View from the Road: What Do WoW and Twilight Have in Common?

Vegedus

New member
Mar 8, 2010
9
0
0
Dr. Paine said:
those were the key three traits to actual vampires.
Key-word, "were". You have this laundry list of "conditions" that apparently a vampire HAS to uphold to be a vampire, but you base it only on a consensus of ancient myths and folklore. There's been many interpretation since then that does not meet all your requirements. Myths change with time. As with many other definitions, the main definition of vampire is something that "feels" like a vampire. It's an intangible feeling of association that people have. People simply have some implied notion of what is a vampire, and the only shared trait here seems to be that they leech life-force (you are right that it doesn't have to be blood).

So let's bring some hypothetical examples:

Is someone that has to suck human blood, and is hurt by the sunlight, but is no stronger or longer lived than a human a vampire?

Is someone that sucks blood, is nocturnal but only mildly bothered by sunlight, and has no real weaknesses, except perhaps a stake in the heart (which isn't really that much of a weakness since people die from that too) a vampire?

Is anyone that meets the other criteria, but is "near-invincible" rather than just "immortal, but with weaknesses" not a vampire?

The main character in Hellsing anime, for instance, lives of donor-blood, though he goes without for 30 years without consequence, sunlight just bothers him, and he can only die by getting killed one time for each person he's sucked from (some million) or a stake through the heart. He also happens to have several odd powers and strength several times above your average vampire. I haven't heard anyone complain about his status as a vampire, and even if there has, it hasn't been the massive outcry that Twillight has gotten, since it's just people hating the books/movies because they're badly written, and then people trying to find all sorts of other, auxiliary arguments for why they're so bad.
 

wonkify

New member
Oct 2, 2009
143
0
0
Stephen King recently had a funny comment when asked who he thought was better, Stephanie Meyer (Twilight) or J.K. Rowling (Harry Potter) he said, "Jay Rowling is a wonderful writer, but Stephanie Meyer, well, she's just not that good, is she?"

And yes, I'd much rather judge quality than 'realism' in my fantasy fare.
 

Epigone

New member
Nov 21, 2009
47
0
0
People confuse there dislike of a take on a vampire/werewolf to mean that it isn't a real one. Obviously, the vampires from twilight are vampires, but I don't like that model as much.
 

Bato

New member
Oct 18, 2009
284
0
0
I just really don't like the fact that the Castalysm werewolves are Alliance.
They're anthropomorphic beasts, why would they be in the Alliance?
They would be rejected just like the Tauren, Orcs, Trolls, et cetera.

Yet they're welcomed by the humans. Even if they had developed a partial cure and retained their sanity as the lore stated. They wouldn't be welcomed in the Alliance.
And then they go off to go to war with the Peaceful Shamanistic anthropomorphic cows. Or the non-chaos orcs. Who are much the same, with a more colourful history.

It had always seemed the Horde was a group of freaks and misfits, usually beast-like humanoids that are shunned by the xenophobic non-beast-humanoid races.
 

Broderick

New member
May 25, 2010
462
0
0
Bato said:
I just really don't like the fact that the Castalysm werewolves are Alliance.
They're anthropomorphic beasts, why would they be in the Alliance?
They would be rejected just like the Tauren, Orcs, Trolls, et cetera.

Yet they're welcomed by the humans. Even if they had developed a partial cure and retained their sanity as the lore stated. They wouldn't be welcomed in the Alliance.
And then they go off to go to war with the Peaceful Shamanistic anthropomorphic cows. Or the non-chaos orcs. Who are much the same, with a more colourful history.

It had always seemed the Horde was a group of freaks and misfits, usually beast-like humanoids that are shunned by the xenophobic non-beast-humanoid races.
Well, before they were werewolves, they were allies of stormwind, and the various other human cities that were still occupied by humans at the time, they just shut off all contact and cloesed the gates to their "kingdom" because the Worgen curse was spreading; because of their history and because they are more civil than their other "kin" in silverpine, I would suppose the allience would welcome them, but not with open arms mind you. But I think Blizzard put Worgens on allience because they needed to mix things up a bit, same thing with why there are goblins on horde. "Hey, allience doesnt have any feral half-man half-beast races, maybe we should put one in to even things out!" or "hey, allience have a technologicaly advanced race(cough* gnomes cough*), perhaps we should put one on horde to even things out a bit". becides, with burning crusade, horde got a "pretty" race, I guess this might even things out a bit eh?
Back to the main topic, to be perfectly honest, I could care less if people think their version of a (incert race here) is the "best" or "original", but if they try to push it on me like a bible thumper, they better have a logical reason why.
 

Akiada

New member
Apr 7, 2010
128
0
0
JEBWrench said:
Akiada said:
Dracula is so Gangrel (the man turns into a bat! a Wolf! MIST!). Cullen is also so stereotypical Toreador it's not funny, what is funny that you'd think him Tremere, which is a clan of total neeeeerds. :p
Sparkling = Presence 5?
Oh yes.

God, if I ever get a chance to use that in a game of V:TM, I'm so saying "Do I dazzle you?"

The rage will be legendary.

Vanguard_Ex said:
My sister's reaction to the Twilight series was a prime example. I was saying something about vampires, and she was basically claiming that Twilight held the true vampires, and that it should be a gospel to what they really are. Drinking blood and having to stay out of the sun? No no, it turns out those are all lies!
The arguments that literally hundreds of years of folklore cannot be washed away by a single book written in the 21st century by some woman didn't get far.
Funnily enough, when Wolf-Man rewrites all that stuff about werewolves using wolf-skin belts or drinking from wolf-paw prints filled with rain water or making pacts with spirits to get their power and says "lol infectious bite" no one notices or complains. Never mind that werewolves used to be normal wolves that looked off. Human eyes, human voice, maybe missing a tail or has human-esque collar bone instead of the distinct lack of one a real wolf had. Or that silver did shit all (unless you were the Beast of Gevaudan).

Nevermind all that stuff White Wolf did to werewolf mythos. It's not uncommon to hear the term 'Crinos' tossed about casually to refer to any werewolf what walks upright and looks like a anthropomorphic wolf.

Changing the mythos entirely: Clearly only acceptable when it's cool.

Point is, yes, some random person in the 21 century can totally wash it all away. This is not inherently a good thing, but nor is it a bad thing, since anyone else can then change it to whatever they please.

blindthrall said:
I meant to say Toreador, it's been a while since I fucked around with Masquerade. Dracula may have Gangrel abilities, but his actions are very Ventrue, with the whole mind control thing. I can't exactly see Dracula living in the woods off of rats. I guess Victor would be a better example of Ventrue, though. Which clan does Salma Hayeck fit into?
If I recall V:TM correctly you can have cross-clan disciplines (Such as Ventrue's domination) and Gangrel definately aren't prevented from being the sorts who reside in castles and whatnot. I mean hell, there's Beckett, who runs around collecting lore and being a vampire historian in spite of the stereotype against scholarly Gangrel.

No idea about Hayeck, though. Toreador? Actress and all that, seems to fit.
 

aldowyn

New member
Mar 1, 2010
151
0
0
If you think about it, most interpretations of fantasy races come from Dungeons and Dragons, which in turn came from Tolkien.
The evil races tend to be an exception. Orcs vary more than anything, but Trolls do too. (though I prefer LOTR trolls to the Jamaican green things in Warcraft, no offense to any troll players out there.)
As for the good races Dwarves: Same. Halflings: Pretty much the same: Elves: Discounting the stupid "elfs" (yes, I spelled it that way on purpose) that make Santa's presents, varied, but the same. (Wood elves, High elves, Drow.)
People's opinions on what these races are supposed to be like depends on their experiences. Me, I'm of the opinion that werewolves should actually turn into WOLVES, with some slight differences, not the wolf-man things they always seem to be, and vampires... let's just say they DIE in sunlight, not sparkle. Stupid...

BTW, I liked the Drizzt reference.
 

Aureli

New member
Mar 8, 2010
149
0
0
Akiada said:
Cullen is also so stereotypical Toreador it's not funny, what is funny that you'd think him Tremere, which is a clan of total neeeeerds. :p
No he's not. Toreadors are obsessed with beauty, and as far as I can tell, Bella is as far from that as you can get in any sense.
 

AceAngel

New member
May 12, 2010
775
0
0
As Yahtzee once said "..We're a civilization so stuck in escapism, that we found mundane-ity in something that doesn't exist and never will.."