There is no reason for vampires to be ugly. ESO simply decided to make them so. In vampire lore we find the following descriptions of vampires.
"Young, seductive, sexual and alluring" The Vampyer 1819
"Female Vampires: Beautiful to the point of hypnotic" Dracula 1897
"Ordinary, but often somewhat above average" Blade
"All are beautiful. The transformation enhances their beauty. The older and stronger they get, the less human they look but still remain beautiful." Vampire Diaries
"Cartoon duck" Count Duckula
So the you have to be ugly to gain a bit of power thing doesn't fly.
The other argument that claims it is somehow unfair to hide the abilities holds no water because I can make my sword look like a dagger. I can make my heavy armor look like a chefs outfit. My helmet is invisible. All that is much more deceptive than hiding the fact that you are a vampire.
Only reason left to be against being able to hide vampirism is spite. I don't mind the reason being spite. I am against mount skills being account wide mostly (mostly) out of spite. Just fess up, be honest and tell us you don't think people should be able to hide vampirism because sometimes it's fun to be spiteful. No need to make up excuses about lore and hiding abilities.
Facefister wrote: »I can't take people seriously who spell vampirism as "vamparism". Second, being a vampire isn't a cosmetic choice. You want the benefits? You'll get the skin.Facefister wrote: »"I want to be and roleplay but ... without all that roleplay!"
Drink a Bloody Mara, weakling.People against hiding vamparism shouldn't hide their gear behind outfits and costumes nor hide their vamparism behind Skins
Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
Tell me more about how this full costume that is hiding my heavy armor is also hiding my vampirism. I'll take notes.
Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
Tell me more about how this full costume that is hiding my heavy armor is also hiding my vampirism. I'll take notes.
I think you look really cool!
There are a lot of costume options.
Some costumes make characters look fatter than they are and those people have to choose a different costume that doesn’t do that... so, choose another costume?
I remember being so excited for the Priest of the Green costume until I bought it and saw that not only did it make my characters look fat, it flattened their behinds as well. So I chose a different costume.
TES-lore there are vampires that can go by unnoticed in public. If we used lore though vampires would be super strong especially at night and have the power of invisibility along with the power to turn into mist.
So again...spite.
There is no reason for vampires to be ugly. ESO simply decided to make them so. In vampire lore we find the following descriptions of vampires.
"Young, seductive, sexual and alluring" The Vampyer 1819
"Female Vampires: Beautiful to the point of hypnotic" Dracula 1897
"Ordinary, but often somewhat above average" Blade
"All are beautiful. The transformation enhances their beauty. The older and stronger they get, the less human they look but still remain beautiful." Vampire Diaries
"Cartoon duck" Count Duckula
So the you have to be ugly to gain a bit of power thing doesn't fly.
The other argument that claims it is somehow unfair to hide the abilities holds no water because I can make my sword look like a dagger. I can make my heavy armor look like a chefs outfit. My helmet is invisible. All that is much more deceptive than hiding the fact that you are a vampire.
Only reason left to be against being able to hide vampirism is spite. I don't mind the reason being spite. I am against mount skills being account wide mostly (mostly) out of spite. Just fess up, be honest and tell us you don't think people should be able to hide vampirism because sometimes it's fun to be spiteful. No need to make up excuses about lore and hiding abilities.
Ofcourse I'll attack the grammar first. If you want a fruitful discussion, then learn to properly articulate yourself. It's like people who are mixing up the term "DD" with "DPS". It gets hilarious when they try to state their issues: "Why is my DPS's DPS so low? my DPS can't out-DPS the DPS check"Why should you be able to get the benefits of heavy armor and use light armor outfits? Or tank in a bathing robe costume? Secondly, *** off with the grammer correction as the fact that you chose to attack my grammer first speaks more about you than it does me. Also I intentionally misspelled grammer to mess with you since your priorities were a joke
Facefister wrote: »Ofcourse I'll attack the grammar first. If you want a fruitful discussion, then learn to properly articulate yourself. It's like people who are mixing up the term "DD" with "DPS". It gets hilarious when they try to state their issues: "Why is my DPS's DPS so low? my DPS can't out-DPS the DPS check"Why should you be able to get the benefits of heavy armor and use light armor outfits? Or tank in a bathing robe costume? Secondly, *** off with the grammer correction as the fact that you chose to attack my grammer first speaks more about you than it does me. Also I intentionally misspelled grammer to mess with you since your priorities were a joke
Vamparismisn't a cosmetic choice.
Facefister wrote: »Ofcourse I'll attack the grammar first. If you want a fruitful discussion, then learn to properly articulate yourself. It's like people who are mixing up the term "DD" with "DPS". It gets hilarious when they try to state their issues: "Why is my DPS's DPS so low? my DPS can't out-DPS the DPS check"Why should you be able to get the benefits of heavy armor and use light armor outfits? Or tank in a bathing robe costume? Secondly, *** off with the grammer correction as the fact that you chose to attack my grammer first speaks more about you than it does me. Also I intentionally misspelled grammer to mess with you since your priorities were a joke
Vamparismisn't a cosmetic choice.
Language is merely a clumsy, albeit often beautiful, tool of the mind. Its sole purpose is to take a concept that resides within one individual and convey it to the next.
I feel sorry for you if you are going to allow arbitrary rules, that are relatively new in the grand history of the spoken word, be your stumbling block when you clearly are able to grasp what peoples' intentions are in their statements.
Facefister wrote: »Don't overdo yourself. If someone is trying to discuss about some topic but can't even spell the terms properly, shouldn't be discussing about the topic in the first place.
Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.

Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
There is no reason for vampires to be ugly. ESO simply decided to make them so. In vampire lore we find the following descriptions of vampires.
"Young, seductive, sexual and alluring" The Vampyer 1819
"Female Vampires: Beautiful to the point of hypnotic" Dracula 1897
"Ordinary, but often somewhat above average" Blade
"All are beautiful. The transformation enhances their beauty. The older and stronger they get, the less human they look but still remain beautiful." Vampire Diaries
"Cartoon duck" Count Duckula
So the you have to be ugly to gain a bit of power thing doesn't fly.
The other argument that claims it is somehow unfair to hide the abilities holds no water because I can make my sword look like a dagger. I can make my heavy armor look like a chefs outfit. My helmet is invisible. All that is much more deceptive than hiding the fact that you are a vampire.
Only reason left to be against being able to hide vampirism is spite. I don't mind the reason being spite. I am against mount skills being account wide mostly (mostly) out of spite. Just fess up, be honest and tell us you don't think people should be able to hide vampirism because sometimes it's fun to be spiteful. No need to make up excuses about lore and hiding abilities.
Facefister wrote: »Ofcourse I'll attack the grammar first. If you want a fruitful discussion, then learn to properly articulate yourself. It's like people who are mixing up the term "DD" with "DPS". It gets hilarious when they try to state their issues: "Why is my DPS's DPS so low? my DPS can't out-DPS the DPS check"Why should you be able to get the benefits of heavy armor and use light armor outfits? Or tank in a bathing robe costume? Secondly, *** off with the grammer correction as the fact that you chose to attack my grammer first speaks more about you than it does me. Also I intentionally misspelled grammer to mess with you since your priorities were a joke
Vamparismisn't a cosmetic choice.
Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
False. Only if you wear a disguise. Not a costume.
RavenRoxie wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »Mattock_Romulus wrote: »Basic pro/con decision making in game play. You want +2 strength? Then the side effect is -2 charisma.
that isn't how this works, cosmetic changes have always been entirely separate from combat and do not affect gameplay in any way outside of changing the appearance of your character. So why should i be forced to look as terrible as i do in stage 4 vampirism when it would be incredibly easy to allow us to choose what stage we appear as? it literally changes nothing except it lets me fix my appearance, so that i am happy with how they look.
So you want all the reward without any drawbacks then?
Do you use outfits, or costumes? Do you want all the benefits from your gear, but what to look different?
But if you wear a full costume your vampirism is hidden too, just like my heavy armor.
I am sorry but I did not spend anything less than 10 minutes in character creation screen for any of my characters only to hide my work under some helmet.
Matthew_Galvanus wrote: »There are so many outfits that i have to hard pass on with my vampire because he looks so damn ugly. I have never understood why you make players choose between sitting at stage 4 to have the most benefits from their passives, but look ugly as sin, or force us to remain at stage 1 or cure ourselves just so we don't look like a horribly bloated pasty sausage.
TES-lore there are vampires that can go by unnoticed in public. If we used lore though vampires would be super strong especially at night and have the power of invisibility along with the power to turn into mist.
So again...spite.
Jerrypicking much? How long has it been, that your character could see his/her own face?