves holy symbol* "This language is dead, and so are you, know this and begone!"...Darn, it has turn resistance.

Anzyr wrote:

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Officially no. All vampires are evil. In Pathfinder / D&D, once you're turned, you're not really YOU at all.

There are no sparkly vampires - http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0946.html

And while you can houserule it - any such ruling would be just that - a houserule.

You do know that Helm of Opposite Alignment is a thing right? And would create a RAW Good Vampire.

I wonder if immunity to mind effects would affect that.

Vampire Lore as pertains to Pathfinder is pretty vague and decidedly all over the place when it comes to what makes them tick. Sure they're all evil (which by the rules can still have "exceptions") but the why and the how of that evil is up to interpretation and personal creation.

Order of the stick was already given as an example where the original soul is either sent on or locked in frozen crazy hell prison forever and the soul/spirit controlling the body is a new creation of negative energy and evil.

Other plots have the same spirit and memories, but the soul (and therefore the capacity for moral intincts and feelings) is gone, leaving a thinking beast of cold, sociopathic logic and villainous self-interest. Or all the normal feelings, memories and instincts but borne down into evil by a desperate addiction to the flesh and blood of the living.

Then there's the, "warm, rich, liquid-protein diet." A vampire trapped in a coffin for centuries can come out just as powerful as one that spent the last 4 years in a pipe of constantly-flowing fresh blood. Sometimes it's necessary for survival, sometimes it's just an addiction that needs to be fed. Sometimes the addiction can be quelled with animal blood, sometimes ONLY human blood works. Sometimes the thirst leads to severe pain and inevitable madness, sometimes the thirst can be controlled, suppressed, and almost completely ignored. And all sorts of in-betweens happen where maybe you can LIVE on animal blood, but your totally-awesome vampire powers need fueling from "higher creatures."

As for why people want to play or have good vampires, it's the same as good drow, risen demons, and every other "Redeemer" archetype. You want some white-wolf style wangst, some totally sweet powers, and an excuse to be all Batman "Darker and Edgier" antihero. And you know what? Ain't nothing wrong with that. Like playing an immortal elf or a hearty dwarf or a slinky catgirl. Like playing a wizard who uses the power of his brain to shape the world or a barbarian who is allowed to solve his problems with an axe and a scream. Like living in a world of fantasy adventure instead of boring meetings where high-born jackholes tell you why you'll never be making as much money as them. We role-play something awesome for fun. Yeah, we could all be humans with NPC classes, but some of us want a bit more.

That said, I won't be playing a vampire, undead aren't my style.

[boring7]

Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

*has a flashback to early 90's discussions on morality of playing a vampire in WoD*

Yea. I had the hardest time understanding the path of humanity. I literally did not get it.

"But I'm an evil bloodsucking creature of the night. Why am I trying not to be?"

You don't start evil, you start out just like you used to be (human) but with an unholy hunger and a problem with things like sunlight. It's the endless thirst (and feeding it), the fact that you can't dream anymore (cut off from your soul), and the ennui of semi-immortality that wears away your humanity over time. Sometimes very little time, since there are plenty of humans who would jump at the chance to set themselves above people and start murdering them for fun and self-indulgence. You can fall slowly, or dive in head-first,

And for a lot of the LARP and LARP-like crowd, it's a chance to explore emotions and feelings that the regular world spends its time beating and shaming them for. Alienation, desire, self-indulgence and open selfishness.

[PathlessBeth]

Gorbacz wrote:

*has a flashback to early 90's discussions on morality of playing a vampire in WoD*

In before someone insists that WoD was made by Twilight fans without checking release dates!

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Fair enough I suppose. I guess that I should know better than to make statements without having read EVERY supplement book EVER. :P

(I will say though - per the beastiary alone I'd be right.)

Check the Bestiary again:

Bestiary wrote:

Alignment, Size, and Type: While a monster's size and type remain constant (unless changed by the application of templates or other unusual modifiers), alignment is far more fluid. The alignments listed for each monster in this book represent the norm for those monsters—they can vary as you require them to in order to serve the needs of your campaign. Only in the case of relatively unintelligent monsters (creatures with an Intelligence of 2 or lower are almost never anything other than neutral) and planar monsters (outsiders with alignments other than those listed are unusual and typically outcasts from their kind) is the listed alignment relatively unchangeable.

[boring7]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Fair enough I suppose. I guess that I should know better than to make statements without having read EVERY supplement book EVER. :P

(I will say though - per the beastiary alone I'd be right.)

Yes and no, there are sections in the bestiary and the core rulebook which make it clear even "always evil" doesn't really mean ALWAYS. Quotable quote from the Evil Subtype which applies to things that are literally infused with evil, like they are evil-radioactive.

Quote:

Evil Subtype

This subtype is usually applied to Outsiders native to the evil-aligned Outer Planes. Evil Outsiders are also called fiends. Most creatures that have this subtype also have evil alignments; however, if their alignments change, they still retain the subtype. Any effect that depends on alignment affects a creature with this subtype as if the creature has an evil alignment, no matter what its alignment actually is. The creature also suffers effects according to its actual alignment. A creature with the evil subtype overcomes damage reduction as if its natural weapons and any weapons it wields are evil-aligned.

[Deadmanwalking]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Fair enough I suppose. I guess that I should know better than to make statements without having read EVERY supplement book EVER. :P

Well, not definitive and absolute statements anyway. :)

And it's really lacking the book on the particular subject being discussed that's the big risk. I mean, Blood of the Night's the definitive authority on this particular subject in Pathfinder, and the source of the definitive statements.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

(I will say though - per the beastiary alone I'd be right.)

Uh...to quote the Bestiary introduction:

Bestiary wrote:

Alignment, Size, and Type: While a monster's size and type remain constant (unless changed by the application of templates or other unusual modifiers), alignment is far more fluid. The alignments listed for each monster in this book represent the norm for those monsters—they can vary as you require them to in order to serve the needs of your campaign. Only in the case of relatively unintelligent monsters (creatures with an Intelligence of 2 or lower are almost never anything other than neutral) and planar monsters (outsiders with alignments other than those listed are unusual and typically outcasts from their kind) is the listed alignment relatively unchangeable.

So...given that vampires have an Int higher than 2 and aren't Outsiders, per the Bestiary, Good vampires are fine, just rare. Supplements actually note them as being much rarer than the Bestiary does, to be honest.

EDIT: Semi-ninja'd. Ah, well.

[Charon's Little Helper]

My bad - I haven't GM'd much since 3.5 - so my monster knowledge is horribly out of date.