LadyNalcarya wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »This was always kinda weird to me. I mean, it theory it sounds like a cool and unique system. But... Whenever we meet a powerful vampire, there is blood everywhere, torture devices and stuff so it seems like they actually feed a lot, but that doesnt make them any less deranged.
There was also a vampire that was comatose because she refused to drink blood, I think it was count Hassildor's wife. She didn't go feral or anything, it just made her super weak.
They could in theory snack on it lightly, without actually drinking enough to sate their monstrous desires. Or, you know... torture and main for their sadistic urges.
After all, seeing that the blood is on the floor, walls and furnishings kinda indicates that they're not drinking it.
Hassildor's wife is correct, and thats one of the many odd discrepancies in TES lore.
Yeah, but Volkihar vampires, for example, are some of the strongest and yet..
We don't nessecarily know if the Volkihar is some of the strongest vampires in TES existence, the vampire lord form of the first and second generation of Volkihar is certainly a giant boon, yet that has just, with this update, been given to the noxiphilic sanguivoria too.
I'm giving you a awesome though, for that delightful image.
https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Vampire_LordWhile in Vampire Lord form, you will have access to a unique skill tree with perks that makes your special abilities more powerful. You gain progress to your next Vampire Lord perk by defeating enemies with Vampiric Drain or a "power bite" attack. The Vampiric Drain attack counts toward a perk when it kills living creatures other than rabbits and foxes. Non-living creatures, such as undead, constructs, or summoned creatures do not give any progress gains.
Each new perk requires a few more kills than the last. The first perk requires 5 kills with Vampiric Drain or a "power bite" attack, the second 6, the third 9, and the fourth 10; after that, each new perk requires two more kills than the last (up to 24 required to progress from the 10th perk to the 11th). You will need to feed a total of 156 times to complete the entire tree.
It makes perfect sense to me that a vamp would get stronger with blood food.
Thevampirenight wrote: »
Well that is because of common belief and superstition. Many can't tell the difference between vampirism or necromancy and the lore clearly states they are considered by many to be what the d&d vampire is a reanimated corpse. When in reality they are inverted and the opposite from a d&d vampire. While undead are considered false life. Vampires got to be considered a form of false death. Do to how the condition has worked. The passive should be called Unliving fortitude.
It is unique that many think of them like d&d vampires when clearly they are not.
I've read every piece of TES vampire lore, including played every one of the games, including the mobile spin-offs.
Not once have I ever seen the games suggest that Vampirism isn't a form of undeath. The only example that I can think of is Lawrence Schick referencing vampires as shapeshifters. Which, ironically enough, was towards the very question that I submitted for his lore article.
Can you perhaps share your sources? I say this without foul, for I'm open to having my mind changed, if you're correct. But until then, I'll keep being mad pissy over these changes that fundamentally destroy the vampire experience that I've always sought after in a TES video game.
LadyNalcarya wrote: »
This could be actually how they will justify the changes. Lamae's bloodline is already special, they are not afraid of sunlight, for example. Could also be that they become stronger as they feed.
I think there's a few aspects to this. First, of course is lore. TES lore has always been evolving, and retcons/inconsistencies are almost unavoidable when we are talking about a 20+ year old franchise.
Secondly, there is gameplay. Lore is great, but Elder Scrolls games are, well, games, so they must convey the narrative via gameplay mechanics. There are thousands of vamp chars in ESO, but for the majority of them its just extra 10% recovery. You don't even have to bite anyone - the introduction quest doesnt require you to drink blood, and after that you can just use bloody maras to adjust your vampirism stage (or stay at stage 4 forever). I think there has to be more "flavor" to make the whole thing more immersive and fun. Imo players need to be encouraged to do vampire things if they decided to make their char a vampire, and better passives are a good way to do so.
EU PC 2000+ CP professional mudballer and pie thrower"Sheggorath, you are the Skooma Cat, for what is crazier than a cat on skooma?" - Fadomai
Quoted post has ben removed.
Quoted post has been removed.
Thevampirenight wrote: »Thevampirenight wrote: »
What is unique about the vampires still is they are not undead but unliving that will not change. Vampires can eat, drink, drown that is shown and I doubt will change throughout the various games. Your right they are unique. Just not in the way you think they are. They are mortals with a curse that alters the body into a death like state. They are not reanimated corpses or act like the d&d vampires do. They have inverted the tropes with them. All they are doing is make it so they are stronger when well fed does not change the fact if your a vampire hoping to explore underwater your going to drown just like any other typical mortal. Because you are an unliving being. Sorry you think your undead think again.
You're literally wrong, but ok.
https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Arena:_Undead
https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Undead_(Daggerfall)
It was with morrowind that vampirism was changed to its own enemy category.
ESO Vampires even have the Undeath passive, and so too do people claim it in several ingame lore books. Often referred to as a state of undeath.
Well that is because of common belief and superstition. Many can't tell the difference between vampirism or necromancy and the lore clearly states they are considered by many to be what the d&d vampire is a reanimated corpse. When in reality they are inverted and the opposite from a d&d vampire. While undead are considered false life. Vampires got to be considered a form of false death. Do to how the condition has worked. The passive should be called Unliving fortitude.
It is unique that many think of them like d&d vampires when clearly they are not.
I believe they did it this way to move away from the common d&d and vampire tropes. As the first two games were basically a home brewed d&d campaign that changed with Morrowind. So they moved away from it.
LadyNalcarya wrote: »
Not all changes are bad. Drastic change in tone and themes is what gave us Morrowind.
Of course, I dont expect the new chapter's lore to be as good as original Morrowind, but still.
Nirn is not real world, and rules are not set in stone. A lot of religious stuff was changed from Arena/Daggerfall, but it didn't ruin the franchise. Dark Brotherhood now worships Sithis, not Mephala. Khajiits can be not just human-like, but also completely cat-like (and everything in between)... Etc. I just don't see why can't there be a vampire bloodline that works differently (especially since it already works differently).
LadyNalcarya wrote: »
Not all changes are bad. Drastic change in tone and themes is what gave us Morrowind.
Of course, I dont expect the new chapter's lore to be as good as original Morrowind, but still.
Nirn is not real world, and rules are not set in stone. A lot of religious stuff was changed from Arena/Daggerfall, but it didn't ruin the franchise. Dark Brotherhood now worships Sithis, not Mephala. Khajiits can be not just human-like, but also completely cat-like (and everything in between)... Etc. I just don't see why can't there be a vampire bloodline that works differently (especially since it already works differently).
The changes to the Dark Brotherhood and the Khajiit were, in my eyes, both positive, because it offered both a bigger and more unique identity rather than being another Morag Tong or another Bosmer-like race.
There can be vampire bloodlines that work differently, I will never argue against that, but they're literally changing an existing bloodline, rather than creating a new one, which is what they should've done with a change like this.
What they're doing now is not only a minor retcon, but forcing every player onto a new and disinteresting mechanic that doesn't align with the unique vampire represensation of the TES franchise, but rather a modernized vampirism thats a borderline copy of any modern vampire fiction.
It wouldn't surprise me if this entire change is aimed at VTMB2 fanbase, considering that this change is being released conveniently in time.
TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »
Have you played Daggerfall, Morrowind or the Vampire Lord form in Skyrim?
None of them got weaker from feeding.
They're not adding more, they're changing an existing bloodline.
I otherwise agree with you.
SidewalkChalk5 wrote: »They're not adding more, they're changing an existing bloodline.
I otherwise agree with you.
I dunno, I was admittedly distracted during the stream, but it seemed to me like the Blood Scion skill line is an optional add-on to the base Vampire skill line. Just don't become a Blood Scion. I guess we'll see more implementation details on PTS ::shrug::
SidewalkChalk5 wrote: »They're not adding more, they're changing an existing bloodline.
I otherwise agree with you.
I dunno, I was admittedly distracted during the stream, but it seemed to me like the Blood Scion skill line is an optional add-on to the base Vampire skill line. Just don't become a Blood Scion. I guess we'll see more implementation details on PTS ::shrug::
I fear this is incorrect.
The player character by definition, is already the Scion of Lamae Bal. It's why we're given the book, too.
Thevampirenight wrote: »SidewalkChalk5 wrote: »They're not adding more, they're changing an existing bloodline.
I otherwise agree with you.
I dunno, I was admittedly distracted during the stream, but it seemed to me like the Blood Scion skill line is an optional add-on to the base Vampire skill line. Just don't become a Blood Scion. I guess we'll see more implementation details on PTS ::shrug::
I fear this is incorrect.
The player character by definition, is already the Scion of Lamae Bal. It's why we're given the book, too.
Yes from what I gathered is they are overhauling it. The vampire lord form will be added to the base and the vampire quest is getting overhauled as well.
Thevampirenight wrote: »
Bethesda did the same thing to vampires in Skyrim they even changed how they looked with Dawnguard. They are just overhauling it.
Siohwenoeht wrote: »
Did they actually show the blood Scion ult to be a Vampire Lord? If so, another blow to canon and lore.
wild_kmacdb16_ESO wrote: »On the plus side, vampires won’t need to wear a skin anymore to not look hideous since you will want to stay fed.
Siohwenoeht wrote: »
Did they actually show the blood Scion ult to be a Vampire Lord? If so, another blow to canon and lore.
Yup, unfortunately so. They didn't show it, but Lemon outright revealed it.
That Vampire Lords "train" their vampirism through feeding might actually be the redeeming factor here @ShadowHvo .
What if the vampire skill line was advanced through feeding instead of simply getting XP?
Then technically vampires would be getting stronger by feeding. Since they are changing vampirism and giving us access to the vampire lord transformation as well as us still receiving vampirism from Lamae herself, it might simply be explained away by us pure-bloods gaining better control over the gift the more we feed (and more than off-setting the penalty for it), which doesn't change that lowly generic vampires of a lesser kind than our player characters in ESO, need to starve themselves to become stronger.
If this is the explanation they are going for, I want to see this actually be acknowledged somewhere that us players are better than generic vampires.
By the end of the day, I do like that they are making feeding more important and that vampirism interacts with the justice system (hopefully on more than simply using skills but just by being stage 4 as well).
It remains to be seen what the rework actually looks like. Hopefully they make it consistent with the franchise instead of going the Bosmer stealth and Argonian poison resist route again.
wild_kmacdb16_ESO wrote: »On the plus side, vampires won’t need to wear a skin anymore to not look hideous since you will want to stay fed.
Nope, they reversed that too: the well-fed vampires are now the hideous ones.
That Vampire Lords "train" their vampirism through feeding might actually be the redeeming factor here @ShadowHvo .
What if the vampire skill line was advanced through feeding instead of simply getting XP?
Then technically vampires would be getting stronger by feeding. Since they are changing vampirism and giving us access to the vampire lord transformation as well as us still receiving vampirism from Lamae herself, it might simply be explained away by us pure-bloods gaining better control over the gift the more we feed (and more than off-setting the penalty for it), which doesn't change that lowly generic vampires of a lesser kind than our player characters in ESO, need to starve themselves to become stronger.
If this is the explanation they are going for, I want to see this actually be acknowledged somewhere that us players are better than generic vampires.
By the end of the day, I do like that they are making feeding more important and that vampirism interacts with the justice system (hopefully on more than simply using skills but just by being stage 4 as well).
It remains to be seen what the rework actually looks like. Hopefully they make it consistent with the franchise instead of going the Bosmer stealth and Argonian poison resist route again.
I wouldn't mind one bit if the skill-line itself was advanced through such a method, since that indeed, sounds logical and plausible.
But that is not how I heard Lemon's explanation on the livestream, I understood it as a fundamental change to how Vampirism operates in its stages, that the vampire, physically and magically, maintain their strength and toolset by feeding often, which contradicts established canon.
Essentially, to me, it sounds like Stage 1 is king, with Stage 4 being irrelevant, when in truth there should be downsides and positives to both:
Stage 1 is when the vampire is at their most human, yet also their vampiricly weakest. Easily disguised, hidden amongst civil society.
Stage 4 is when the vampire is at their most monstrous, their most feral and vampiricly powerful. Easily identified as a vampire and unable to interact with civil society. (Justice system, hello.)
Feeding should be important, yet it should be important for the same reasons as in Oblivion and Skyrim pre-Dawnguard. That at least, is my opinion.
Thevampirenight wrote: »Siohwenoeht wrote: »
Did they actually show the blood Scion ult to be a Vampire Lord? If so, another blow to canon and lore.
Yup, unfortunately so. They didn't show it, but Lemon outright revealed it.
Its going to be called the Blood Scion. So it won't be Harkons vampire lord. Here is what I want to know about the blood scion form is it a temp form or is it going to be how it was in Skyrim. If they are doing it I think they might have some buff effect to exsting vampire skills they added to it. So I think it might be a more optional form. While being able to do abilties in either.
Thevampirenight wrote: »
I think they can mix the two. Maybe keep the passives the same but require feeding for the more powerful vampire abilties. So they could go that route.