So the new dhampir gains necrotic resistance, but they now have to make the attack rolls of their vampiric bite with strength instead of constitution, and no longer get to make it with advantage if they’re bloodied. They also need to breathe now.
The change to the attack roll on vampiric bite is pretty rough! I doubt many dhampir are strength builds, as that’s not much of a vampire trope. I play a dhampir sorcerer, so going from a +3 to -1 for the attack roll doesn’t sound fun.
Some other weird things in here too… the Tireless Reveler feat would be wild in a party with someone who had Musician - the character would gain Heroic Inspiration several times every Short Rest.
The Bloodlust feat’s Sanguine Feast lets you regain hp whenever you hit a Bloodied creature with an attack roll. It feels like that should be with a melee attack? It feels weird to regain hp from this feature even if I’m 120ft away.
I feel the new Dhampir is a straight downgrade of the lineage version.
Disagree - the bite being an Unarmed Strike now instead of a weird natural weapon means lots more synergy with the rest of the system. For example, there's no ambiguity about Wraps of Unarmed Power working with their bite now.
Similarly, the breath holding thing is far less likely to come up than Necrotic Resistance.
I don’t understand why wraps of unarmed prowess would affect a bite. You’re not punching them. Or why with tavern brawler you should be able to push and bite them at the same time.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
I don’t think it’d have hurt to keep the no-breathing thing. It’s fun flavour.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
Some species just lend themselves to certain archetypes. Bugbears want melee builds that do lots of attacks. Aarakocra want builds with light armor or no armor so they can fly. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's not like playing against type will make your character unusable either.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
Some species just lend themselves to certain archetypes. Bugbears want melee builds that do lots of attacks. Aarakocra want builds with light armor or no armor so they can fly. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's not like playing against type will make your character unusable either.
Which could be fine if the trope for a vampire was to be a fighter or paladin. I guess it works if you want your dhampir to be Blade, but this makes it tough to play a rogue (such as Astarion) or a spellcaster, which are more likely to be what players are after.
If you’re going to shut off viable player options that worked before, there should be a thematic or mechanical reason for it, which there just isn’t here.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
Some species just lend themselves to certain archetypes. Bugbears want melee builds that do lots of attacks. Aarakocra want builds with light armor or no armor so they can fly. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's not like playing against type will make your character unusable either.
Which could be fine if the trope for a vampire was to be a fighter or paladin. I guess it works if you want your dhampir to be Blade, but this makes it tough to play a rogue (such as Astarion) or a spellcaster, which are more likely to be what players are after.
If you’re going to shut off viable player options that worked before, there should be a thematic or mechanical reason for it, which there just isn’t here.
No offense meant, but this seems a bit on the melodramatic side; you're not "shut off" from being a rogue or primary caster as a Dhampir. You just have one slightly suboptimal / unneeded feature. Would my Dhampir be doing a lot of biting as, say, a Stars Druid or Evoker Wizard - no, probably not. Would my caster Dhampir suddenly be weak though, of course they wouldn't. In fact, the ability to walk up a wall and stand on the ceiling concentration-free while I'm casting with my hands full is still pretty good I'd say, and Necrotic resist is highly likely to come up in most campaigns too. Similarly, rogues are usually pretty bad at climbing because they tend to dump strength, unless they pick Athletics for one of their Expertises, but a Dhampir doesn't have to do that.
So, with a dhampir monk, does the drain ability work off the martial arts die? RAW, seems like it would, but that seems unbalanced to me.
It wouldn’t. It’s pretty clear that the damage formula for vampiric bite is an alternative to the damage formula that monk’s use, and the drain ability is only allowed when you deal “this damage”.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
Some species just lend themselves to certain archetypes. Bugbears want melee builds that do lots of attacks. Aarakocra want builds with light armor or no armor so they can fly. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's not like playing against type will make your character unusable either.
Which could be fine if the trope for a vampire was to be a fighter or paladin. I guess it works if you want your dhampir to be Blade, but this makes it tough to play a rogue (such as Astarion) or a spellcaster, which are more likely to be what players are after.
If you’re going to shut off viable player options that worked before, there should be a thematic or mechanical reason for it, which there just isn’t here.
No offense meant, but this seems a bit on the melodramatic side; you're not "shut off" from being a rogue or primary caster as a Dhampir. You just have one slightly suboptimal / unneeded feature. Would my Dhampir be doing a lot of biting as, say, a Stars Druid or Evoker Wizard - no, probably not. Would my caster Dhampir suddenly be weak though, of course they wouldn't. In fact, the ability to walk up a wall and stand on the ceiling concentration-free while I'm casting with my hands full is still pretty good I'd say, and Necrotic resist is highly likely to come up in most campaigns too. Similarly, rogues are usually pretty bad at climbing because they tend to dump strength, unless they pick Athletics for one of their Expertises, but a Dhampir doesn't have to do that.
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks. I can see a dhampir being a cool fit for a barbarian, but I’d rarely picture them in heavy armor. Of course you can play a mechanically suboptimal character, but this change is very much a steer, and it seems unnecessary.
I’m disappointed because I’m playing a dhampir sorcerer who uses vampiric bite in most sessions. My DM has asked me to switch from 2014 content to 2024 in the past, and in this case it’d take my attack modifier from +6 (with advantage when bloodied) to +2.
So I’m kind of making a fuss in case it turns out this was unintended, and they feel like errata-ing it back to being a Con attack roll.
The no-breathing thing was flavourful, and I’d take that over the mechanically superior necrotic resistance. Not sure why it needed to go.
Nearly every natural weapon defaults to STR as the attack stat, presumably since it’s the default melee stat. This includes Tabaxi claws. This doesn’t look to be some specific design decision they made for dhampir, it’s just how natural weapons work.
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks. I can see a dhampir being a cool fit for a barbarian, but I’d rarely picture them in heavy armor. Of course you can play a mechanically suboptimal character, but this change is very much a steer, and it seems unnecessary.
I’m disappointed because I’m playing a dhampir sorcerer who uses vampiric bite in most sessions. My DM has asked me to switch from 2014 content to 2024 in the past, and in this case it’d take my attack modifier from +6 (with advantage when bloodied) to +2.
So I’m kind of making a fuss in case it turns out this was unintended, and they feel like errata-ing it back to being a Con attack roll.
The no-breathing thing was flavourful, and I’d take that over the mechanically superior necrotic resistance. Not sure why it needed to go.
1) Why wouldn't they be able to wear heavy armor or be strength-based? If scrawny Githyanki fighters can go around wearing fullplate and swinging greatswords, any species can. D&D moved away from racelocking that kind of thing eons ago.
2) Again, I wouldn't view "I have a bite attack I don't really use because I'm a caster/rogue" as "suboptimal." I can sympathize with the desire to 'use the whole animal' as it were, but an unarmed strike feature on my non-US character's sheet doesn't mean I'm not optimizing; to me this is like saying Aarakocra casters are suboptimal because they tend not to use their talons. It's a flavorful feature from the species sure but they get others.
3) I wouldn't mind if they had kept the no breathing thing but eh, I'm not exactly going to lose sleep over it either. For me, necrotic resist is way more fitting for what they are, on top of being mechanically stronger.
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks.
Why don't you think they're "encouraging" dhampir to be rogues with the free spider climb?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Funnily enough when I picture Dhampir characters (and not just people playing dhampir because it's the closest to a vampire race) my first thought is always them in armour swinging a long sword, mostly because the first I ever encountered was Alucard in the Castlevania games. In real world lore they're vampire hunters and warriors against evil so a paladin would fit perfectly
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks.
Why don't you think they're "encouraging" dhampir to be rogues with the free spider climb?
Spider Climb was already in the VRGR dhampir. The point being made here (as far as I can tell anyway), is that the changes are pushing the species towards strength-based character concepts.
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks.
Why don't you think they're "encouraging" dhampir to be rogues with the free spider climb?
Spider Climb was already in the VRGR dhampir. The point being made here (as far as I can tell anyway), is that the changes are pushing the species towards strength-based character concepts.
And the counterpoint is that most if not all natural weapons use the same format, which probably hasn’t slowed the implementation of DEX class Tabaxi and similar concepts much.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So the new dhampir gains necrotic resistance, but they now have to make the attack rolls of their vampiric bite with strength instead of constitution, and no longer get to make it with advantage if they’re bloodied. They also need to breathe now.
The change to the attack roll on vampiric bite is pretty rough! I doubt many dhampir are strength builds, as that’s not much of a vampire trope. I play a dhampir sorcerer, so going from a +3 to -1 for the attack roll doesn’t sound fun.
Mind you this is better for dhampir monks! They’ve said that vampiric bite is a type of unarmed strike so I guess they could make a flurry of bites?
What new dhampir? I don't see a UA for gothic lineages and there wasn't anything in the horror subclasses document
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Astarion’s Book of Hungers was a digital expansion to the Faerun books and it released on Beyond today.
It includes a new dhampir, 5 stat blocks, 3 backgrounds and 16 feats.
I feel the new Dhampir is a straight downgrade of the lineage version.
Some other weird things in here too… the Tireless Reveler feat would be wild in a party with someone who had Musician - the character would gain Heroic Inspiration several times every Short Rest.
The Bloodlust feat’s Sanguine Feast lets you regain hp whenever you hit a Bloodied creature with an attack roll. It feels like that should be with a melee attack? It feels weird to regain hp from this feature even if I’m 120ft away.
Disagree - the bite being an Unarmed Strike now instead of a weird natural weapon means lots more synergy with the rest of the system. For example, there's no ambiguity about Wraps of Unarmed Power working with their bite now.
Similarly, the breath holding thing is far less likely to come up than Necrotic Resistance.
I don’t understand why wraps of unarmed prowess would affect a bite. You’re not punching them. Or why with tavern brawler you should be able to push and bite them at the same time.
I think the consequence is we’ll rarely see dhampir who aren’t strength builds or monks.
I don’t think it’d have hurt to keep the no-breathing thing. It’s fun flavour.
Why would they affect a headbutt or a kick? You're not punching them there either. It's magic, don't overthink it.
Some species just lend themselves to certain archetypes. Bugbears want melee builds that do lots of attacks. Aarakocra want builds with light armor or no armor so they can fly. There's nothing wrong with it, and it's not like playing against type will make your character unusable either.
Which could be fine if the trope for a vampire was to be a fighter or paladin. I guess it works if you want your dhampir to be Blade, but this makes it tough to play a rogue (such as Astarion) or a spellcaster, which are more likely to be what players are after.
If you’re going to shut off viable player options that worked before, there should be a thematic or mechanical reason for it, which there just isn’t here.
So, with a dhampir monk, does the drain ability work off the martial arts die? RAW, seems like it would, but that seems unbalanced to me.
No offense meant, but this seems a bit on the melodramatic side; you're not "shut off" from being a rogue or primary caster as a Dhampir. You just have one slightly suboptimal / unneeded feature. Would my Dhampir be doing a lot of biting as, say, a Stars Druid or Evoker Wizard - no, probably not. Would my caster Dhampir suddenly be weak though, of course they wouldn't. In fact, the ability to walk up a wall and stand on the ceiling concentration-free while I'm casting with my hands full is still pretty good I'd say, and Necrotic resist is highly likely to come up in most campaigns too. Similarly, rogues are usually pretty bad at climbing because they tend to dump strength, unless they pick Athletics for one of their Expertises, but a Dhampir doesn't have to do that.
It wouldn’t. It’s pretty clear that the damage formula for vampiric bite is an alternative to the damage formula that monk’s use, and the drain ability is only allowed when you deal “this damage”.
Not aiming to be melodramatic - I think they’ve made a choice that looks almost unintended, because I can’t see why they’d encourage dhampirs to be strength builds or monks. I can see a dhampir being a cool fit for a barbarian, but I’d rarely picture them in heavy armor. Of course you can play a mechanically suboptimal character, but this change is very much a steer, and it seems unnecessary.
I’m disappointed because I’m playing a dhampir sorcerer who uses vampiric bite in most sessions. My DM has asked me to switch from 2014 content to 2024 in the past, and in this case it’d take my attack modifier from +6 (with advantage when bloodied) to +2.
So I’m kind of making a fuss in case it turns out this was unintended, and they feel like errata-ing it back to being a Con attack roll.
The no-breathing thing was flavourful, and I’d take that over the mechanically superior necrotic resistance. Not sure why it needed to go.
Nearly every natural weapon defaults to STR as the attack stat, presumably since it’s the default melee stat. This includes Tabaxi claws. This doesn’t look to be some specific design decision they made for dhampir, it’s just how natural weapons work.
1) Why wouldn't they be able to wear heavy armor or be strength-based? If scrawny Githyanki fighters can go around wearing fullplate and swinging greatswords, any species can. D&D moved away from racelocking that kind of thing eons ago.
2) Again, I wouldn't view "I have a bite attack I don't really use because I'm a caster/rogue" as "suboptimal." I can sympathize with the desire to 'use the whole animal' as it were, but an unarmed strike feature on my non-US character's sheet doesn't mean I'm not optimizing; to me this is like saying Aarakocra casters are suboptimal because they tend not to use their talons. It's a flavorful feature from the species sure but they get others.
3) I wouldn't mind if they had kept the no breathing thing but eh, I'm not exactly going to lose sleep over it either. For me, necrotic resist is way more fitting for what they are, on top of being mechanically stronger.
Why don't you think they're "encouraging" dhampir to be rogues with the free spider climb?
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Funnily enough when I picture Dhampir characters (and not just people playing dhampir because it's the closest to a vampire race) my first thought is always them in armour swinging a long sword, mostly because the first I ever encountered was Alucard in the Castlevania games. In real world lore they're vampire hunters and warriors against evil so a paladin would fit perfectly
Spider Climb was already in the VRGR dhampir. The point being made here (as far as I can tell anyway), is that the changes are pushing the species towards strength-based character concepts.
And the counterpoint is that most if not all natural weapons use the same format, which probably hasn’t slowed the implementation of DEX class Tabaxi and similar concepts much.