In our current Pathfinder campaign, my party is (probably) dealing with a Vampire; one of the vampire weaknesses is to take damage in "running water".

We have multiple Clerics and a Druid in the party (all 6th level), and Create Water is an Orison, which means each of us could Create 12 gallons of Water every 6 seconds. That's a lot of water! Could this be used to create "running water" sufficient for hurting a Vampire?


2 Answers 2


Only with a Lot of Planning

The description of the vampire reads, "Each round of immersion in running water inflicts damage on a vampire equal to one-third of its maximum hit points—a vampire reduced to 0 hit points in this manner is destroyed." Emphasis mine.

I'll admit 12 gallons per person per round is a lot, but immersing--that is, submerging or completely covering the vampire beneath running water--is going to take a lot more than a few castings of the spell create water. You and your meddling friends are going to have to engineer a Scooby-doo style trap with dams and such to make the water actually run for that to work.

The Pathfinder vampire is killed by running water probably as a baptism metaphor, but also probably to give low-level players a method of destroying an otherwise powerful undead by bull rushing it into a river and winning grapple checks. The spell create water--a 0th-level spell usable infinitely in Pathfinder--I'm almost certain isn't supposed to nor intended to kill again Count Dracula or Baron Blood.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Water flow varies a lot, but with a bit of Googling I found a target figure of 500 gallons-per-minute as something good enough to micro-generate power (imagine a small creek flowing with enough momentum to move a propeller). The image seems reasonable, and equates to 50 gallons per round - it would be the kind of flow however that would require the vampire to be held down in it, as you suggest. Not just cast-and-go. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 21, 2014 at 14:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ So, folklore aside, it sounds like we could technically create a stream (from the top of a hill, with a magically-dug trench, etc etc) but it's probably not the most efficient method of dealing with one little vamp :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Josh
    Mar 21, 2014 at 15:08
  • 9
    \$\begingroup\$ @Josh Correct. On an individual scale the scheme's effort far outstrips its results--but if you're flooding, like, a valley full of vampires and time permits, rock on. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 21, 2014 at 15:16

I would personally rule against it. The traditional folklore regarding running water referred to established streams and brooks and had as much to do with the idea of thresholds as it did with the water. Creating a splash of water, even the substantial amount from Create Water or a Decanter of Endless water doesn't create an established channel the way that a running brook or river does.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .