Question.. in the Bestiary entry of vampire it lists human, is this purely descriptive?
Vampire
XP 6,400
Female human vampire sorcerer 8
CE Medium undead (augmented humanoid)
I have always taken that line, and similar lines, to indicate where the original creature came from, to explain the stats that are not purely from the vampire template.
What does the vampire look like? bugbear? human? dragon? male? female? etc..
Where is it getting those spells from, do all vampires get them..Oh, she was a human sorcerer before..and that also explains why she has more spells known that a normal sorcerer 8 -it's where she put her favored class points...etc
That type of deductive reasoning, and the demonstration of how the template works, is only effective if you have the base stats to work with.
@mdt
I have a bit of a problem accepting that favored enemy (human) would be effective against undead. Two major reasons actually.
1) I don't want to have to track what all the zombies and skeletons (and any other undead type) were before they became undead.
2) I think it would make favored enemy more powerful that I am comfortable with. Why would any ranger not take (human), as it would help against the most prolific of the races and against most of the undead?
@mdt
I have a bit of a problem accepting that favored enemy (human) would be effective against undead. Two major reasons actually.
1) I don't want to have to track what all the zombies and skeletons (and any other undead type) were before they became undead.
2) I think it would make favored enemy more powerful that I am comfortable with. Why would any ranger not take (human), as it would help against the most prolific of the races and against most of the undead?
1) It's a really good thing then that zombies and skeletons specifically do not become augmented then, isn't it? Read the descriptions, they specifically call them out as not becoming augmented, which I sort of see as another reason to consider the original type.
2) Any ranger that doesn't take Human as his biggest FE is insane, mechanically speaking. And any that don't take Undead as their second are insane, mechanically speaking. The vast majority of most enemies in APs and modules are either (A) undead or (B) human. Unless it's a very specific non-human world.
1) It's a really good thing then that zombies and skeletons specifically do not become augmented then, isn't it? Read the descriptions, they specifically call them out as not becoming augmented, which I sort of see as another reason to consider the original type.
2) Any ranger that doesn't take Human as his biggest FE is insane, mechanically speaking. And any that don't take Undead as their second are insane, mechanically speaking. The vast majority of most enemies in APs and modules are either (A) undead or (B) human. Unless it's a very specific non-human world.
Apologies, still at work, no books, and not enough time or energy to look it up on the SRD.
Point 2) Why would you take both, if you are going to use the higher one (likely human)? For skeletons and zombies?
1) It's a really good thing then that zombies and skeletons specifically do not become augmented then, isn't it? Read the descriptions, they specifically call them out as not becoming augmented, which I sort of see as another reason to consider the original type.
2) Any ranger that doesn't take Human as his biggest FE is insane, mechanically speaking. And any that don't take Undead as their second are insane, mechanically speaking. The vast majority of most enemies in APs and modules are either (A) undead or (B) human. Unless it's a very specific non-human world.
Apologies, still at work, no books, and not enough time or energy to look it up on the SRD.
Point 2) Why would you take both, if you are going to use the higher one (likely human)? For skeletons and zombies?
Skeletons and zombies do not get augmented humanoid as a subtype. Ergo, they do not fall into the discussion about whether a Human Vampire with the Augmented Humanoid subtype still counts as human. Ergo, even if you allow a ranger to use his FE to work for Augmented Humanoid with the original subtype (human in this case), it only applies to vampires, not zombies or skeletons or draugr or <insert any other undead that doesn't get augmented humanoid subtype>.
Skeletons and zombies do not get augmented humanoid as a subtype. Ergo, they do not fall into the discussion about whether a Human Vampire with the Augmented Humanoid subtype still counts as human. Ergo, even if you allow a ranger to use his FE to work for Augmented Humanoid with the original subtype (human in this case), it only applies to vampires, not zombies or skeletons or draugr or <insert any other undead that doesn't get augmented humanoid subtype>.
Too many hours at work. I will see if I can still speak/type English clearly. :)
Point 2) Why would your ranger take both FE human and FE Undead, if his higher FE (likely human) would apply to the more dangerous undead?
Why would he (or she) not keep that other FE slot for another type of creature? After all, the weaker undead, like skeletons and zombies, are usually not much of a threat after the first couple of levels.
As has already been explained, the class/race line is for constructing the build using the rules. It doesn't tell us what type of creature we're dealing with; that's what the type line is for.
For instance, a...
NE female young adult blue dragon vampire
... would again be an undead (augmented dragon), which is an undead and is NOT a dragon.
Similarly, a...
LE male halfling worm that walks wizard 8
... would be a vermin (augmented humanoid), which is a vermin and NOT a humanoid.
|
@mdt
I have a hard time believing that a vampire, lich, or ghost have the exact same wants, needs, mindset, physiology, etc as the base creature that it was created out of (at least for FE). For example, a ghost wold no longer need to eat or sleep and would generally have no foot prints, so tracking it would be entirely different. A vampire would not have the same wants/needs as a human, and so a bluff, diplomacy, or sense motive would need a different approach. and while a lich may have been a kobold (humanoid {reptilian}) , bribing it with food would be entirely inappropriate.
I am not sure how to classify how bane works or detects if its target is valid for it's effects..
Too many hours at work. I will see if I can still speak/type English clearly. :)Point 2) Why would your ranger take both FE human and FE Undead, if his higher FE (likely human) would apply to the more dangerous undead?
Why would he (or she) not keep that other FE slot for another type of creature? After all, the weaker undead, like skeletons and zombies, are usually not much of a threat after the first couple of levels.
Why would he take undead more than once if you don't consider it to also apply? I've never seen a ranger take FE Undead more than once, and usually only at very low level. Remember, not all powerful undead are human. :) You can have an elf lich or a dwarven vampire too. :)
Mechanically, a ranger should normally take undead at 1st level, and human at 5th and then always boost human after that. If you go the other way around, with human at 1st, you should never take undead, as they are useless. Especially if you carry a wand of 'make that thing my favored enemy' in your pocket.
I guess what I've been saying is, it really doesn't make much difference mechanically, and stops newbies from falling into the poor FE choice trap.
As has already been explained, the class/race line is for constructing the build using the rules. It doesn't tell us what type of creature we're dealing with; that's what the type line is for.
For instance, a...
NE female young adult blue dragon vampire
... would again be an undead (augmented dragon), which is an undead and is NOT a dragon.Similarly, a...
LE male halfling worm that walks wizard 8
... would be a vermin (augmented humanoid), which is a vermin and NOT a humanoid.
I submit that an Augmented Dragon is Still a Dragon.
It's just that an Augmented Humanoid is no longer Human by your logic.
Bane works off type and in some cases type with a subtype.
The vampire is no longer Human, he does not have the correct subtype. You guys are compacting this way more then it is.
The rules clearly give it the undead type, with a subtype being its former type. You need something that effects the undead type to effect it.
It simply no longer has the human subtype.
@mdt
I have a hard time believing that a vampire, lich, or ghost have the exact same wants, needs, mindset, physiology, etc as the base creature that it was created out of (at least for FE). For example, a ghost wold no longer need to eat or sleep and would generally have no foot prints, so tracking it would be entirely different. A vampire would not have the same wants/needs as a human, and so a bluff, diplomacy, or sense motive would need a different approach. and while a lich may have been a kobold (humanoid {reptilian}) , bribing it with food would be entirely inappropriate.
I am not sure how to classify how bane works or detects if its target is valid for it's effects..
I don't know why the wants, needs, or mindset would matter for FE.
As to Physiology, I agree and disagree. I agree for the ghost, I don't know why they get Augmented Humanoid, they are no longer physical beings. It boggles the mind why they are still considered humanoid for spells like enlarge person etc. They don't have bodies! :)
As to vampires and liches... I disagree. Yes, there are some changes, but not as many as you'd think. The heart is still in the same spot (for the vampire at least), their eyes are still there and still vulnerable spots, the brain is still a vital target, their necks still break in the same spots, they still have the same joint structures which can be used for breaking joints and tossing them. A lot of the physical weakpoints between a human and a vampire are going to be the same. Shatter a vampire's spine and he still has major issues. Same with a lich.
By the same token, undead are going to have some things in common, regardless of physical form. Necromantic energy disruption, weaknesses to various things (light, wood stakes, etc), holy symbol repulsion, etc. I guess I can just see there would be as much overlap between Human and Human Vampire weaknesses go as there would be between Ghost and Vampire and Lich overlapping.
I submit that an Augmented Dragon is Still a Dragon.
It's just that an Augmented Humanoid is no longer Human by your logic.
No it is not human, it lost that subtype. It is however still humanoid, but now that is simply a subtype and not the type.
Bane works off type and in some cases type with a subtype.
The vampire is no longer Human, he does not have the correct subtype. You guys are compacting this way more then it is.
The rules clearly give it the undead type, with a subtype being its former type. You need something that effects the undead type to effect it.
It simply no longer has the human subtype.
Would you say a Dragon Bane weapon still affects a dragon vampire, who's Augmented Dragon?
No it is not human, it lost that subtype. It is however still humanoid, but now that is simply a subtype and not the type.I submit that an Augmented Dragon is Still a Dragon.
It's just that an Augmented Humanoid is no longer Human by your logic.
Other than the wording, how is a human developing vampirsm and losing the human subtype different from a dragon developing vampirsm and not losing the dragon part?
It is the humanoid type that is the issue, not the undead. As a whole it acts odd, each and every subtype of humanoid is treated differently. So yes they lose that subtype.
Give me one official example where they do not lose the second subtype. Every one we have shows humanoids lose the second one.
Also dragon is the type, just as Humanoid is the type.
Ya know the more I think about and read up on this the more it seems the issue is the Augmented thing. It is not used by all templeted undead and seems to be causing more confusion then anything as it does nothing at all really.
All it does it let ya know the type has been changed to subtype, yet they do not do it all all templets? So what is its point?
It is the humanoid type that is the issue, not the undead. As a whole it acts odd, each and every subtype of humanoid is treated differently. So yes they lose that subtype.
Give me one official example where they do not lose the second subtype. Every one we have shows humanoids lose the second one.
Also dragon is the type, just as Humanoid is the type.
My point being that it's inconsistent. FE and Bane Dragon still affect the Vampiric Dragon Augmented Dragon. FE and Bane Human, by your contention, and a very very strict reading of the Augmenting section, do not affect Vampiric Human Augmented Humanoid.
My belief is that RAI is that Augmented Humanoid be read as Augmented Humanoid (with subtype still viable). Otherwise you get the sillyness that is FE : Dragon still affects a vampiric dragon but FE : Human does not affect a vampiric human. That is a logical disconnect. Honestly, Dragons are as varied as humanoids.
If you read it instead the way I believe, then the rule works consistently for all situations where something becomes vampiric, regardless of subtype. FE and Bane work on all undead, rather than them working on everything but humanoid undead.
Ya know the more I think about and read up on this the more it seems the issue is the Augmented thing. It is not used by all templeted undead and seems to be causing more confusion then anything as it does nothing at all really.
All it does it let ya know the type has been changed to subtype, yet they do not do it all all templets? So what is its point?
Yup, I agree, it's the augmented thing. It is very fuzzy and inconsistent in the way it works with the other rules, unless you read it as retaining the subtypes of the subtypes (IE: Humans are Humanoid - Human, not Humanoid all by themselves).
Ok just to be sure I am gonna list all the exsamples of templeted undead I can find.
Ghost
Human ghost aristocrat 7
CE Medium undead (augmented humanoid, incorporeal)
Lich
Human lich necromancer 11
NE Medium undead (augmented humanoid)
Skeletal Champion
Human skeletal champion warrior 1
NE Medium undead
Human Skeleton
NE Medium undead
Human Zombie
NE Medium undead
Vampire
Female human vampire sorcerer 8
CE Medium undead (augmented humanoid)
Relevant Non Undead
Wererat
Human natural wererat rogue 2 (augmented humanoid)
LE Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
Wererat
Human natural wererat rogue 2 (augmented humanoid)
LE Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
So what does this show? Lycanthrops for one do in fact keep the human subtype. But undead do not keep the human subtype, some do not even keep the humanoid subtype. Most of those are mindless however if they are templeted.
Yup, I agree, it's the augmented thing. It is very fuzzy and inconsistent in the way it works with the other rules, unless you read it as retaining the subtypes of the subtypes (IE: Humans are Humanoid - Human, not Humanoid all by themselves).
Look at what I just posted. They are also in consistent in how it is handled. The argumeted undead do not keep it. but the shapeshifters do {may have something to do with them being not dead} yet then some of the undead templets do not keep the humanoid subtype at all.
I do think it is clear from three exsamples they do not keep the human subtype however.
The wererat shouldn't be on that list. That line is clearly an error. For one the werewolf doesnt have a simlar entry (nor Beasty 2 lycans). Second that is so totally in the wrong line of standard stat block format.
I submit that an Augmented Dragon is Still a Dragon.
I disagree. It no longer has the dragon type -- it just has "augmented dragon" as a subtype. Its type is Undead, and that's the only type it has.
Abilities that target only dragons don't work on it; abilities that target only undead do. It's undead, and not a dragon.
Yes, as was already explained the "augmented humanoid" line on the wererat sheet is an error. NONE of the other were-creatures have that, and it's not even on the right line.
Otherwise, the use of the ability is pretty consistent. The template rules tell you what type to shift to, and whether or not the creature gets an "augmented oldtype" subtype or not.
The second should have been werewolf and yes it does indeed have that line.
WerewolF
Human natural werewolf fighter 2
CE Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
Vampires are Undead, period. Therefor they aren't affected by FE Human. Once a humanoid becomes a vampire their weaknesses change drastically.
I mean, a vampire has kidneys but punching him in the side would do absolutely no good. And just because shooting him in the eye works... well, that works on just about anything with eyes. It amazes me how much common sense can be lost in the pursuit of examining rules that, by dint of the laws of the universe, will have flaws.
From B2
Werebear
Human natural werebear ranger 4
CG Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
wereboar
Human natural wereboar barbarian 2
CN Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
weretiger
Human natural weretiger rogue 4
NE Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
So no that is not a mistake.
However here is an odd ball
Human juju zombie rogue 2
NE Medium undead (augmented human)
Worm that walks
Human worm that walks conjurer 13
NE Medium vermin (augmented human)
Red Wyrm Ravanger
CE Gargantuan undead (fire)
Mow the undead does not have the dragon subtype at all but fire, both the others do not have the humanoid subtype but human which is totally different then B1
I have a sinking feeling the tangled mess just got worse.
Like I said, Augmented anything is inconsistent. Zombies don't have it, JuJu zombies do. Wierd.
The second should have been werewolf and yes it does indeed have that line.
Wererat
Human natural wererat rogue 2 (augmented humanoid)LE Medium humanoid (human, shapechanger)
Bold is the error I and others have pointed out. Lycanthropes are not relevant to the Augmented discussion, haven't been since Shapechanger became a subtype. Even the Lycan template doesn't have a reference to Augmented. All they gain is Shapechanger subtype.
That's why I said it doesn't belong on the list. None of the Lycans do.
As far as I can read so far Augmented has no true game effect, at least no global effect. The only thing it does do is provide an origin and thus general physical description of the creature. An Augmented Humanoid Worm that Walks will should look humanoid (two armish looking things, something in the region of the head, moving more or less on two legs), compared to say a Dragon of the same template.
It is possible in the future that (now it is being brought to light) that stuff could be done with the subtype. Say a spell or magic item that only targets Undead with the Augmented Humanoid subtype.
Not sure about the half-elf. Technically it would retain being treated like an elf despite not having the subtype. Same would go for the half-orc.
A dirge bard may use mind-affecting spells to affect undead as if they were living creatures, even if they are mindless (though spells that affect only humanoids do not affect them, even if they were humanoids in life)
.
Some undead are susceptible to your mind-affecting spells. Corporeal undead that were once humanoids are treated as humanoids for the purposes of determining which spells affect them.
Seems pretty clear that vampires are not counted as humans, as there are specific exceptions that allow you to treat them as humans.
FAQ!
Interesting.
Related question: If a ranger with a favored enemy humanoid [human] spots a creature posing as such a creature but not actually it--such as, for example, a vampire who was formerly human but is now undead, or a green hag who is disguised as a human but is actually a monstrous humanoid--does he get to automatically out them, as he knows how humans act and he can tell that they're not human (even if he doesn't know what they actually are)?
FAQ!Interesting.
Related question: If a ranger with a favored enemy humanoid [human] spots a creature posing as such a creature but not actually it--such as, for example, a vampire who was formerly human but is now undead, or a green hag who is disguised as a human but is actually a monstrous humanoid--does he get to automatically out them, as he knows how humans act and he can tell that they're not human (even if he doesn't know what they actually are)?
My take: no. These creatures are using Disguise against Perception; the Ranger can make a Perception check as normal to realize that these creatures aren't human. Because the creatures aren't human, he gets no bonus on this check.
On the other hand, the Ranger would get a bonus to tell that a human is disguised as something else, since it would be a Perception check against his favored enemy.
Just do not tell the player he is not getting the bonus.
FAQ!Interesting.
Related question: If a ranger with a favored enemy humanoid [human] spots a creature posing as such a creature but not actually it--such as, for example, a vampire who was formerly human but is now undead, or a green hag who is disguised as a human but is actually a monstrous humanoid--does he get to automatically out them, as he knows how humans act and he can tell that they're not human (even if he doesn't know what they actually are)?
My take: no. These creatures are using Disguise against Perception; the Ranger can make a Perception check as normal to realize that these creatures aren't human. Because the creatures aren't human, he gets no bonus on this check.
On the other hand, the Ranger would get a bonus to tell that a human is disguised as something else, since it would be a Perception check against his favored enemy.
So since the ranger knows how to spot humans, he can spot a human posing as a vampire or a green hag, but he can't spot a vampire or a green hag posing as a human?
This may run okay from a mechanics viewpoint, but from a logic and storytelling standpoint, it strains credibility. Literature is filled with rangers and so forth doing the line "I don't know what it is, but it's not human."