Vampire: The Masquerade, True Blood, and you

[monstersquad]

So I've recently been getting into True Blood very hard, and I was just wondering a) does anyone else out there play or used to play Vampire, and b) if you do, how do you feel about True Blood and the way vampires are portrayed?

For example I used to LARP vampire, starting when I was 16, and technically not allowed into the extensive OWBN game that I played in. I love True Blood and how it can sometimes mirror V:tM very closely. The latest episode of season 3 just blew my mind. How do you other current or former vampire players feel about the show and how it relates to Vampire in general? I'm curious.

 

[MisterShine]

I actually thought the show sounded kind of stupid, then my friend started telling me more about how the vampires worked and I was like "Hey, this is like Masquerade only without (one part) of the masquerade and no Malkavians!"

Aww, no Malkavians

I do think it is the closest thing we'll get to a Vampire Tv show (not that other crappy show a few years ago), and it is pretty sweet. Plus this man

Makes me feel some strange things..

 

[okogamashii]

Vampire: the Masquerade happens to be my favorite game ever! In fact, while I enjoy True Blood, the discovery of VtMB was what redeemed vampires as a genre for me.

 

[Mr Montmorency]

How it usually is => How it should be:

Vampires get stronger as they age => Vampires are equally strong, due to higher metabolisms
Vampires vaporise in daylight => Vampires suffer a chemical reaction when exposed to ultraviolet rays
Vampires are insanely fast => Vampires are just slightly faster than normal
Vampires have sharp canines => Vampires have normal teeth
Vampires are immortal and show no age => Vampires age 4x slower
Vampires have no heartbeat or soul => Vampires have normal heart beats and "souls"
Vampires have red eyes => Vampires have normal eyes
Vampires can shapeshift => Vampires cannot shapeshift
Vampires are brooding and mysterious => Vampires are normal
Vampires can be killed only with silver, garlic or crosses => Vampires are allergic to silver and garlic, but not crosses

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

 

[manythings]

Vampire: the Masquerade happens to be my favorite game ever! In fact, while I enjoy True Blood, the discovery of VtMB was what redeemed vampires as a genre for me.

Troika will always be missed by anyone who played their stuff. Isn't True Blood based on a series of books?

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

I like how True Blood does Vampires, it isnt "hard core" Vampire lore, but its is a more believeable variation. I havent seen anything of V:tM unfortunatly since I lost interest in Vampires (thanks to a certain saga ruining the genre)

 

[Outright Villainy]

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

Read this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_am_legend].
And no, that does not mean watching any of the crappy film adaptations. Read the dang book! It's awesome...

 

[Silver]

Yeah, how about Kindred? The series actually based on Vampire the masquerade? I'd say that's closer than True Blood.

How it usually is => How it should be:

Vampires get stronger as they age => Vampires are equally strong, due to higher metabolisms
Vampires vaporise in daylight => Vampires suffer a chemical reaction when exposed to ultraviolet rays
Vampires are insanely fast => Vampires are just slightly faster than normal
Vampires have sharp canines => Vampires have normal teeth
Vampires are immortal and show no age => Vampires age 4x slower
Vampires have no heartbeat or soul => Vampires have normal heart beats and "souls"
Vampires have red eyes => Vampires have normal eyes
Vampires can shapeshift => Vampires cannot shapeshift
Vampires are brooding and mysterious => Vampires are normal
Vampires can be killed only with silver, garlic or crosses => Vampires are allergic to silver and garlic, but not crosses

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

Why is that how it should be? Who makes up the rules? You? And isn't the whole point of vampires that they're supernatural, you know, that they defy science? Sure, the science behind it could probably be interesting. After all, Becket and the two doctors (the malkavian and the gangrel, can't remember their names) are among the most interesting characters in Vampire: The masquerade. But the mystery is a big part of what makes vampires interesting, sort of like how a revealed monster is almost always less scary than one hidden in shadows. Just throwing a bunch of nonsensical technobabble in there which will have anyone who actually knows what they're talking about groaning about the inaccuracies wouldn't really help much.

But then, I guess that's just my opinion.

 

[Mr Montmorency]

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

Read this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_am_legend].
And no, that does not mean watching any of the crappy film adaptation. Read the dang book! It's awesome...

I meant in a normal contemporary setting, though. And the only time when it's set like that, it's all about the romance. No complicated story arcs about a person being separated from a normal livelihood, no exploration by a doctor of the phenomenon, it always ends up being placed side by side with romance or something shit like pixies. The psychology would be compelling.

 

[Blueruler182]

I know racism is a big thing in today's society, less so in past generation but still pretty big, but why in the hell do we need vampires to be like the X-men? I mean, seriously, they ripped off mutants more effectively then Heroes did. The world hates and fears them, I'm not one hundred percent sure why beyond the blood sucking and the super powers, they just seem to hate them.

Of course, I'll hold judgement until I watch more than bits and pieces of episodes that happen to be on while I'm on my laptop trying to ignore it, but everything I hear about True Blood just seems like they're taking far too many notes from the X-men.

And that fucking actress can do a southern accent! Why the fuck didn't she do a southern accent on X-men?!!! She was Rogue!!!

Okay, that's out of my system. I honestly don't think too harshly about True Blood, I just consider it Twilight if it were tolerable.

 

[Outright Villainy]

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

Read this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_am_legend].
And no, that does not mean watching any of the crappy film adaptation. Read the dang book! It's awesome...

I meant in a normal contemporary setting, though. And the only time when it's set like that, it's all about the romance. No complicated story arcs about a person being separated from a normal livelihood, no exploration by a doctor of the phenomenon, it always ends up being placed side by side with romance or something shit like pixies. The psychology would be compelling.

It's pretty contemporary, it's set in the seventies. It feels very much like a modern novel anyway, and you'd be very foolish to disregard it out of hand just because it was written in the fifties. It deals with the issues of being the last human in a world of vampires; how that affects him psychologically due to the sever isolation. And in the backstory we see over the years he investigates what causes it, and what chemically deters it. The scientific explanations feel pretty sound and the ending is amazing.

 

[cerebus23]

TB is based off a pulp series of books "the sookie stackhouse chronicles" or something. tho the show sometimes deviates way off the books or so i have read having never read the books. example lafiette died very early in the books, like the forst or second books out of the series, and hbo kept the character into he has turned into one of the fan favs on the show.

dunno if the person wrote the books was into vtm at all but it obvious that they had a familiarity with vampire lore and other things that exists in that whole mythos, i mean how many people are familiar with maynaids and junk like that. compared to twilight where the author seems to care jack spit about any lore and just wrote a ultra religious 90210 take on vamps and other things.

tb is good cause it is campy with some good lore behind it, it never takes itself too seriously, and yet it can do drama pretty well when it comes down to it.

 

[DarkPanda XIII]

The reason why True Blood hits on the awesome is the interaction between characters and how interesting their mythos is..which I will admit that they take alot of folklore, toss it into a pot and call it like it is, yet the concepts are occasionally interesting, and brought in by the fact that the characters are a little unique, both the hum.....wait, I really, really can't say humans because it seems that the more the series progresses, the more it seems that every character has something supernatural about them.

That and Jason Stackhouse keeps doing things that are hilarious. I don't like his character that much because he's kind of an idiot, but a lovable idiot that gets into dopey situations.

But really, the series is good for the fact of the characters, including the two best characters in my book, Eric and Godric. Kind of wished Godric was around for Season 3, an easy match up to the villain.

 

[monstersquad]

I know racism is a big thing in today's society, less so in past generation but still pretty big, but why in the hell do we need vampires to be like the X-men? I mean, seriously, they ripped off mutants more effectively then Heroes did. The world hates and fears them, I'm not one hundred percent sure why beyond the blood sucking and the super powers, they just seem to hate them.

Of course, I'll hold judgement until I watch more than bits and pieces of episodes that happen to be on while I'm on my laptop trying to ignore it, but everything I hear about True Blood just seems like they're taking far too many notes from the X-men.

I would have to disagree with the comparaison between True Blood and X-men. Racism really doesn't factor into the show a whole lot. At best it's a minor theme. The biggest issue with vampires is that they're non-human supernatural beings that regularly interact with humans, and it's fucking scary. They look like humans, talk like humans, but they are far, far from human. Some of the vampires in the show are 1000+ years old. And, at best, a vampire is still considered a sociopath in human terms, yet they're afforded the same rights as humans. And they're practically unstoppable. So, I'd say the show is more about how the humans (and shape-shifters and were-wolves) deal with that fact, and the issues that constantly arise from it are what makes the show truly great. That and the fact that it's on HBO, every week is a full-hour episode, so it's basically 2/3 of a movie, with movie quality acting, writing and filmmaking every damn week.

 

[monstersquad]

Bloodlines was so awesome. Seriously that was a work of art right there, but I don't think I could ever get into True Blood because of how they portray vampires. I mean, they're monsters. Literally. They need human blood to survive, and are designed to enjoy killing people. How does that in any way equal sexy or sympathetic?

I'll stick with Buffy's version of vamps, myself.

I fucking hate Buffy's vamps these days. I loved Buffy, but more especially Angel when I was younger though. But once again someone is passing judgement without perspective. If you watched the show, you'd see just how monstrous they are, while still retaining the most meagre vestiges of humanity. They go to great lengths to portray the horror involved with vampires. But they also portray the social veneer that they have to adopt in order to "co-exist" with humans in the main stream. Seriously though, I must respectfully state that having never watched the show, you're speaking out of your ass.

 

[Altorin]

How it usually is => How it should be:

Vampires get stronger as they age => Vampires are equally strong, due to higher metabolisms
Vampires vaporise in daylight => Vampires suffer a chemical reaction when exposed to ultraviolet rays
Vampires are insanely fast => Vampires are just slightly faster than normal
Vampires have sharp canines => Vampires have normal teeth
Vampires are immortal and show no age => Vampires age 4x slower
Vampires have no heartbeat or soul => Vampires have normal heart beats and "souls"
Vampires have red eyes => Vampires have normal eyes
Vampires can shapeshift => Vampires cannot shapeshift
Vampires are brooding and mysterious => Vampires are normal
Vampires can be killed only with silver, garlic or crosses => Vampires are allergic to silver and garlic, but not crosses

No known series is as scientific with the lore as this comparison. It's a shame, I'd love to see the science behind it, it'd be an interesting sci-fi concept. People seem to be more concerned with whiny emo vampires, though, or romance.

I Am Legend did a pretty good job with that, the book at least.

Ninja'd I guess

Still, Robert Neville spends almost 90% of the book doing experiments on the vampires to determine the science behind vampirism.. and vampires in that book follow most of the "rules" you've set out there.

The movie is pretty lousy, but the book is great.

Also, Daybreakers (the 2009 movie) also goes into the science of vampirism, but it doesn't answer all of the questions it asks. It does however show vampires that aren't particularly monsters and just view their dependance on blood as a symptom of being who they are, similar to the vampires at the end of I Am Legend (although I really don't want to say anymore then that)

 

[Shilkanni]

Out of all books & media I've read, I prefer the Vampire: the Masquerade 'ruleset' for Vampires (more than say, Buffy or Anne Rice) and I'd still prefer to see more of that. I don't mind True Blood because it has a lot of similarities with V:tM.

I liked Kindred: the Embraced even though it wasn't brilliant I still wish there was more of it or another attempt at it.