Vampire Weaknesses, where the fuck do they come from?

[Maj]

According to the video you posted his fighting style is a lot like stabbing people with swords only he has six of them and they're glued to his arms. So while I'm sure Anthony Burch thought his rant was justified he sure didn't bother to back it up with supporting video clips.

Wasn't there a clip in there of Wolvie shoving an opponent's head into the blades of a helicopter and chopping his head off with blood spurting everywhere? Because I was mostly with you up until that point.

[Crissa]

Maj, that was the guy who would not die and would not quit shooting him.

I think there's a definite point at where if we're going to prove the unkillable guy is dying, is his head going everywhere.

Also, he fell in the film, Wolverine wasn't holding him at that point.

-Crissa

[Kaelik]

Bottom line. If your boss happened to rape my mother, it wouldn't make me a hero to walk into your place of employment and postal a bunch of people who weren't bothering me on my way to shooting him.

It would make me a vigilante who also murders innocents just for shits and giggles. IE evil.

Right. But I take it these guys working for Striker are trying to shoot him, right? They're just doing their job, but their job involves "Getting in the way" and "Trying to shoot you". So really, they have the opportunity to remember they have pressing matters to attend to anywhere else. If they insist on getting in the way and trying to shoot you, that really becomes their problem.

I'll bring up Death Note again: Light kills off the evildoers, and skips the middleman, going right for the big people who make bad things happen. So he's actively making the world a better place. Now, L is a detective who is trying to stop him. In the end, once he actually meets L, he writes his name in the book and L dies (spoiler!). Did L personally deserve that? No, but he did knowingly get in the way of making the world a better place, so he won one (1) free heart attack.

It's a shame that sometimes people who aren't the big bad guy still feel they have to get in the way of the big bad being killed, but ultimately that's their fault and their problem.

Koumei. These people only "work for Stryker" in the sense that are members of the US military. And as such, must in fact do what a general tells them.

Let me try to break this down for you:

1) Wolverine does some stuff.
2) Stryker frames Wolverine for murder.
3) Innocent army men working at army bases, and police officers attempting to apprehend a known serial killer get viciously butchered for shits and giggles.

If you are accused of murder by someone, there are some hero ways to deal with it:

1) Go to trail, protest, tell the truth. If you get convicted, escape.
2) run away from cops.
3) disarm cops, then run away.

You know what's not even remotely okay?

Murdering every officer of the law who looks at you funny in high profile ways that bring more cops to your location so you can slaughter more of them.

These cops are doing their job. Their job is to apprehend serial killers. You are a serial killer in the eyes of the law. You don't get to fucking kill cops just because they are wrong, especially not in ways that lead directly to more cop killing.

As for Light. Let me try to explain this in a simple way that you will not understand because you are crazy.

The reason we have courts and shit is because we want only guilty people to die. When Light takes the law into his own hands, he is fucking crazy. He is declaring his judgment superior to the laws of the land. What actually happens is he kills people who he thinks are guilty, even though he hasn't heard facts of the case. So what you are actually proposing is if a prosecutor thinks you are guilty, you should be executed, screw all that trial crap.

That's fucking crazy and wrong. The fact of the matter is that you are going to kill innocents. Lots of innocents. The very innocents that were decided by the system in place to be more important than catching a few more criminals.

[Kaelik]

Maj, that was the guy who would not die and would not quit shooting him.

I think there's a definite point at where if we're going to prove the unkillable guy is dying, is his head going everywhere.

Also, he fell in the film, Wolverine wasn't holding him at that point.

-Crissa

In the video, it was not the unkillable guy at all. We are talking about the Rev Rant, in which, in a clip in the game, a helicopter pilot in the US army is attempting to shoot Wolverine. So instead of running away, or even just jumping on, chopping the blades off, and letting the guy fall with a chance to parachute out, he jumps onto the copter, pulls the guy out through the canopy, then shoves his face into the helicopter blades, before jumping back to the land.

[IGTN]

These cops are doing their job. Their job is to apprehend serial killers. You are a serial killer in the eyes of the law. You don't get to fucking kill cops just because they are wrong, especially not in ways that lead directly to more cop killing

That, and, even if you were framed at first, once you start killing cops, you've kinda become a murderer.

[Kaelik]

These cops are doing their job. Their job is to apprehend serial killers. You are a serial killer in the eyes of the law. You don't get to fucking kill cops just because they are wrong, especially not in ways that lead directly to more cop killing

That, and, even if you were framed at first, once you start killing cops, you've kinda become a murderer.

Well, the whole problem with Koumei understanding any of this, is that she believes that if someone frames her of a crime, she now has been given a moral excuse to kill an infinite number of cops without any of those killings being murder.

Because she is trying to do good by killing her framer, so therefore, anyone and everyone who attempts to prevent her from her vigilante justice, including police officers attempting to apprehend a criminal for trial.

Apparently being mislead by someone else, but still doing your job is all it takes to be an evil person deserving of death.

So in return Koumei, I turn your logic back on you. By being a vigilante in the first place, you undermine the rule of law, making the world a worse place, even worse than someone who frames you for his crime. He only killed one person, you are driving other people to murder many others.

But even more so, the very second you kill a police officer, you know, one of those people who apprehends murderers, you have actually made the world a worse place, because, in your own words "anyone who will protect them is making the world a worse place by protecting them."

And by murdering cops, you are protecting the criminals those cops would arrest.

So congratulations. Your "I can kill them damn PoPo if I want, because they annoy me." attitude just lead to you protecting murders, and by extension, you deserve vigilante justice exacted upon you.

I think we just reached a motivation behind Captain America vs Wolverine.

[Crissa]

Ahh, that's far more brutal than the movie. If I were a parent, I'd be pissed.

-Crissa

[Lago PARANOIA]

Why didn't they just change the plot of the game to something like:

Stryker is planning to launch an UltraNuke because he's a neo-nazi and there's no legal channel you can use to stop him because of bullshit ultra-Shadow Government competence. His soldiers are fanatically loyal and there is no reasoning with them and are willing to die to protect what they don't know is an UltraNuke because the story Stryker fed them was that he's protecting the secret of Cold Fusion.

There. The plot is sufficiently railroaded so that you have no choice but to kill hundreds of otherwise-innocent soldiers, because if you waste your time trying to write letters to Congress the UltraNuke will go off.

[Draco_Argentum]

Why didn't they just change the plot of the game to something like:

Its a game based off a bad movie.

Wasn't there a clip in there of Wolvie shoving an opponent's head into the blades of a helicopter and chopping his head off with blood spurting everywhere? Because I was mostly with you up until that point.

Lets think about that a bit more. That guy would've died instantly and in far less pain than getting shot somewhere that isn't lethal right away. On the other hand its probably a lot messier than a normal battlefield shooting.

So, if morality is about not making a gory mess then sure, that wasn't right. If minimising suffering is more important then the helicopter blades are actually superior to a lot of the deaths that happen on the field of battle.

The Rev Rant's example videos all smacked of Princess Morality. From what I hear of Prototype it wouldn't even have been hard to show some civilian killings as evidence. The fact that he didn't makes it look like his real point is that he doesn't like gore as opposed to his stated position of being against hero/murderers.

[Kaelik]

So, if morality is about not making a gory mess then sure, that wasn't right. If minimising suffering is more important then the helicopter blades are actually superior to a lot of the deaths that happen on the field of battle.

The Rev Rant's example videos all smacked of Princess Morality. From what I hear of Prototype it wouldn't even have been hard to show some civilian killings as evidence. The fact that he didn't makes it look like his real point is that he doesn't like gore as opposed to his stated position of being against hero/murderers.

On the other hand, if morality is about not killing innocents. Taking down the chopper in a way that provides the man a chance for survival is better than killing him for certain.

If you found a completely painless way to kill someone, would it suddenly become moral to kill anyone?

As for Prototype, he explicitly talked about the various civilian killings, and how you are the town's "savior" while murdering them for no reason.

It's called "Rev Rant" not "Rev, watch what's on the screen, it totally encapsulates my message."

The murdering of innocents is much more important than how the murders are done.

[Koumei]

Uh, if the police decide you're guilty, then I hate to tell you but this is the real world, not CSI: Miami. We're talking about a place where, if someone steals your $1000 TV and you know it's them, you pay a policeman $500 and you get your TV back when he arrests them for a reason he made up that gives them 10 years. Yeah. Where police corruption basically becomes a joke that gets rolled into business as normal. Actual Jesus rocking up isn't going to help you once:

A. They think you're guilty, and
B. They have more important things to do than their jobs

Given a world where the police actually do protect and serve the innocent, sure, it should be left up to them and the judicial systems. But we're talking about the real world, so I just accept that any time they actually protect and serve it's a coincidence, a mistake on their part, or because they were bribed into doing so in the first place. And so people saying "Well they're actually less useful than no-one being there" and doing the job themselves is fine, in my books. The only problem is with the fact that they often tend to also have shitty judgement, or in the case of Light, they then figure "While I'm at it, I really hate short people." or whatever.

At least a lot of the cases in Australia basically got limited to "Criminals kill other criminals, police can't be fucked investigating/prosecuting", where it's really polite of the crime lords to only be interested in killing each other (which is basically why Melbourne is known in AU for being such a crazy mafia land, yet a person who isn't actually in a gang will never even see any of it). It became someone else doing the job for the police, and yeah, if they arrested them and held fair trials instead of gunning them down, that would be better - but it would also be a very bizarre parody of the legal system, where criminals did a better job of a fair system than the police.

I'm trying to think of a nice comparison here, but the problem is that while "If your greengrocer doesn't sell you tomatoes, you grow your own." is basically the idea I'm promoting, the problem is that the greengrocer won't break into your yard and steal your tomatoes, whereas the service provider that doesn't do their job in this instance (the police) aren't happy for people to get the service at all. So the metaphor breaks down because greengrocers who hate tomatoes aren't promoting turning the regular populace into victims.

So sure, Gandhi. I'll agree with you the day that the police do their jobs. Because I actually like the idea of a world where people don't carry concealed weapons because they trust law enforcement to enforce the law. But if they're just going to be another criminal element, then just letting there be "The Big Bads" and "the victims" isn't an option: let everyone be a criminal and wait for the situation to either solve itself (unlikely) or the situation to become such a crisis that people up the top do their jobs.

tl;dr The vigilante isn't killing Horatio and friends. The police that get in the way may as well be the Taleban, as they are part of Team Evil here.

[Draco_Argentum]

As for Prototype, he explicitly talked about the various civilian killings, and how you are the town's "savior" while murdering them for no reason.

It's called "Rev Rant" not "Rev, watch what's on the screen, it totally encapsulates my message."

I don't think its asking a lot for him to show the things hes complaining about instead of other stuff. Hes some guy I don't know, his say so is not compelling at all, if he wants to do more than pontificate he needs evidence. If hes trying to be Bill O'Reilly hes going the right way though.

[Username17]

DA, could you take your foot out of your mouth and stop trying to play devil's advocate long enough to actually read the bullshit you are typing?

Killing people is wrong. If you don't understand that, you're criminally insane by definition. If someone kills people, they had better have a fucking excellent reason for doing it, or they are a monster. So if you show a character killing someone at all, then the burden of proof is on the people who are saying that the character in question is anything other than a villain, because the basic foundation of the claim that the guy is a wicked misanthrope has been well fucking established.

As it happens, Wolverine's excuse for killing the tribal dudes was that they had some shit his boss wanted, and his excuse for killing the regular members of the US Army was that he was super pissed at some other guy that his victims had probably never even met. Which is in both cases no excuse at all.

So Anthony wins, and you're being a dick.

-Username17

[Kaelik]

@Epically retarded Koumei rant:

WTF. Um... Guess what:

1) You are wrong about the police in Australia.
2) It wouldn't matter if you were right because Wolverine is not in fucking Australia. He is in the US. So suck a barrel of cocks.

The police are not a corrupt mafia organization. And you do not have free license to kill them when they bother you by trying to arrest you because you are a murderer.

1) Wolverine met some nice people.
2) Those nice people died in Wolverine's company.
3) A warrant was put out for his arrest.
4) He would totally get tried, and he would even get off.

Instead of letting the police apprehend him, he choose to viciously murder them for whenever they saw him, even though "take 40 bullets to the chest and cut up their guns" is seriously a valid option.

That makes him a murdering fuckhead. And you are a crazy conspiracy theorist on the level of Tzor with your crazy fucked up "The Police is a giant extortion agency."

As for Prototype, he explicitly talked about the various civilian killings, and how you are the town's "savior" while murdering them for no reason.

It's called "Rev Rant" not "Rev, watch what's on the screen, it totally encapsulates my message."

I don't think its asking a lot for him to show the things hes complaining about instead of other stuff. Hes some guy I don't know, his say so is not compelling at all, if he wants to do more than pontificate he needs evidence. If hes trying to be Bill O'Reilly hes going the right way though.

Um... Fuck you? It's a rant for people who know what the fuck he is talking about. He also didn't show in the video a definition of what a video game is. So I guess he's O'Reillying it up by not proving that there is such a thing as video games, or that one was made called prototype.

How about you fucking get a basic knowledge of anything at all before you start dealing in it.

It would seriously take you like eight seconds to confirm the information regarding the killing of civilians if you had even listened to any of the words he spoke, instead of apparently watching the video on mute, and then criticizing him for it.

Here, let me take eight seconds to do your work for you, you complete incompetent.

Now perhaps you can stop trying to weasel out of your obvious wrongness by claiming that he didn't show you video footage of a specific action in a game that he talked about.

[Prak]

ok, back on topic!

What do people think should happen when a vampire eats normal food?

I'm looking at these options:
1- They digest it more or less as normal, but derive no actual nourishment from it, unless there's some form of blood, and even then, they only derive nourishment from the blood itself
2- They can't do anything with the food, so it sits and rots in their stomach
3- The food becomes ash somewhere within them, usually their mouth or stomach, and they must expel it at some point

I personally like the first option. But then, I'm becoming a chef, I personally would want to be able to still enjoy a normal meal, even if it doesn't nourish me in anyway.

[shadzar]

1 and 2.

Kind of like Merv from Matrix 2/3.

They kind of digest it because it gets mushed, but not absorbed, so they become bulimic with the left overs, because Everybody poops, except vampyres.

[Username17]

Depends on the vampire. Obviously, sexy vampires and cannibal vampires need to be able to eat. Divine curse vampires, heroin junky vampires, and disease vampires probably shouldn't. Americans don't actually "get" feudalism, so you probably weren't going to throw down nobility vampires anyway.

Different metaphors will require different food reactions. Gnawing on a human arm isn't nearly as horrifying as grabbing a recognizable chunk of human and putting into an otherwise recognizable meal and eating it like a civilized person - so obviously that kind of Hannibal shit is exactly what you want to do with a cannibal vampire. On the other hand, sex and food are pretty closely related, so it's pretty hard to be a really effective succubus if you don't put stuff into your mouth.

Then again, junkies don't eat and waste away, so the vampire as addict metaphor really revolves around not being able to eat food and being hungry all the time. Divine curses are supposed to be bad, so the vampire in those is going to want to be banned from all normal daily pleasures - food included. And finally, plagues kill people more than pizzas, so denying those pestilence metaphors any food but people is pretty standard fare.

-Username17

[Draco_Argentum]

Um... Fuck you? It's a rant for people who know what the fuck he is talking about. He also didn't show in the video a definition of what a video game is. So I guess he's O'Reillying it up by not proving that there is such a thing as video games, or that one was made called prototype.

How about you fucking get a basic knowledge of anything at all before you start dealing in it.

Good work on strawmanning the existence of video games as being the same as having played a specific one there. Its pretty simple, he could've made the video actually convincing but he didn't. Thats fine for a rant but worthless as an entry in an actual discussion.

[Username17]

Draco, for your own sake, just shut up. You are seriously embarrassing yourself in front of all the readers of this thread. You have been left arguing - apparently seriously - that someone should be forced to take time out of their argument to not only exhaustively demonstrate the connectedness of a minor visual aid to the narrative of a persuasive argument, but in fact to prove a negative that there are no existant mitigating factors anywhere in the universe that would make that visual aid not apply. Seriously: what the fuck?

You know that proving a negative is not only pointless, it´s literally impossible. If someone says "this character kills these people for no real reason" there is no way to ever prove that. Because there could be a reason for killing that dude that you haven´t mentioned or thought of.

And yet, even by your own admission, Wolverine has no fucking reason to kill those people. So you going on and on and on about the case isn´t "proven" is complete and utter horse shit. You know there´s no good reason for those teenage kids to get chopped in half, so you continuing to play devil´s advocate on this subject just makes you look really bad. Like, really really bad. So do yourself a favor, and fucking shut up.

-Username17

[Kaelik]

Good work on strawmanning the existence of video games as being the same as having played a specific one there. Its pretty simple, he could've made the video actually convincing but he didn't. Thats fine for a rant but worthless as an entry in an actual discussion.

So in short:

"I are Draco! I gets to have opinion on game I have never played! Prototype has no innocent civilian killing at all! Prove me wrong! WTF is Google?"

If you don't want to have a discussion, that's fine. But just shut up. If you want to have a discussion about the game prototype, it is incumbent on you to have spent 6+ seconds investigating it. Read a blurb of the game, any one at all, maybe even a full fledged review.

You can get back to us then.

In the mean time, you don't get to have an opinion on something you know literally nothing about. That's a real O'Reilly. For all I know, you don't actually know what a videogame is. You haven't shown any evidence at all of knowing what one is. So prove to me with a 30 second clip from Sponge Bob Square pants that you do in fact know what a videogame is, or I'm just going to sit here and keep arguing that you have not demonstrated any knowledge of it.

After all, I certainly can't waste my time with your actual words or anything. Only background video clips have any meaning at all to anyone.

[Draco_Argentum]

If you don't want to have a discussion, that's fine. But just shut up. If you want to have a discussion about the game prototype, it is incumbent on you to have spent 6+ seconds investigating it. Read a blurb of the game, any one at all, maybe even a full fledged review.

Hey, fuck you. I already said I knew Prototype had a bunch of civilian killing in it. Apparently its too much to ask for a guy ranting about killing civilians to show it. I can't believe you're defending this guy's little youtube rant so hard.

[Kaelik]

Hey, fuck you. I already said I knew Prototype had a bunch of civilian killing in it. Apparently its too much to ask for a guy ranting about killing civilians to show it. I can't believe you're defending this guy's little youtube rant so hard.

So you are bitching about how someone didn't adequately prove something that even people who have never played the game already know? Why the fuck would he need to prove that? WTF does that that have to do with the argument at all?

He said "You kill a bunch of civilians, that's not hero like." Your response: "It looks like he doesn't care about civilians, only gore, I say this because I am incapable of hearing words, only videos matter."

I'm not defending his rant, I'm attacking you for being fucking retarded. The fact that you happen to be retarded by attacking a rant for not addressing something that it specifically addresses, and is in fact the entire point of the rant, is just coincidental.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I don't know about you guys, but I like it when asshole characters immediately and repeatedly get their comeuppance in video games.

I guess this is why I liked playing as Bowser / Strong Bad / Travis Touchdown so much. Because no matter how much of a bastard these guys were being the other characters would dish it right back just as hard and make them look foolish.

[Avoraciopoctules]

Thread Necro!

I just saw a pretty neat idea on some blog that got linked on another thread a little while ago.
http://luduscarcerum.blogspot.nl/2012/0 ... ution.html

This posits a setting where vampires are not vulnerable to holy symbols. However, they do recoil from crosses because these are symbols of execution. The same would go for electric chairs, nooses, etc.

Thoughts?

[Maj]

The problem is that it takes a "hard" restriction and turns it into an emo soft restriction.

One is, theoretically, a biological reason - no matter how stupid - and the other is just angst. Which isn't to say it couldn't work, but it needs better flavor text.