I believe Vampirism is rampant in ESO. This is very strange, lore evading, lore breaking - especially for Templar's, and seems to need some changes. The obvious change would be to make it so Vampires just weren't as powerful by nerfing their passives but a more realistic solution would be to apply an upkeep to the Vampirism system.
The upkeep system would provide that you lose power over time in a system of stages. This would change the values for things like Undeath and Supernatural Recovery. For example, without paying the upkeep you would lose the strength of Undeath and Supernatural Recovery every three to six hours.
So, if you don't go around feeding you would perhaps go down to 7% Resource Regeneration then 5% and then 3% until Supernatural Reovery would no longer benefit you at all! However, regardless of whether or not you pay the upkeep you would still suffer the fire damage penalty and health recovery reduction.
This makes much more
sense as Vampires in 99% of all fantasy must feed or they become weakened or might even die. In the case of this proposed system you would just be weaker.
As you lose levels of Vampirism due to lack of feeding the amount of Upkeep you must pay would be greater. For example, in order to maintain maximum Supernatural Recovery and Undeath you may need to feed on ten NPCs before the timer expires which then renews the timer or adds x time to it.
But for each level you go down you must feed on an additional five NPCs.
This system is superior to the current system in several ways.
- It makes more sense
- Vampires should be weakened from not feeding
- It doesn't make vampirism effortless
The most defining characteristic of vampires is their unnatural, insatiable need for blood. A hybridization of a plant and vampiric blood led to plants with a similar, voracious hunger for blood, among other things.[10] Blood may not be needed to stay "alive", but doing without it can cause a vampire to become extremely weak and rabid, though some types of vampires will instead become stronger and more vampiric. However, they will still become rabid after too long without blood[7][11] and in some cases, can fall into a coma. Consuming blood also allows some vampire bloodlines to maintain a more inconspicuous appearance, dulling their vampiric qualities but may improve their health and regeneration. If a vampire's bite leaves its victim alive after a feeding, the vampire risks passing its disease to the victim. Blood itself may not be needed to keep a vampire healthy; it is suggested that vampires are able to drain a warmblooded creature's "life force" to replenish their own.
Vampires are essentially parasitic and don't actually need to kill their victims during feeding, however, either out of a frenzied blood-lust or to avoid potential competition, most victims are drained completely. Only two known bloodlines are shown to be able to restrain themselves by feeding without killing, though this is out pragmaticism and most victims suffer a fate worse than death by being kept captive by vampires to be fed on continuously.
Vampires are capable of eating mortal food with no ill effects but won't derive the sustance they need from it.
Here we can see that "some types of vampires will instead become stronger and more vampiric" does not mean
ALL Vampires would become stronger and more Vampiric. Further, it goes on to state they will "Still become rabid after too long without blood." This is not reflected in the game. No vampire eventually becomes "rabid" and no vampire "has to feed" in the game. This is against the lore.
Moreover, it states "Blood may not be needed to stay alive, but doing without it can cause a vampire to become extremely
weak and rabid". Does taking less damage and having faster resource recovery convey
weakness?
In this other example:
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Vampires_of_the_Iliac_Bay,_Chapter_II
We see the following stated: " If I did not kill a warm blooded creature once a night and drink its blood, my hunger would gnaw at me, and any wounds I suffered would not heal no matter how much I rested." So tell me, does Undeath (less damage taken) convey someone not being able to
heal?
In this other example:
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Journal_of_the_Lord_Lovidicus
We see the following stated: " Entry 8: Two weeks. Two weeks have passed since Luktuv locked me in my quarters. Try as I might, I cannot free myself. I cannot breach the doors! If I don't feed soon, I feel I will go
mad." Does anything in the game encourage us to feed else we go mad? Does anything even require us to feed?
Source with footnotes:
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Vampire#cite_note-JOTLL-11
Quoting ShadowHvo:
I recently bought the book "Tales of Tamriel - Book 1: The Land", and it was quite a nice read, really recommended for everyone that would like more insight into the lore of the Elder Scrolls.
However, as a self-proclaimed "Vampire Lorewhore" in the Elder Scrolls setting, I would like to point something rather strange out...
On page 230, (which is the second last page in the book.) Cinna Scholasticus writes the following in line 18:
"By night, these hunters are possessed of extreme fortitude and a powerful ability to recover from wounds."
Now, here comes the killer, the lore studies in the book completely contradicts the ingame version of how the bloodline actually functions. In ESO, we have a 75% Decrease in Health Regen, the lore supporting this particular vampiric bloodline completely contradicts this.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/199211/noxiphilic-sanguivoria-lore-inconsistency
Again we see direct lore contradictions.
THE PURPLE GANG IS A NO FEES TRADING GUILD WITH PERKS! 
