Too many vampires

[Tharivious]

It almost universally fails, because well, you can only act evil when no one wants to be the victims. In order to prove the evilness and cunning and outright fear required of a vampire you actually have to have someone -see- you doing the acts which you so controversially ban because they are "suicidal". (Else there are no rumours!) It's quite a conundrum. And when you find victims willing, and players willing to be victimised, often you're dismissed as pathetic.

The same often, unfortunately, goes for any sort of attempted villain, vampires just add the feed-and-replicate layer to the mix. It's one of the flaws in freedom of destiny, but one that can be dealt with by associating with like-minded players. I think that's as much a reason for the clique-isms that get brought up and vilified so often as anything else, frequently it's just a matter of being able to trust certain people to see the situation as intended and knowing that certain others won't.

 

[Akea]

Talk to Jazzmyn, I'm sure she's having these kindsa problems right now ;-)!

Yep. It bites sometimes. *snickers* What we need more of is vampire victims! *raises hand* Jazz is still employable for your wonderful and random killings, apply today! Well, when I get back into rp'ing swings, that is.

 

[Warbridge]

Contrary to recent sentiment, I think this thread has been a calm rational discussion. There's persuasive words on both sides, but no real argument involved. Moreover, no one is banning anything.

Two themes seem to keep coming back over and over. The first theme is whether vampires are good or evil by nature. I say toss the rulebooks back in your bags and zip those puppies closed. Who needs them anyway? This is purely a question of personal taste, and whatever a person thinks is their own vision. It might be incompatible with others, or it might not be that big a deal. Maybe it's just a good point of friction between a few characters, injecting a little heated IC conversation to the mix. No one will ever win the argument, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth a little RP effort. Maybe the player and the character don't even agree, but it won't be the first time that any of us play a role to stretch ourselves or explore an idea. So you have your idea and I have mine. Good or bad is up to the player. Hopefully they won't all be the same, that would just be boring as well as statistically improbable.

The next issue is animalistic vs intelligent vampires. This one is a little more complicated, but why not have both? Sounds like I'm not the only one who thinks WotC didn't put much thought into variety when it comes to challenging a group of PCs. But why not have both? One option is to have two different styles of vampires in the world. The first type maintains its human intelligence, either considering it useful for its survival or in an effort to not sink into the mindless animal that is the predator type of vampire. The predator vampires could have succumbed to the bloodlust and power, revelling in it with wild abandon. The latter wouldn't be a very good character to play, but would make a great threat to a group of PCs. The former might make a stronger villain type, but could also be an ally depending on the situation.

This isn't the only option for mixing animal and intelligent vampires. There is a lot of opportunity in a vampire that struggles to maintain his intelligence, keeping the humanity if you will, rather than sinking into a feral state. Why not have vampires that are intelligent most of the time but ocassionally go into a feeding frenzy or are driven to that state by hunger? Some might willingly surrender to it or not be able to put up much of a fight. For those seeking to maintain their intelligence, it might be a constant struggle and one full of some good story potential.

As for getting more victims, why no work out some kind of fair trade system with friendly players? They make a new DV, designated victim, and if they need some help with their schemes then you return the favor. It's not really a new trick: at one point I had five or six other players offering to help with a large plan. Would have worked too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids, though in this case I'm talking about work interfering.

None of this has anything to do with how obvious anyone is about the vampiric nature of their character in the Tavern. I think we've done beaten that horse into undeath.

 

[Elf_Ariel]

Okay, I agree, ban was not the appropriate word. My mistake, and I take it back. I'd edit it out even, if I could think of what to put there right now. Any suggestions?

As for victims, I actually -thought- about this today at work. Between the soggy boots and crawling around under stuff I came to the conclusion that it is -possible- even probable that everyone who partakes in such a storyline can play two characters or two sides. Let's say...we have (for lack of a better current storyline...I'm pickin' on ya Jazzy!) Jazzymn's clan<black>, those who oppose them (be they a were clan, hunters group etc)<white> & then the third party of victims<grey>. Whatif (and this is a huge streak of possible idiocy for me) every player involved was required, as part of being in the storyline, to have one black or white character and one grey character. Now this doesn't necessarily involve having two characters. You could, for instance, play a vampire, who is unlucky/stupid enough to turn victim and be slain (though that leaves you a little in the lurch doesn't it). On the other hand, the slayers involved, could see this as an opportunity, ressurrect you, and in the (I'm assuming ressurection has detrimental effects to one's mind) stupor thereafter, are brainwashed into becoming an advocate for the other team ! Same goes for hunters who get owned by a vampire...they could get brainwashed after turning and live happily ever dead! On the other hand, you can, for simplicity, need, peace of mind, play two totally seperate characters...If you're a slayer, you have another innocent character, who gets turned...and then one of your fellow slayers (because killing yourself is so yesterday ) gets to enjoy the fact that they can slay said victim and leave them un-ressed. A victim twice! Similarly, other slayers, who also have a second grey character, you can have a got at as soon as they're turned. In all that, the vampires're getting what they want, in the sense that they're spreading their plague. Naturally, you've gotta spread out the slayin' and turning of things...on account of the fact that if ya do it all in one week the story turns up it's toes. On the other hand, other folk might see and want to join in on the massacre . I hold you all in high enough regard, that I trust you wont hold this against me if it is a -retarded- idea.

I think I should just work harder huh!

 

[Sienna_Rose]

Actually, it's not a retarded idea. It might not be good to impose on a plotline that's already going, though. That would have the potential reaction of "What do you mean I *have* to do this to continue?" (I know, using Jazzy's plotline was only an example, but it's still a valid consideration if anyone considers adding the idea).

But, it's a cute idea to be developed. I know I'd have the concern that I'd be stuck being the bad guy (Me? Play a bad guy? okay, so bad example, but work with me. . .) to torture my own victim character. So, you'd want to organize and make sure that doesn't happen to anyone (unless they want it to).

And, to reference an earlier post, having a willing victim doesn't necessarily make the vampire pathetic. Depends, of course, on the vampire. And on the victim - and here, we should probably distinguish between victims and the players of victims.
On the willing victim side: What challenge is there in taking the ones who *want* to be vampire bait? Maybe little challenge besides making sure they're not caught. Yes, that might appear pathetic, maybe. But, if that's the taste of both, that's cool. I don't know. My vamp character has had one willing victim, and that was just 'cause he lost a bet. But, I tend to play that she's already fed before she comes in, anyway.

On the willing player side: Just because the player is willing to work with a player of a vampire to allow their character to be a victim, doesn't mean that the *character* necessarily is going to bare his or her neck like a good little snack. Good conflict to play with there. Yes, by checking OoC, you may already know the outcome, but, you still get to play out the strife. And drag it out as long as you like. And that definitely doesn't come out as pathetic.

 

[Ruthia]

It's a good idea in my eyes, oone I use a lot acctually. Playing both sides of the storyline is both a challange and a joy, and sometimes frusterating as all heck!

Though I do see one minor problem with this, one I've heard a lot around EN. "Well you never interact with anyone. You never let new people play. Your just a clique"
I think it would be hardest to work on NOT appearing to be "Just another closed group of friends."

 

[Elf_Ariel]

Any storyline I've organised (which granted are few and far between), have always been open. I dislike the thought that it excludes people just because I've never met them. Hence often the ooc discussion and partaking before the storyline goes ahead. Depressingly, it's usually only my friends that respond to joining into such a thing. *cringes* work that one out. <edit: well it's not depressing that I get to play with my friends. It is depressing that I dont get to open up some new minds, and steal a few new ideas...>

Hmmm Sienna is right, and I wasn't necessarily thinking that the grey victim characters were willing, more so that the player of that character was willing enough to get them turned/killed/whatever. I'm a strong believer, that no one, in their right mind, wants to get nibbled. I mean really, it -is- giving your life up for someone. And to be honest with you, that doesn't happen a lot. By nature, all living things are selfish.

But no matter, you've all got my mind turning now...Once I get this current short Passing RP done, I'll dwell and scheme, and maybe, if I arrive at something good enough, come forward with an idea.

 

[Reshak Delanier]

((Playing a bit of ketchup....))

SNERT...that takes me back to the days of my good buddy Malicki...heh

anywho...I never hid the fact that Re'shak was evil. Or a vampire. Of course I never ate anyone in the tavern either. Rarely used any of his vampiric stuff in the tavern. I prefered to go fight and kill victims in the arena. Was a lot of fun, regardless of others. But, since the old RP site went away and was replaced by this "better" one, I don't bother much any more. My higher level characters are no longer fun to RP here, mainly due to the rules, as well as the mind set of some of the players.

but that is steering towards a different topic. Play what you like. Drow, Vamp, Elf, human, block of cheese. The point is to have fun. If you like vampires, play a vampire. The hell with what other people think.

 

[Imreis]

Wait...new idea! A cheese golem!

 

[Ruthia]

Wait...new idea! A cheese golem!

It's the Cheesiest!