Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient. You add your Constitution modifier to the attack and damage rolls when you attack with your bite. Your bite deals 1d4 piercing damage on a hit. While you are missing half or more of your hit points, you have advantage on attack rolls you make with this bite.
When you use your bite and hit a creature that isn’t a Construct or an Undead, you can empower yourself in one of the following ways of your choice:
• regain hit points equal to the damage dealt by the bite
• gain a bonus to the next ability check or attack roll you make; the bonus equals the damage dealt by the bite
You can empower yourself with your bite a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
Initially, this is all well and good. However, as written, the Vampiric Bite trait is eligible for abilities like Hunter's Mark and Divine Smite. The issue arises in how to interpret the following: "... the damage dealt by the bite".
Now, the reasonable interpretation is that the "bite" deals d4+Con. Full Stop. However, if "the damage dealt by the bite" is interpreted to include the rider damage from the previously listed abilities, it opens the door to absolutely insane bonuses to ability checks in excess of +60.
Is there anything in RAW that clearly distinguishes between "bite" (specific weapon damage) and "attack" (generic attack damage)?
Is there anything in RAW that clearly distinguishes between "bite" (specific weapon damage) and "attack" (generic attack damage)?
It's a good question. I mean in some ways, if you "let it go" and just presume all the damage goes to the damphy's empowerment, it lets the power scale in a way that would otherwise have diminishing returns as the character comes across higher damaging targets. I don't know if I like that, though I guess we're about to see an era of Bite Builds. But separating the d4 bite and subsequent empowerment from the damage enhanced by other features might be unprecedented and be considered "overly complicated". I want to say there's got to be somewhere where damage = additional imbued power to the attacker does make those distinctions, but off the top of my head I can't recall anything. Elemental absorptions for instance is based on damage done to you you, so that doesn't work. At least that's my read.
Well, here's a possible distinction which some tables I imagine ignore for efficiency in combat. RAW the radiant damage of divine smite is in addition to the weapon damage. If you were to use divine smite against a creature vulnerable to a radiant damage, RAW (and again I think this is hand waved off for faster calculation by a lot of tables, and no one really wants to see a Divine Smite go weak, even the DM) only the dice pool of the radiant damage should be doubled, not that of the weapon itself. So if that distinction can be made, I believe the distinction between the bite and additionally delivered damage can (and I think should) be made as far as calculated the "empowered" healing or modifier.
Assuming you wanted to limit bit shinanigans, just have it heal the piercing damage done. That brings it to the d4+con and I think hunters mark. Or just have it be the d4 roll but I think that would be over nerfed
Besides the fundamental issue of needing to be a paladin (and thus be MAD) to pull this off...use all your high level spell slots...
You have to be a high level character. High level characters have less issue hitting DCs than lower level characters. Sure, your next attack will absolutely hit, but... chances are it would hit from just a +7 bonus too. And the chances are you'll be using it up in combat - your friends won't be letting you feed for +60 damage to use on a mere skill check.
And that's putting aside any magic weapons you might want to be using instead of biting.
This definitely sounds like a white room theorycraft instead of something that comes up in actual play.
With Damage Vulnerability from Grave Cleric's "Path to the Grave" and Sleep. You'll be looking at upwards of +22 at level 2. As for biting allies, I guess that's what a familiar or pet is for. Keep a bag of rats on you at all times.
Besides the fundamental issue of needing to be a paladin (and thus be MAD) to pull this off...use all your high level spell slots...
You have to be a high level character. High level characters have less issue hitting DCs than lower level characters. Sure, your next attack will absolutely hit, but... chances are it would hit from just a +7 bonus too. And the chances are you'll be using it up in combat - your friends won't be letting you feed for +60 damage to use on a mere skill check.
And that's putting aside any magic weapons you might want to be using instead of biting.
This definitely sounds like a white room theorycraft instead of something that comes up in actual play.
I don't know. I could totally see one of those adversarial DMs doing one of those "you've been stripped of your magic items and weapons and cast into the arena." The arena doesn't have to be a white room, but could.
Regardless, RAW I think shows the path to disregarding divine smite. This however:
With Damage Vulnerability from Grave Cleric's "Path to the Grave" and Sleep. You'll be looking at upwards of +22 at level 2. As for biting allies, I guess that's what a familiar or pet is for. Keep a bag of rats on you at all times.
is harder to segregate so could lead to a very enriched empowerment pool, I think. You'd never get it from a bag of rats though, or a familiar unless it had a high HP capacity. That is, I'd presume the damage returned as empowerment is limited to the hp capacity of the victim. So now 22 hp infusion from drinking a rat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I don't know. I could totally see one of those adversarial DMs doing one of those "you've been stripped of your magic items and weapons and cast into the arena." The arena doesn't have to be a white room, but could.
Regardless, RAW I think shows the path to disregarding divine smite. This however:
That... really doesn't change things. No one builds a character around being thrown naked into an arena. Let alone a high level one. Biting and getting +5 ~ +9 to hit is already going to put you in "pretty much hitting every time" territory. Getting more from smiting is a bit superfluous. Especially when, at high levels, being able to consistantly hit with -5 penalty for GWM / SS is common.
Getting +5 to pretty much any and all skills checks and attack rolls? At such a small cost? Now, that's admittedly pretty easy thing to discuss being overpowered. I'm also in the camp that being able to consistantly get above +5 to skills at low level is too much, breaking bounded accuracy. I can also see the argument that getting extra healing/skill from dealing radiant damage is a bit unthematic.
I'm also not really sold on being able to bite like this outside of a grapple. Given that HP isn't just meat... given that opponents have scales and armor that shouldn't just be bit through casually, without aiming.
There is a lot I find questionable about the biting. But worrying about a paladin-smite-biter? That's a bit of an extreme theorycraft that I just can't really see as being useful.
I don't know. I could totally see one of those adversarial DMs doing one of those "you've been stripped of your magic items and weapons and cast into the arena." The arena doesn't have to be a white room, but could.
Regardless, RAW I think shows the path to disregarding divine smite. This however:
That... really doesn't change things. No one builds a character around being thrown naked into an arena. Let alone a high level one. Biting and getting +5 ~ +9 to hit is already going to put you in "pretty much hitting every time" territory. Getting more from smiting is a bit superfluous. Especially when, at high levels, being able to consistantly hit with -5 penalty for GWM / SS is common.
Getting +5 to pretty much any and all skills checks and attack rolls? At such a small cost? Now, that's admittedly pretty easy thing to discuss being overpowered. I'm also in the camp that being able to consistantly get above +5 to skills at low level is too much, breaking bounded accuracy. I can also see the argument that getting extra healing/skill from dealing radiant damage is a bit unthematic.
I'm also not really sold on being able to bite like this outside of a grapple. Given that HP isn't just meat... given that opponents have scales and armor that shouldn't just be bit through casually, without aiming.
There is a lot I find questionable about the biting. But worrying about a paladin-smite-biter? That's a bit of an extreme theorycraft that I just can't really see as being useful.
I think you're spot on pointing out the need for grappling or incapacitation for the bite to actually work. I mean this attack is vampire derivative, though the vampire bite functions differently and is obviously more formidable; but grappled or incapacitated is how vampires have to roll, so to speak. If that was in effect, I'd be more comfortable with the bite, and I think the lack of that handling speaks to some of the rushed feel this whole design has (anyone think the short timeline between UA and survey release pretty much admits something they rushed out and will probably quickly archive for a rethink?).
I also appreciate the strictures against undead and constructs provided empowerment benefits, but I don't know if I'd stop there. I don't know why outside of simplicity Fiendish Ichor (or whatever fiends besides Demons have for vitality fluids), Celestial equivalent, whatever courses through Elementals etc would be nourishing to a Dhamphyr. Maybe limit it to creatures of your half origin (but that gets messy since you could see some creatures of non humanoid nature lore-sensibly preying on humanoid life energies).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I personally have no problem feeding on fiends, celestials and elementals - vampires are, from a story perspective, feeding on life force. Blood, breath, soul are all interconnected. Golems and undead kind of...lack life force.
Though, I'd also allow the bite to work on fellow vampires. You suck blood, you have blood in you to be sucked. I see the rules more as... guidelines, to borrow a certain pirate's words.
I agree, and it's probably going to RAW that vampire bites are more about life force (I mean check the UA table on what the Dhamphyr hungers for) in the abstract. I guess I'm a little :/ about it since my games have some developed lore with some mechanical implications as to what souls and "life forces" are which would call into question what would happen if something that nourishes through prime material mortal souls tries to feed on an outer or elemental planar beings "life force" (because the PM "soul" is something very different, literally radically different, from souls of an elemental or outer planar nature).
I want to see plant lineages to allow for myconids opening doors to the deep weird. Oozes too maybe?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Everything about the Gothic Lineages are easy enough to fix and they would be great except for the losing all of your previous racial abilities. That part is a hard nut to crack. However, the bite thing is a pretty simple issue to wrangle just by simply dropping the random bonus to the next attack/skill check thing. I think the potential healing is a good enough reason to use the attack.
Assuming you wanted to limit bit shinanigans, just have it heal the piercing damage done. That brings it to the d4+con and I think hunters mark.
This is the way, in my opinion. The other half is what can be done with the buff, aside from attack rolls? Hide checks to duck in & out of the shadows, a boost to Counterspell or Dispel Magic... Initiative for the next fight, if you're careful. What else?
This is the way, in my opinion. The other half is what can be done with the buff, aside from attack rolls? Hide checks to duck in & out of the shadows, a boost to Counterspell or Dispel Magic... Initiative for the next fight, if you're careful. What else?
That will largely depend on the DM. In 5e, there isn't much support for "Epic Skill Checks", so anything above DC30 should simply saturate and go to waste, except in opposed checks.
The most potentially problematic uses would probably be charisma or knowledge checks. A +20~60 to recalling information about (or seducing) the BBEG would either need to reveal intimate details, or be met with [Access Denied: This target is protected by Plot Armor], which rolls into the issue of managing expectations. If players are given access to exciting features, they will expect proportionate rewards for success. Requiring multiple successful rolls is one way of mitigating this, but employed reactively, it will feel like a cheap trick to block the player.
A better implementation of this Vampiric Bite feature might be to make it target specific. Biting a rogue gives you a bonus to dexterity checks, or to knowledge/insight relating to discern information related to that individual, a la "Blood Memory". That's a little more complicated than a flat bonus to the next check, but it would place narratively justifiable bounds on it.
"Extract Essence"
—Gain a temporary bonus corresponding to the targets highest attribute score for 1 minute. [Guard has a STR 13(+1), so the PC gets a +1 to Strength based checks].
—Learn one secret about the target.
This would have the advantage of allowing the ability to scale according to the monsters being encountered, and also be "encounter-matching", so you're always butting heads with the target's strongest trait.
I read it as just the damage roll and modifier of the bite alone. I can see where you are coming from, but I view a smite, hunters mark, hex and so on as individual sources of damage that are each rolled separately. It's all one attack, but the components are unique.
That said, as it counts as a simple weapon, I do wonder if the health gain would benefit from becoming a monk weapon. I know the damage as an attack goes up, but not sure if the health gain should
I think the key verbage here is "damage dealt by the bite". RAW, I read that as the 1d4 + modifier. Hunter's mark is in addition to (the extra damage is from hunter's mark, not the bite), same with Divine Smite (radiant damage, not the bite).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
"...which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient..."
Monk with Tasha options:
Whenever you finish a short or long rest, you can touch one weapon, focus your ki on it, and then count that weapon as a monk weapon until you use this feature again. The chosen weapon must meet these criteria:
In my opinion half of the written language in Vampiric Bite is broken and I'd be surprised if this version makes it in a published book.
Wording like " You add your Constitution modifier..." instead of "You use your Constitution modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity..." (Warlock, Hex warrior feature) makes it look like you can do 1d4+DEX/STR+CON which I can't imagine being the intent here.
The lack turn limits allowing you to vampiric bite multiple times in 1 combat round. Potentially problematic due to the healing portion. Low hp? Just bite an amount of times to heal back up.
The most potentially problematic uses would probably be charisma or knowledge checks. A +20~60 to recalling information about (or seducing) the BBEG would either need to reveal intimate details, or be met with [Access Denied: This target is protected by Plot Armor], which rolls into the issue of managing expectations. If players are given access to exciting features, they will expect proportionate rewards for success. Requiring multiple successful rolls is one way of mitigating this, but employed reactively, it will feel like a cheap trick to block the player.
A small nitpick, but the official rules for social-fu have a cap of DC 20. Everything else is a function of manipulating their attitude between Hostile, Indifferent and Friendly. A Hostile being, like the BBEG, "does as asked as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved." At the absolute best. Being seduced by your enemy is very much a risk; giving the enemy so much as a copper is a sacrifice. So, a +20 to your check is pretty redundant, especially for a class that's already Charisma-based. A simple +5 bonus will be more than enough in most cases to hit DC 20. Even low level characters.
I mean, I'm not happy with adding the dice bonus to skill checks, because it breaks bounded accuracy and I don't like that from a simple design point of view, but bounded accuracy also means that arbitrarily large numbers are ultimately meaningless.
The most potentially problematic uses would probably be charisma or knowledge checks. A +20~60 to recalling information about (or seducing) the BBEG would either need to reveal intimate details, or be met with [Access Denied: This target is protected by Plot Armor], which rolls into the issue of managing expectations. If players are given access to exciting features, they will expect proportionate rewards for success. Requiring multiple successful rolls is one way of mitigating this, but employed reactively, it will feel like a cheap trick to block the player.
A small nitpick, but the official rules for social-fu have a cap of DC 20. Everything else is a function of manipulating their attitude between Hostile, Indifferent and Friendly. A Hostile being, like the BBEG, "does as asked as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved." At the absolute best. Being seduced by your enemy is very much a risk; giving the enemy so much as a copper is a sacrifice. So, a +20 to your check is pretty redundant, especially for a class that's already Charisma-based. A simple +5 bonus will be more than enough in most cases to hit DC 20. Even low level characters.
I mean, I'm not happy with adding the dice bonus to skill checks, because it breaks bounded accuracy and I don't like that from a simple design point of view, but bounded accuracy also means that arbitrarily large numbers are ultimately meaningless.
Sure, for social stuff. But what about opposed skill checks? Actions like Shove and Grapple are still affected by this. Imagine the following interaction
Player: "Alright! My bite critted. As for my bonus action the dragon is now prone."
DM: "Rewind a second there. A shove is contested, your roll versus mine, roll the dice."
Player: "Alright, but there's no need. The dragon can't win the roll."
DM: "Yea, you rolled a 1 there buddy."
Player: "Doesn't matter. My Vampiric Bite did 4+4+8 damage so I get +16, and with my expertise in athletics adding +17 that's a total of 34. Do you beat a 34?"
DM: "No :("
Player: "I didn't think so."
Now I'd like to imagine players aren't like this with their DM, but rules as written this could happen. Sad thing is that this is bare bones Vampiric Bite (high rolled, but still). If modifiers get added then the monk could increase the dice to d10s. Or if extra damage counts to this attack then a smite bite could make the whole contested skill check quite pointless. With this any monster in the game will be knocked prone and grappled without a possible contest.
Side note. I am aware that dragons are gargantuan. A Grey Dwarf Rune Knight Fighter will be large trough Giant's Might and huge trough Enlarge/Reduce at level 3. Grapples and Shoves works on anything 1 size larger then you, so there's no problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Initially, this is all well and good. However, as written, the Vampiric Bite trait is eligible for abilities like Hunter's Mark and Divine Smite. The issue arises in how to interpret the following: "... the damage dealt by the bite".
Now, the reasonable interpretation is that the "bite" deals d4+Con. Full Stop. However, if "the damage dealt by the bite" is interpreted to include the rider damage from the previously listed abilities, it opens the door to absolutely insane bonuses to ability checks in excess of +60.
Is there anything in RAW that clearly distinguishes between "bite" (specific weapon damage) and "attack" (generic attack damage)?
The RAW definition is +60, yes. I think they’ll change it if the Dhampir is published in a book.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
It's a good question. I mean in some ways, if you "let it go" and just presume all the damage goes to the damphy's empowerment, it lets the power scale in a way that would otherwise have diminishing returns as the character comes across higher damaging targets. I don't know if I like that, though I guess we're about to see an era of Bite Builds. But separating the d4 bite and subsequent empowerment from the damage enhanced by other features might be unprecedented and be considered "overly complicated". I want to say there's got to be somewhere where damage = additional imbued power to the attacker does make those distinctions, but off the top of my head I can't recall anything. Elemental absorptions for instance is based on damage done to you you, so that doesn't work. At least that's my read.
Well, here's a possible distinction which some tables I imagine ignore for efficiency in combat. RAW the radiant damage of divine smite is in addition to the weapon damage. If you were to use divine smite against a creature vulnerable to a radiant damage, RAW (and again I think this is hand waved off for faster calculation by a lot of tables, and no one really wants to see a Divine Smite go weak, even the DM) only the dice pool of the radiant damage should be doubled, not that of the weapon itself. So if that distinction can be made, I believe the distinction between the bite and additionally delivered damage can (and I think should) be made as far as calculated the "empowered" healing or modifier.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Assuming you wanted to limit bit shinanigans, just have it heal the piercing damage done. That brings it to the d4+con and I think hunters mark. Or just have it be the d4 roll but I think that would be over nerfed
Besides the fundamental issue of needing to be a paladin (and thus be MAD) to pull this off...use all your high level spell slots...
You have to be a high level character. High level characters have less issue hitting DCs than lower level characters. Sure, your next attack will absolutely hit, but... chances are it would hit from just a +7 bonus too. And the chances are you'll be using it up in combat - your friends won't be letting you feed for +60 damage to use on a mere skill check.
And that's putting aside any magic weapons you might want to be using instead of biting.
This definitely sounds like a white room theorycraft instead of something that comes up in actual play.
With Damage Vulnerability from Grave Cleric's "Path to the Grave" and Sleep. You'll be looking at upwards of +22 at level 2. As for biting allies, I guess that's what a familiar or pet is for. Keep a bag of rats on you at all times.
I don't know. I could totally see one of those adversarial DMs doing one of those "you've been stripped of your magic items and weapons and cast into the arena." The arena doesn't have to be a white room, but could.
Regardless, RAW I think shows the path to disregarding divine smite. This however:
is harder to segregate so could lead to a very enriched empowerment pool, I think. You'd never get it from a bag of rats though, or a familiar unless it had a high HP capacity. That is, I'd presume the damage returned as empowerment is limited to the hp capacity of the victim. So now 22 hp infusion from drinking a rat.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I'd consider double a creature's HP, due to the rules for massive damage. In which case, Abyssal chickens are a viable Familiar Blood Bank.
That... really doesn't change things. No one builds a character around being thrown naked into an arena. Let alone a high level one. Biting and getting +5 ~ +9 to hit is already going to put you in "pretty much hitting every time" territory. Getting more from smiting is a bit superfluous. Especially when, at high levels, being able to consistantly hit with -5 penalty for GWM / SS is common.
Getting +5 to pretty much any and all skills checks and attack rolls? At such a small cost? Now, that's admittedly pretty easy thing to discuss being overpowered. I'm also in the camp that being able to consistantly get above +5 to skills at low level is too much, breaking bounded accuracy. I can also see the argument that getting extra healing/skill from dealing radiant damage is a bit unthematic.
I'm also not really sold on being able to bite like this outside of a grapple. Given that HP isn't just meat... given that opponents have scales and armor that shouldn't just be bit through casually, without aiming.
There is a lot I find questionable about the biting. But worrying about a paladin-smite-biter? That's a bit of an extreme theorycraft that I just can't really see as being useful.
I think you're spot on pointing out the need for grappling or incapacitation for the bite to actually work. I mean this attack is vampire derivative, though the vampire bite functions differently and is obviously more formidable; but grappled or incapacitated is how vampires have to roll, so to speak. If that was in effect, I'd be more comfortable with the bite, and I think the lack of that handling speaks to some of the rushed feel this whole design has (anyone think the short timeline between UA and survey release pretty much admits something they rushed out and will probably quickly archive for a rethink?).
I also appreciate the strictures against undead and constructs provided empowerment benefits, but I don't know if I'd stop there. I don't know why outside of simplicity Fiendish Ichor (or whatever fiends besides Demons have for vitality fluids), Celestial equivalent, whatever courses through Elementals etc would be nourishing to a Dhamphyr. Maybe limit it to creatures of your half origin (but that gets messy since you could see some creatures of non humanoid nature lore-sensibly preying on humanoid life energies).
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I personally have no problem feeding on fiends, celestials and elementals - vampires are, from a story perspective, feeding on life force. Blood, breath, soul are all interconnected. Golems and undead kind of...lack life force.
Though, I'd also allow the bite to work on fellow vampires. You suck blood, you have blood in you to be sucked. I see the rules more as... guidelines, to borrow a certain pirate's words.
I agree, and it's probably going to RAW that vampire bites are more about life force (I mean check the UA table on what the Dhamphyr hungers for) in the abstract. I guess I'm a little :/ about it since my games have some developed lore with some mechanical implications as to what souls and "life forces" are which would call into question what would happen if something that nourishes through prime material mortal souls tries to feed on an outer or elemental planar beings "life force" (because the PM "soul" is something very different, literally radically different, from souls of an elemental or outer planar nature).
I want to see plant lineages to allow for myconids opening doors to the deep weird. Oozes too maybe?
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Everything about the Gothic Lineages are easy enough to fix and they would be great except for the losing all of your previous racial abilities. That part is a hard nut to crack. However, the bite thing is a pretty simple issue to wrangle just by simply dropping the random bonus to the next attack/skill check thing. I think the potential healing is a good enough reason to use the attack.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
This is the way, in my opinion. The other half is what can be done with the buff, aside from attack rolls? Hide checks to duck in & out of the shadows, a boost to Counterspell or Dispel Magic... Initiative for the next fight, if you're careful. What else?
That will largely depend on the DM. In 5e, there isn't much support for "Epic Skill Checks", so anything above DC30 should simply saturate and go to waste, except in opposed checks.
The most potentially problematic uses would probably be charisma or knowledge checks. A +20~60 to recalling information about (or seducing) the BBEG would either need to reveal intimate details, or be met with [Access Denied: This target is protected by Plot Armor], which rolls into the issue of managing expectations. If players are given access to exciting features, they will expect proportionate rewards for success. Requiring multiple successful rolls is one way of mitigating this, but employed reactively, it will feel like a cheap trick to block the player.
A better implementation of this Vampiric Bite feature might be to make it target specific. Biting a rogue gives you a bonus to dexterity checks, or to knowledge/insight relating to discern information related to that individual, a la "Blood Memory". That's a little more complicated than a flat bonus to the next check, but it would place narratively justifiable bounds on it.
"Extract Essence"
—Gain a temporary bonus corresponding to the targets highest attribute score for 1 minute. [Guard has a STR 13(+1), so the PC gets a +1 to Strength based checks].
—Learn one secret about the target.
This would have the advantage of allowing the ability to scale according to the monsters being encountered, and also be "encounter-matching", so you're always butting heads with the target's strongest trait.
I read it as just the damage roll and modifier of the bite alone. I can see where you are coming from, but I view a smite, hunters mark, hex and so on as individual sources of damage that are each rolled separately. It's all one attack, but the components are unique.
That said, as it counts as a simple weapon, I do wonder if the health gain would benefit from becoming a monk weapon. I know the damage as an attack goes up, but not sure if the health gain should
I think the key verbage here is "damage dealt by the bite". RAW, I read that as the 1d4 + modifier. Hunter's mark is in addition to (the extra damage is from hunter's mark, not the bite), same with Divine Smite (radiant damage, not the bite).
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
Dhampir vampiric bite
Monk with Tasha options:
Hur dur 1d10+x for the next ability check.
In my opinion half of the written language in Vampiric Bite is broken and I'd be surprised if this version makes it in a published book.
Wording like " You add your Constitution modifier..." instead of "You use your Constitution modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity..." (Warlock, Hex warrior feature) makes it look like you can do 1d4+DEX/STR+CON which I can't imagine being the intent here.
The lack turn limits allowing you to vampiric bite multiple times in 1 combat round. Potentially problematic due to the healing portion. Low hp? Just bite an amount of times to heal back up.
A small nitpick, but the official rules for social-fu have a cap of DC 20. Everything else is a function of manipulating their attitude between Hostile, Indifferent and Friendly. A Hostile being, like the BBEG, "does as asked as long as no risks or sacrifices are involved." At the absolute best. Being seduced by your enemy is very much a risk; giving the enemy so much as a copper is a sacrifice. So, a +20 to your check is pretty redundant, especially for a class that's already Charisma-based. A simple +5 bonus will be more than enough in most cases to hit DC 20. Even low level characters.
I mean, I'm not happy with adding the dice bonus to skill checks, because it breaks bounded accuracy and I don't like that from a simple design point of view, but bounded accuracy also means that arbitrarily large numbers are ultimately meaningless.
Sure, for social stuff. But what about opposed skill checks? Actions like Shove and Grapple are still affected by this. Imagine the following interaction
Now I'd like to imagine players aren't like this with their DM, but rules as written this could happen. Sad thing is that this is bare bones Vampiric Bite (high rolled, but still).
If modifiers get added then the monk could increase the dice to d10s. Or if extra damage counts to this attack then a smite bite could make the whole contested skill check quite pointless. With this any monster in the game will be knocked prone and grappled without a possible contest.
Side note. I am aware that dragons are gargantuan. A Grey Dwarf Rune Knight Fighter will be large trough Giant's Might and huge trough Enlarge/Reduce at level 3. Grapples and Shoves works on anything 1 size larger then you, so there's no problem.