Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
Obnoxious Mute paint fail
-
StormChaser3000✭✭✭✭✭
✭
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Kalik_Gold wrote: »What about that elf in the DC quests? He had his look under control.
Verandis Ravenwatch. If we take his dialog at face value, he was turned by Molag Bal personally. So, that puts him in rough parity with vampires like Lamae Bal, and Serana (from Skyrim.) As far as I can remember, he's the only confirmed male turned by Molag Bal. Usually they're called Daughters of Coldharbour.
There is a vampire bloodline based out of Cyrodiil that is supposed to be able to completely hide their vampirism when well fed. So, that is a thing. No idea of Verandis founded that bloodline, or if he simply has the ability independently of them.
Vampires that can completely hide their nature are not unheard of on Tamriel. Though they do seem to be somewhat unusual.0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormChaser3000 wrote: »
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...
As I recall, the problem with feeding was, the animation tools they had at launch, didn't allow two actors to be linked together during an animation. By the time Dark Brotherhood came along, they'd, apparently, worked out some of the kinks with that, and the Blade of Woe can be used in linked animations. Unfortunately, for that to work with Vampiric feeding, you'd directly conflict with the Blade of Woe, meaning any vampire assassin would get hosed by that change. (The Blade of Woe activates closer to the target, while feeding is at a longer range.)0 -
Verbal_Earthworm✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »If you get stronger the less you feed, and feeding makes you weaker, why bother feeding?
Some don't. One major thing that ESO doesn't reflect, is that well fed Vampires can blend into mortal society, and pass for living beings. While ones that have intentionally starved themselves are much stronger.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »It's not how Dracula et al. function at all.
It's been a minute since I read the novel, but as I recall, the major thing about Dracula feeding was it allowed him to look less monstrous. Which is something we see in The Elder Scrolls, though our vampires never look as messed up as when Johnathan Harker first meets Dracula.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »That is what I meant by "proper vampire" and as you missed that your post is pointless and condescending.
So, they don't meet your version of vampires. Which is consistent with neither Stoker's novel, nor Tamriel's Vampires. Cool.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Anyway, I call Fake-Vampires.
Cool. I call them, "Steve," and "hey you!" They seem to respond better to, "hey, you!"Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Is it really worth looking like crap for a couple of passives?
Depends, but, yeah, sometimes. Some of those passives are amazing. Also the actives can be very useful, and seal up holes in your build.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Fake-Vampires don't deserve makeup.
Fortunately, we don't have any Fake-Vampires, we just have Steve.
Once again, a pointless and condescending post from you.
You have chosen to forget the novel and instead rely on your imperfect memory and your ability to skew the facts.
I introduce the idea of the fictional vampire, not just Dracula which ESO vampires can't help but be compared to and ultimately fail, the first time you didn't even comprehend what I meant and launched into a diatribe on ESO vampire lore and opinion (which I know quite well thanks), I call you out on that then you invent the notion that I have my own version of vampires?
You could have just admitted ignorance instead of entrenching yourself.
You might want to do some research on fictional vampires, specifically Dracula, Lestat and Vampire the Masquerade.
Right... so, let's talk about that for a second.
In Vampire: The Masquerade, vampires don't get stronger from feeding. They need to burn a blood point each night when they wake. If they have no blood points, they slip into torpor, which is incidentally also what happens when you stake a Kindred in V:TM.
This doesn't actually kill them. Depending on their humanity score, vampires recover from Torpor after fixed amounts of time have passed.
Feeding restores blood points, so vampires are forced to feed, or they'll slip into torpor. Now, vampires who are close to starving will be at serious risk of losing control to the beast. That's a different problem. And in that sense, you could almost say that they get weaker when well fed, if only because they're frenzy checks will be way easier to pass.
The only way a Kindred can become stronger through feeding is lowering their generation via Diablarie. If the dice like you enough, this may let you buy a point of Generation. However, this requires draining a lower generation vampire. Though, at the same time, in the fluff, Diablarie also runs a serious risk of possession by the elder vampire. (Though, the only examples of this provided are with the vampires who dialbarized the antideluvians.)
What's genuinely funny to me about this is that, since most disciplines cost blood to activate (some, like Fortitude are passive), vampires actually deplete their blood pool using their powers. Which also happens in ESO, where using active abilities deducts 30 minutes from the current stage timer.
Of course, none of this matters, because the Vampires of White Wolf's World of Darkness, much like Anne Rice's and Bram Stoker's vampires, live in an approximation of the contemporary world. All three are part of a genre known as Urban Fantasy.
ESO is not.
Vampires in The Elder Scrolls are undead, daedric abominations, who must feed if they want to suppress their inhuman nature. If they don't feed, they become more monstrous. Those are the rules. If you don't like them, tough.
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. That's the same reason why none of the examples you provided follow the same rules for Vampirism. They're all the result of different creatives taking a mess of distinct myths and meshing them together into an amalgam of a creature.
You can't have "Fake-Vampires," because there's no such thing as a "real vampire."
You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
Edited by Verbal_Earthworm on March 25, 2019 12:12AM0 -
StormChaser3000✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...
As I recall, the problem with feeding was, the animation tools they had at launch, didn't allow two actors to be linked together during an animation. By the time Dark Brotherhood came along, they'd, apparently, worked out some of the kinks with that, and the Blade of Woe can be used in linked animations. Unfortunately, for that to work with Vampiric feeding, you'd directly conflict with the Blade of Woe, meaning any vampire assassin would get hosed by that change. (The Blade of Woe activates closer to the target, while feeding is at a longer range.)
But they can just appoint a different button, so when you are close you just choose needed action/animation.0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormChaser3000 wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...
As I recall, the problem with feeding was, the animation tools they had at launch, didn't allow two actors to be linked together during an animation. By the time Dark Brotherhood came along, they'd, apparently, worked out some of the kinks with that, and the Blade of Woe can be used in linked animations. Unfortunately, for that to work with Vampiric feeding, you'd directly conflict with the Blade of Woe, meaning any vampire assassin would get hosed by that change. (The Blade of Woe activates closer to the target, while feeding is at a longer range.)
But they can just appoint a different button, so when you are close you just choose needed action/animation.
On consoles they might not. I don't use a controller for ESO, so I'm genuinely unsure.0 -
therift✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...
As I recall, the problem with feeding was, the animation tools they had at launch, didn't allow two actors to be linked together during an animation. By the time Dark Brotherhood came along, they'd, apparently, worked out some of the kinks with that, and the Blade of Woe can be used in linked animations. Unfortunately, for that to work with Vampiric feeding, you'd directly conflict with the Blade of Woe, meaning any vampire assassin would get hosed by that change. (The Blade of Woe activates closer to the target, while feeding is at a longer range.)
But they can just appoint a different button, so when you are close you just choose needed action/animation.
On consoles they might not. I don't use a controller for ESO, so I'm genuinely unsure.
You are correct. Consoles do not have the button space, much like a magsorc doesn't have skill bar space. We use the 'synergy' function for both Feed and Woe.0 -
OrdoHermetica✭✭✭✭✭
✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »If you get stronger the less you feed, and feeding makes you weaker, why bother feeding?
Some don't. One major thing that ESO doesn't reflect, is that well fed Vampires can blend into mortal society, and pass for living beings. While ones that have intentionally starved themselves are much stronger.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »It's not how Dracula et al. function at all.
It's been a minute since I read the novel, but as I recall, the major thing about Dracula feeding was it allowed him to look less monstrous. Which is something we see in The Elder Scrolls, though our vampires never look as messed up as when Johnathan Harker first meets Dracula.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »That is what I meant by "proper vampire" and as you missed that your post is pointless and condescending.
So, they don't meet your version of vampires. Which is consistent with neither Stoker's novel, nor Tamriel's Vampires. Cool.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Anyway, I call Fake-Vampires.
Cool. I call them, "Steve," and "hey you!" They seem to respond better to, "hey, you!"Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Is it really worth looking like crap for a couple of passives?
Depends, but, yeah, sometimes. Some of those passives are amazing. Also the actives can be very useful, and seal up holes in your build.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Fake-Vampires don't deserve makeup.
Fortunately, we don't have any Fake-Vampires, we just have Steve.
Once again, a pointless and condescending post from you.
You have chosen to forget the novel and instead rely on your imperfect memory and your ability to skew the facts.
I introduce the idea of the fictional vampire, not just Dracula which ESO vampires can't help but be compared to and ultimately fail, the first time you didn't even comprehend what I meant and launched into a diatribe on ESO vampire lore and opinion (which I know quite well thanks), I call you out on that then you invent the notion that I have my own version of vampires?
You could have just admitted ignorance instead of entrenching yourself.
You might want to do some research on fictional vampires, specifically Dracula, Lestat and Vampire the Masquerade.
Right... so, let's talk about that for a second.
In Vampire: The Masquerade, vampires don't get stronger from feeding. They need to burn a blood point each night when they wake. If they have no blood points, they slip into torpor, which is incidentally also what happens when you stake a Kindred in V:TM.
This doesn't actually kill them. Depending on their humanity score, vampires recover from Torpor after fixed amounts of time have passed.
Feeding restores blood points, so vampires are forced to feed, or they'll slip into torpor. Now, vampires who are close to starving will be at serious risk of losing control to the beast. That's a different problem. And in that sense, you could almost say that they get weaker when well fed, if only because they're frenzy checks will be way easier to pass.
The only way a Kindred can become stronger through feeding is lowering their generation via Diablarie. If the dice like you enough, this may let you buy a point of Generation. However, this requires draining a lower generation vampire. Though, at the same time, in the fluff, Diablarie also runs a serious risk of possession by the elder vampire. (Though, the only examples of this provided are with the vampires who dialbarized the antideluvians.)
What's genuinely funny to me about this is that, since most disciplines cost blood to activate (some, like Fortitude are passive), vampires actually deplete their blood pool using their powers. Which also happens in ESO, where using active abilities deducts 30 minutes from the current stage timer.
Of course, none of this matters, because the Vampires of White Wolf's World of Darkness, much like Anne Rice's and Bram Stoker's vampires, live in an approximation of the contemporary world. All three are part of a genre known as Urban Fantasy.
ESO is not.
Vampires in The Elder Scrolls are undead, daedric abominations, who must feed if they want to suppress their inhuman nature. If they don't feed, they become more monstrous. Those are the rules. If you don't like them, tough.
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. That's the same reason why none of the examples you provided follow the same rules for Vampirism. They're all the result of different creatives taking a mess of distinct myths and meshing them together into an amalgam of a creature.
You can't have "Fake-Vampires," because there's no such thing as a "real vampire."
You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
Wait, seriously? You're going with the "you're clearly not a real nerd" argument because they offered up a comprehensive response to you and used detailed knowledge of the most well-known vampire RPG out there to do so?
You're on the ESO forums, discussing vampires with people are playing a fantasy game and probably have at least a passing familiarity with tabletop RPGs, if not an in-depth knowledge of them, not to mention a very likely familiarity with supernatural fantasy and horror fiction. You flatter yourself if you think people care enough about what you think of the topic to read up on something just to impress you.
You have an entirely subjective definition of what a "real" vampire is. And hey, you're entitled to your opinion. But speaking of condescending attitudes, you really don't need to be attacking people's geek cred and going for ad hominems in the process.Edited by OrdoHermetica on March 25, 2019 12:24AM3 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
No, the only thing I looked up is the spelling of Tzimisce. Because I've been mispelling that thing for 20 years at this point. I've also read Dracula.
If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example.
You know what is funny? This is, literally, the second time someone's tried to sidetrack into the Kindred when talking about vampires this week. (Well, technically, last week, since it's now Sunday.)
Actually, don't believe me? Search "Tzimisce." It's not a term that comes up on these forums often.1 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
The "Dracula" type vampires created by Bram Stoker and later picked up by many other authors, producers and game creators was simply one of the most elegant ways to present old myths. Why not to use some of its elements if that would look cool ingame?
Bite in a neck definitely looks better than a string of
a levitating tomato soup flying towards(?) your character's mouth...
As I recall, the problem with feeding was, the animation tools they had at launch, didn't allow two actors to be linked together during an animation. By the time Dark Brotherhood came along, they'd, apparently, worked out some of the kinks with that, and the Blade of Woe can be used in linked animations. Unfortunately, for that to work with Vampiric feeding, you'd directly conflict with the Blade of Woe, meaning any vampire assassin would get hosed by that change. (The Blade of Woe activates closer to the target, while feeding is at a longer range.)
But they can just appoint a different button, so when you are close you just choose needed action/animation.
On consoles they might not. I don't use a controller for ESO, so I'm genuinely unsure.
You are correct. Consoles do not have the button space, much like a magsorc doesn't have skill bar space. We use the 'synergy' function for both Feed and Woe.
It's the same on PC. Though, marginally annoying because we could potentially bind different synergies to different keys. Though at this point, it'd be something like, "num 7 is the blade of woe" because most of the main keyboard is taken up with things. I guess we could use B, since it opens the Inventory, and there's two inventory buttons bound by default (for some reason.)0 -
OrdoHermetica✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
No, the only thing I looked up is the spelling of Tzimisce. Because I've been mispelling that thing for 20 years at this point. I've also read Dracula.
If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example.
You know what is funny? This is, literally, the second time someone's tried to sidetrack into the Kindred when talking about vampires this week. (Well, technically, last week, since it's now Sunday.)
Actually, don't believe me? Search "Tzimisce." It's not a term that comes up on these forums often.
Spelling Tzimisce is terrible, but you know what's even worse? Deciding how to pronounce it. (I'm in the "Zim-ee-see" camp, myself.)Edited by OrdoHermetica on March 25, 2019 12:35AM0 -
Verbal_Earthworm✭✭✭✭✭
✭OrdoHermetica wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »If you get stronger the less you feed, and feeding makes you weaker, why bother feeding?
Some don't. One major thing that ESO doesn't reflect, is that well fed Vampires can blend into mortal society, and pass for living beings. While ones that have intentionally starved themselves are much stronger.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »It's not how Dracula et al. function at all.
It's been a minute since I read the novel, but as I recall, the major thing about Dracula feeding was it allowed him to look less monstrous. Which is something we see in The Elder Scrolls, though our vampires never look as messed up as when Johnathan Harker first meets Dracula.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »That is what I meant by "proper vampire" and as you missed that your post is pointless and condescending.
So, they don't meet your version of vampires. Which is consistent with neither Stoker's novel, nor Tamriel's Vampires. Cool.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Anyway, I call Fake-Vampires.
Cool. I call them, "Steve," and "hey you!" They seem to respond better to, "hey, you!"Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Is it really worth looking like crap for a couple of passives?
Depends, but, yeah, sometimes. Some of those passives are amazing. Also the actives can be very useful, and seal up holes in your build.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Fake-Vampires don't deserve makeup.
Fortunately, we don't have any Fake-Vampires, we just have Steve.
Once again, a pointless and condescending post from you.
You have chosen to forget the novel and instead rely on your imperfect memory and your ability to skew the facts.
I introduce the idea of the fictional vampire, not just Dracula which ESO vampires can't help but be compared to and ultimately fail, the first time you didn't even comprehend what I meant and launched into a diatribe on ESO vampire lore and opinion (which I know quite well thanks), I call you out on that then you invent the notion that I have my own version of vampires?
You could have just admitted ignorance instead of entrenching yourself.
You might want to do some research on fictional vampires, specifically Dracula, Lestat and Vampire the Masquerade.
Right... so, let's talk about that for a second.
In Vampire: The Masquerade, vampires don't get stronger from feeding. They need to burn a blood point each night when they wake. If they have no blood points, they slip into torpor, which is incidentally also what happens when you stake a Kindred in V:TM.
This doesn't actually kill them. Depending on their humanity score, vampires recover from Torpor after fixed amounts of time have passed.
Feeding restores blood points, so vampires are forced to feed, or they'll slip into torpor. Now, vampires who are close to starving will be at serious risk of losing control to the beast. That's a different problem. And in that sense, you could almost say that they get weaker when well fed, if only because they're frenzy checks will be way easier to pass.
The only way a Kindred can become stronger through feeding is lowering their generation via Diablarie. If the dice like you enough, this may let you buy a point of Generation. However, this requires draining a lower generation vampire. Though, at the same time, in the fluff, Diablarie also runs a serious risk of possession by the elder vampire. (Though, the only examples of this provided are with the vampires who dialbarized the antideluvians.)
What's genuinely funny to me about this is that, since most disciplines cost blood to activate (some, like Fortitude are passive), vampires actually deplete their blood pool using their powers. Which also happens in ESO, where using active abilities deducts 30 minutes from the current stage timer.
Of course, none of this matters, because the Vampires of White Wolf's World of Darkness, much like Anne Rice's and Bram Stoker's vampires, live in an approximation of the contemporary world. All three are part of a genre known as Urban Fantasy.
ESO is not.
Vampires in The Elder Scrolls are undead, daedric abominations, who must feed if they want to suppress their inhuman nature. If they don't feed, they become more monstrous. Those are the rules. If you don't like them, tough.
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. That's the same reason why none of the examples you provided follow the same rules for Vampirism. They're all the result of different creatives taking a mess of distinct myths and meshing them together into an amalgam of a creature.
You can't have "Fake-Vampires," because there's no such thing as a "real vampire."
You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
Wait, seriously? You're going with the "you're clearly not a real nerd" argument because they offered up a comprehensive response to you and used detailed knowledge of the most well-known vampire RPG out there to do so?
You're on the ESO forums, discussing vampires with people are playing a fantasy game and probably have at least a passing familiarity with tabletop RPGs, if not an in-depth knowledge of them, not to mention a very likely familiarity with supernatural fantasy and horror fiction. You flatter yourself if you think people care enough about what you think of the topic to read up on something just to impress you.
You have an entirely subjective definition of what a "real" vampire is. And hey, you're entitled to your opinion. But speaking of condescending attitudes, you really don't need to be attacking people's geek cred and going for ad hominems in the process.
You're reading this backwards, I am the one who has been attacked.
In defending my argument, you think that I have become the attacker?
Then you come to the bizarre conclusion that I have an entirely subjective definiton of what a vampire is, when it is exactly the same definition as anyone else here (according to you).
But then, hey, you're entitled to your entirely subjective opinion.
0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭OrdoHermetica wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
No, the only thing I looked up is the spelling of Tzimisce. Because I've been mispelling that thing for 20 years at this point. I've also read Dracula.
If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example.
You know what is funny? This is, literally, the second time someone's tried to sidetrack into the Kindred when talking about vampires this week. (Well, technically, last week, since it's now Sunday.)
Actually, don't believe me? Search "Tzimisce." It's not a term that comes up on these forums often.
Spelling Tzimisce is terrible, but you know what's even worse? Deciding how to pronounce it. (I'm in the "Zim-ee-see" camp, myself.)
I don't think the T is silent, it's that sort of forced Tz sound. But, what do I know? I clearly looked it up an hour ago, so I could travel back in time to the late 90s and run a Project: Twilight campaign.
1 -
Verbal_Earthworm✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »You're doing it again...
You may have missed this somewhere, but vampires aren't real. I have said "fictional vampires" more than once.
So you spent an hour reading up on Vampire the Masquerade, probably haven't even read Stoker's Dracula and only posted so you can continue to talk down to me.
I already know pretty much everything you have posted.
Talk about deluded.
No, the only thing I looked up is the spelling of Tzimisce. Because I've been mispelling that thing for 20 years at this point. I've also read Dracula.
If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example.
You know what is funny? This is, literally, the second time someone's tried to sidetrack into the Kindred when talking about vampires this week. (Well, technically, last week, since it's now Sunday.)
Actually, don't believe me? Search "Tzimisce." It's not a term that comes up on these forums often.
No idea why you are mentioning Tzimisce, are you getting your threads crossed?
Not trying to sidetrack into the Kindred, using them as an example of standardised fictional vampiric feeding.0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »You're reading this backwards, I am the one who has been attacked.
In defending my argument, you think that I have become the attacker?
I think it has something to do with tone. You said, they're not "proper," and then cited different versions of vampires from different settings.
I explained how vampirism works in The Elder Scrolls. Which, you know, is the game we're talking about, and the setting we're discussing.
Which, was apparently an attack.Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Then you come to the bizarre conclusion that I have an entirely subjective definiton of what a vampire is, when it is exactly the same definition as anyone else here (according to you).
In fairness to you, vampires are subjective thing. Or at least contextual. It can be warped into a No True Scotsman, but really, these are myths that came out of a fear of the dead. Death is one of the few constants, it's traumatic, it's ****ed up, and no two people deal with it the same time. Hell, no one deals with two different deaths the same way.
Vampires are one way people tried to deal with that. The myths and legends built out of the part where dead bodies are weird. But, also that someone was gone, and that the grief and loss can consume and destroy you.
There's no objective rules for vampires, especially in the folklore, because they're a metaphor for what coping with death does to you.
At that point, there's no one valid kind of vampire, because there's no single way to experience in grief. Every culture came to that and answered it in different ways. Vampires are a catch all for stories from various societies for how to understand, and deal with, grief.1 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »No idea why you are mentioning Tzimisce, are you getting your threads crossed?
Because when I first typed up one of the earlier posts, I made a stray comment about V:TM including Dracula as an NPC and making him a Tzimisci. I forgot I deleted that sentence because it didn't flow in the final post.
I'm not going to waste time researching stuff for you, but I will edit my first draft; I'm not a savage.1 -
Verbal_Earthworm✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »No idea why you are mentioning Tzimisce, are you getting your threads crossed?
Because when I first typed up one of the earlier posts, I made a stray comment about V:TM including Dracula as an NPC and making him a Tzimisci. I forgot I deleted that sentence because it didn't flow in the final post.
I'm not going to waste time researching stuff for you, but I will edit my first draft; I'm not a savage.
Thought as much.
Trying to catch me out with something you had forgotten you deleted?
"If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example"
I'm going to leave you alone now.
Obviously a bad time.
Edited by Verbal_Earthworm on March 25, 2019 12:57AM0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »No idea why you are mentioning Tzimisce, are you getting your threads crossed?
Because when I first typed up one of the earlier posts, I made a stray comment about V:TM including Dracula as an NPC and making him a Tzimisci. I forgot I deleted that sentence because it didn't flow in the final post.
I'm not going to waste time researching stuff for you, but I will edit my first draft; I'm not a savage.
Thought as much.
Trying to catch me out with something you had forgotten you deleted?starkerealm wrote: »If you knew that, you'd have known it was a bad example.
I'm going to leave you alone now.
Obviously a bad time.
No, you claimed I looked it up. I was honest with you. Here we are. I looked up the spelling because **** that name. It's hard to spell. Harder to pronounce. But, that's another story. Might have also looked up how to spell, "diablarie" as well, come to think of it. It doesn't get a lot of use in my day to day writing.
EDIT: Be warned: I will also fix your tags for you in quotes. Edited by starkerealm on March 25, 2019 12:59AM1 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »Verbal_Earthworm wrote: »seriously. for the love of god. ENOUGH WITH DRACULA AND LESTAT. its like... vampires haven't existed in folk tales before that....
would you like it if people came in here and went - the only proper vampires are twilight vampires, everything else is fake. because THAT is what you all sound like.
does the creature drink blood to survive? if the answer is yes - VAMPIRE. everything else is negotiable.
Don't bring Twilight into this, bad show...
I was debating that ESO vampire feeding is in reverse to traditional/fictional vampire feeding.
If that is below you then why bother commenting to stop others debating it?
What is it about forum stars that makes the poster more conceited about their opinion?
no debating feeding is not below me. the insistence that proper vampires MUST be like dracula that keeps being brought up over. and over. and OVER. in every vampire related thread? THAT i'm very tired about. there is NOTHING particularly traditional about Dracula feeding. its just one fictional style of vampires that's for some odd reason became a default.
and honestly ESO is full of magic. the whole vampirism is magical. so... explain to me please.. why is it such a point of contention to have makeup or face-paint actualy... work? honestly this is what annoys me the most about discourse about the ESO vampires. because every-time people start bringing up what vampires should be in their opinion, its almost always with a goal of restricting vampire players in ESO from being able to customize their appearance. to PUNISH them for choosing to use these passives.
You should use italics when you want to emphasise something otherwise you come across as a shouter.
I never insisted any of what you insinuate, that is obviously your own agenda at play.
I mentioned Dracula et al. because they have a way of feeding that is opposite to the ESO vampires.
That does not mean that I want ESO vampires to be like Dracula, nor does it mean that I want to tell others how to play a vampire; I just want the feeding to make sense.
I like caps for emphasis.
ESO vampires are not dracula. they do not need to feed like dracula. its magic. there is NO standardized fictional vampire feeding.
actual reason is probably that its easier to animate feeding that we have in game than trying to animate going for the neck stereotype. but its also fun to imagine that ESO vampires literally drain victim's blood through their pores.
and neither of these theories have anything to do with original post which is about face paint for some reason not working.Edited by Linaleah on March 25, 2019 1:12AMdirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***1 -
FleetwoodSmack✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »FleetwoodSmack wrote: »Either way though, this isn't to start an argument but merely to give a little more insight as of what people may or may not know.
No, @FleetwoodSmack, that was genuinely interesting, and saved me from having to do a dive for stuff on this subject. Thanks.
Anytime! It's something that I find people just don't know about because the death industry took a lot of that process away from the families. There's a lot of scenarios where even store/drugstore bought makeup could still work on someone who's been recently deceased, it's just that we opted for better bases where such makeup can be applied. Now, I also don't work on THAT particular side (I'm a CCO), but I've had opportunities to shadow beautification processes because I'm still on the fence on where I want to end up later in the industry.
More in line with the topic though, there's a few things knowing about how tissues work.
Without basing on external lore (and even though I'd love to have dark tattoos again), we have various passives that could possibly take those away. Undead or not undead, there's still the idea that vampires recover at a quicker pace regardless. So it's not out of the realm of possibility that the skin could regenerate fast enough where the tattoos are always faded. I haven't really considered that before now, and even though I disagree with it--That's something that I can also accept.
As for the folklore bit, it's an interesting topic. While they've injected pop culture references throughout the years and years TES has been a thing, I also find that their form of vampires have become their own thing. I've just accepted that this strain of vampirism is it's own thing.
Now there could be ways to constructively approach it, but at the same time I'm covering it up with armor nowdays, the RP community is still pretty 'meh', and I'm fairly certain the art department have their hands full with queued up future content they're already working on. But as it stands, I think they pretty much consider vampirism to be 'finished' aside from adjusting the passives and abilities from time to time along with the nomnom timer. I appreciate you trying to keep things constructive though!Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies!0 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormChaser3000 wrote: »@Linaleah Current feeding animation looks lame. It's all that matters.
its literally the only thing i like about current visual iteration of ESO vampires, so.. to each their own?dirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormChaser3000 wrote: »@Linaleah Current feeding animation looks lame. It's all that matters.
its literally the only thing i like about current visual iteration of ESO vampires, so.. to each their own?
Stage 1s tend to be kinda cute... so there is that.
Really wish we could set our stage as a cosmetic choice.![:\](https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
1 -
StormChaser3000✭✭✭✭✭
✭StormChaser3000 wrote: »@Linaleah Current feeding animation looks lame. It's all that matters.
its literally the only thing i like about current visual iteration of ESO vampires, so.. to each their own?
Catching tomato soup in the air
Afaik the animation was changed once. Hopefully they will rework it again sometime. The future will tell. But the presence of vampire bite marks on the neck among body adornments options gives some hope...0 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭starkerealm wrote: »StormChaser3000 wrote: »@Linaleah Current feeding animation looks lame. It's all that matters.
its literally the only thing i like about current visual iteration of ESO vampires, so.. to each their own?
Stage 1s tend to be kinda cute... so there is that.
Really wish we could set our stage as a cosmetic choice.
hey, listen as a compromise? I'll take it. its not the most favorite for me, but its still vampiric looking without edging into decomposing.dirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***0