11-07-2014 [VC] Death of a Friend

[Mackus]

I dunno. If someone with bubonic plague was merrily running around town biting people and shouting "I have plague" I wouldn't shred a tear if someone shot them. "Being sick" doesn't exclude "being evil asshole". Its not about what you are, its about what you did, and we didn't get to see what Lorna and Emma did, so we can't yet judge whether staking has been justified.

[Varanus]

Given their actions seem to be causing various events that are supposed to happen (Lori becoming a vampire being the biggest one), "not interfering" seems an unlikely justification for their inaction.

Well, Len, maybe, has no excuse unless you count having to get Suki out of there. But Kate? Heck, offing cryptids is what she and her sister *do*! At least until PETM started sticking their nose into it, hoping for a free meal. So why would she interfere, even if she isn't as gung ho about whacking cryptids as Stephanie was/is/will be.

And she also now is on a cheerleading team full of vampires and helped rescue a coven of vampires. Plus she is the one who asked if they should help Emma. Your reasoning about Katie being a cryptid killer doesn't hold up given she's only ever killed in self defense or the defense of others.

[Malkizid]

http://www.vampirecheerleaders.net/stri ... f_a_friend

I'm sure the heretic will be experiencing those fires soon enough if he fails to repent of his vile deeds. Poor Emma. Poor Lori.

You seem to have quite an odd definition of the Word "heretic". Heresy is something that falls outside the accepted religious traditions. Unless this setting has some sort of commandment like "Thou shalt let vampires drink your blood, for they art awesome and can commit no sin", I highly doubt that staking vampires is considered all that controversial. In case you didn't notice, a lot of the vampire hunters in fiction are depicted as pious people, or even priests in some cases.

Again, we have no idea what happened between "Lori becomes a vampire" and "Vampire hunters stake Emma". We don't know if the vampires killed people and we don't know how the fire started. Until that point, it is pretty baseless to yell "The hunters are evil heretics!".

[Hyper Magi]

Well yeah Mackus, that's because someone with the plague biting people is making an active decision to do that.

Vampires are biting humans to... not starve to death. That in itself isn't an evil act.

[Nightgazer Starlight]

I think Emma was more than just Lori's friend. I think she was her lover too. Which means Lori is really gonna flip out and avenge Emma, which means lots of dead humans are gonna be happening soon then.

[Varanus]

I think Emma was more than just Lori's friend. I think she was her lover too. Which means Lori is really gonna flip out and avenge Emma, which means lots of dead humans are gonna be happening soon then.

What would give you the idea they were lovers?

And anyway its not like being lovers is required for a flip out. Suki went into a rage at the death of those aliens she had recently befriended.

<><><>

I'll reiterate again how this sequence of events just makes no sense in terms of characterization. I mean basically it looks like this happened:

Katie: "She's in trouble, should we help?" *is pulled out of sight*
Summerfield: "It's dangerous here, follow me."
Katie: "That had nothing to do with my question but I'll ignore it completely and follow you."

I would really like to have the writer's thoughts on why they depicted things like this.

[Hyper Magi]

From what I've noticed she's... imaginative(Which isn't a good or bad thing).


Well I'm not the writer, but from my perspective Summerfield is the most knowledgeable about the current situation, so she went along with him. Katie isn't sure what to do, and Leonard is too busy holding Suki to accomplish much right now.


Also... there really wasn't any helping Emma without killing/wounding the hunters, which would just cause more problems.

[Error of Logic]

Well yeah Mackus, that's because someone with the plague biting people is making an active decision to do that.

What if they were delerious at the time?

Vampires are biting humans to... not starve to death. That in itself isn't an evil act.

That depends on whether it has to be human blood or not.
If a vampire could survive comfortably by biting, say, rats or rabbits, who spawn like crazy, but chose to attack humans because they taste better, then I'd be inclined to see them as evil. Especially if they're careless eaters who kill and then just move on with nary a shrug.

[Hyper Magi]

Can you be "evil" if you're not in the right state of mind to actively think? I'd rather go into the territory of calling people who aren't well in the head "evil".


Careless eaters are considerably less sympathetic, that's for sure. As for choice.... Well the argument could be made that humans don't "have" to eat meat, and could live off vegetables(and supplements to make up for what you miss out on from meat). But I'll be the first to say "Chicken taste too good to quit". Would that make me evil? Well, maybe to chickens... So is it really a manner of evil, or is it a manner of "stop eating us"?

[Tako]

Well, humans don't eat intelligent beings, at least most don't (there are cannibals, and people who eat chimps, gorillas and dolphins). Plus, since vampires are born from humans and can breed with humans, they would be considered cannibals, not unlike some crazy guy who attacks and eats their neighbours because he really likes the taste of human flesh.

If you think vampires are justified feeding on humans instead of animals just because humans taste better, then you are justifying every psycho cannibal who does the same.

[Sk'thloq]

Fist of all, we still don't know if vampires can feed from animals or not. It's never even been mentioned. Second, we might want to remember that technically, vampires are parasites, not predators.

[Tako]

Well, humans don't eat intelligent beings, at least most don't (there are cannibals, and people who eat chimps, gorillas and dolphins). Plus, since vampires are born from humans and can breed with humans, they would be considered cannibals, not unlike some crazy guy who attacks and eats his neighbours because he really likes the taste of human flesh.

If you think vampires are justified feeding on humans instead of animals just because humans taste better, then you are justifying every psycho cannibal who does the same.

[Nightgazer Starlight]

Tako : Why did you spam with a duplicate post, isn't that against the rules?

[Hyper Magi]

Vampires aren't technically humans(and some vampires are born vampires and/or less human like than others). They're a different species that just so happens to feed on us, so I don't think the cannibalism comparison works here. Them feeding on humans is justified in the sense that it's not an "evil" act. Unless you think bears, sharks, and any other animal that eats the occasional human is evil.


And going by your "vampires are humans" logic, then that mob just brutally murdered someone without even giving them a fair trail. Not to mention the whole "vampires must die because they're an abomination" thing would start having some very nasty implications(X race is "better" than Y race).

[Varanus]

Vampires aren't technically humans(and some vampires are born vampires and/or less human like than others). They're a different species that just so happens to feed on us, so I don't think the cannibalism comparison works here. Them feeding on humans is justified in the sense that it's not an "evil" act. Unless you think bears, sharks, and any other animal that eats the occasional human is evil.

The shark, bear and such examples aren't really valid given sharks and bears don't have a sense of ethics nor do they act with a sapient kind of malicious intent so no action of theirs can really be called "evil."

A better point to make is that thus far vampire feeding has been depicted as (usually) non-fatal with no lasting physical harm to the body and in fact can be quite pleasurable for the victim.

Whether they can survive on animal blood or not hasn't been addressed, but at the very least it seems blood thirst is heavily linked to sexual desire/pleasure for a vampire, and it could be that feeding on a human satisfies the sexual side of it better than a animal could.

It could also simply be that in a urban city humans are the easiest and largest source of blood. Animals large enough to drain enough to satisfy a vampire without killing them would be hard to come by (and if they did kill them then leaving a bunch of bloodless rats lying around and such would arouse suspicions).