Talk:Vampiric Surge (3.5e Feat)

From D&D Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I'm not sure how this is considered unbalanced. The damage is 2 size categories smaller and heals that amount too. The heal would only take place on a successful attack and actually reduces the damage done to an opponent. If a medium sized creature does damage as if it were tiny (eg a bite attack) we're only talking 1d2 points of damage and healing. Meanwhile a Huge creature would attack as a medium creature and heal that amount. By the time you're fighting huge monsters, having one heal 1d8 damage while reducing it's ability to hit a group of PC's would actually be more of a hindrance to it (or at least balanced) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.84.159.96 (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts.

I think it's the wording that's simply seems ambiguous, the balance seems okay, though I can't tell whether using this feat is optional or your natural weapon always does less damage. I'd word it closer to "Choose a natural weapon you have. When attacking with this natural weapon, you may [or must?] deal damage as if the natural weapon was two size categories smaller. If this attack successfully deals damage, you are cured for an amount of health equal to the damage dealt." Something along those lines would be clearer. --SgtLion (talk) 03:11, 7 October 2015 (MDT)
The prerequisites should be written in a way strictly defined by the game, rather than in natural English.
Retrieved from "https://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vampiric_Surge_(3.5e_Feat)&oldid=727419"