5
\$\begingroup\$

Inspired by a comment thread on this question.

The vampire template says the following for the Type entry:

Type: The creature's type changes to undead (augmented). Do not recalculate class Hit Dice, BAB, or saves.

Does a creature that acquires this template — with the augmented subtype — still count as their original type for targeting spells and effects? In concrete terms: if a humanoid becomes a vampire, will spells like Enlarge Person still work on them? Does this apply for other templates with similar augmented types?

Another user I respect said that Enlarge Person should still work on that previously-humanoid vampire, and whilst I strongly disagree, I can't find anything in the rules as written that specifically says they do not. I will self-answer below with support and examples, but a book rule, developer clarification, or FAQ would be better. Barring that, other examples in the books could help us confirm or deny.

\$\endgroup\$
4
\$\begingroup\$

Augmented [original type] as a subtype has the following description:

A creature receives this subtype when something (usually a template) changes its original type. Some creatures (those with an inherited template) are born with this subtype; others acquire it when they take on an acquired template. The augmented subtype is always paired with the creature's original type.

It doesn't say anything about the creature continuing to be or count as a creature of its original type, and primarily seems to function as a way to remember what this creature was before it changed types. The augmented subtype is typically applied when some part of a creature's statistics remain based on its old type: for example, a vampire does not recalculate HD, hp, or BAB when becoming undead; additionally, the vampire's create spawn ability only works on creatures of its original type. A ghoul, however, despite being a former humanoid turned undead by an undead creature's special ability, exactly like a vampire, does not gain the augmented subtype. A ghoul's statistics and traits, though, are not based on the original creature's; not even the creature's race matters except perhaps to help determine appearance. A ghoul's stats are set; there's no "ghoul template" to apply.

The rules for animal companions feel the need to call out companions as "remaining creatures of the animal type for the purposes of determining which spells can effect them", although animals whose Int score increases to 3 normally become magical beasts (augmented animal). This implies that allowing the creature to change to a magical beast (augmented animal) would disqualify it from having spells like Animal Growth cast on it. Indeed, the Awaken spell on the Pathfinder SRD specifically mentions that creatures targeted by it can no longer serve as animal companions. Awaken causes them to become magical beasts (augmented animal), while an animal companion must be an animal.

After looking at which creatures do and don't gain the augmented subtype, I'm reasonably certain the correct use of the subtype is: Apply the subtype if the creature's statistics are partially based on what the creature was before becoming its new type, or if it has abilities that rely on recalling its original creature type. I'm sure that the original type no longer counts as its current type; a creature can only have one type. Part of the benefit of class archetypes that change your type is that you become immune to the many humanoid-only control spells, such as Dominate Person or Charm Person, and part of the drawback is that you can no longer be affected by humanoid-only buffs, such as Enlarge Person. Otherwise the type change would be near-meaningless, and interpreting the rules in situations where one of your types is specifically vulnerable to an effect and the other type is not would be ridiculous.

\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

The full creature type line of a previously humanoid vampire is

undead (augmented humanoid)

with the "humanoid" in the original PRD being a hyperlinked reference to the full humanoid type, in case there is any doubt or ambiguity.

The Enlarge Person spell's target line is

Target one humanoid creature

Since humanoid is part of the type line of the vampire, it's a valid target for the spell.


There are undoubtedly contradictions and ambiguities elsewhere in the Pathfinder rules, but it seems straightforwardly RAW and RAI that vampires of humanoid body plan, with "humanoid" in their type line, are humanoid creatures — whatever else they may be in addition.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ So that's what "The augmented subtype is always paired with the creature's original type." refers to? The original type goes in the brackets beside the augmented bit? \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Jul 31 '14 at 5:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JonathanHobbs Yep! Every worked example with the augmented subtype in the Bestiary shows "augmented X". Here's a dragon wight that uses the wight template and has the type "undead (augmented dragon)", and a zombie kobold that's "undead (augmented humanoid)". Augmented never shows up alone, apart from where it's defined. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Jul 31 '14 at 16:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ Question for you: Do you rule that Monstrous Humanoids can use enlarge person too? The best evidence I have is articles from 3rd edition, as these rules seem to be unchanged save for a line in the Augmented subtype about gaining the new traits but retaining features. \$\endgroup\$ – Arkhaic Jul 31 '14 at 18:28
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ But Augmented Humanoid is a single subtype as well. Here web.archive.org/web/20130531101714/http://www.wizards.com/… is the article from 3rd edition D&D on the topic (only the polymorph rules have changed and that one line in the augmented subtype description). \$\endgroup\$ – Arkhaic Jul 31 '14 at 18:54
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Well, then you get into outsiders with humanoid forms and the like. What makes things that used to be humans special? Regardless, the spell specifies a humanoid creature. Vampires aren't humanoid. They used to be, which makes the Undead(Augmented Humanoid) which is as humanoid as Monstrous Humanoid. \$\endgroup\$ – Arkhaic Jul 31 '14 at 19:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.