Small Poll On Vampire Personality

Should Vampire sociopathy only kick in at the first mutation?

  • Yes, allow fresh Vampires to love/respect/befriend

    Votes: 140 79.5%
  • No, keep Vampires antisocial from the moment of turning

    Votes: 36 20.5%

  • Total voters
    176

MonMarty

Thotdodger
Staff member
Lore
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
4,429
Reaction score
34,414
Points
663
Age
33
When the recent Vampire rewrite went live, I brought back the old "Vampires are psycho/sociopaths", forgetting that I had actually removed this during the 4.0 rewrite because it made playing a vampire with friends not rewarding. While I did do an effort to broaden the scope of playability by including the subsections about how their affection changes, and isn't entirely gone to entice character development, this kind of complicated nuance is not something everyone can pull off, or wants to pull of.

So. A poll, to decide on the future of Vampire Personality. Someone brought up the suggestion that Vampires shouldn't become psycho/sociopaths until the first mutation. I am inclined to accept this, but only if it is carried by a desire from the player base. I still think that anti personality disorders are essential to a good Vampire character, and that a loving warm Vampire is a slapstick contradiction to Vampire niches. Still, poll results can and will be respected in this particular case. So please cast your vote above.

Casus: Vampires being able to retain their respect for religion, relationships, friendships and authority allows new fresh Vampires to choose their own path and play out internal struggles with their new disposition, while retaining the aspect niche of older Vampires.
 
Hm. It probably doesn't do any harm to give the new vamps that retention, provided that they lose it on their first mutation. It will appeal to the Edward Cullens and WhateverHerNameWases (Bella?) and, in the end, you want to attract as many people to RP as possible. So yeah, do it, I reckon.
 
Ok lmao the poll is pretty one sided. You know what, I'll rewrite the section now to include that vampire mentality doesn't kick in until the first mutation, but allow it to occur on infection as well for those who really want it.
 
Can't really build covens if everyone runs back to their friends tho.
 
It'll suck (pun not intended) if charters start employing them though. Already, if/when charters employ Silven and other nasties that are supposed to be looked down upon by society, it's a bit dodgy. If "good" vampires are hired to hunt down "bad" vampires, then all vampires have lost some of the fear factor right then and there.
 
Can't really build covens if everyone runs back to their friends tho.
Varlords are designed to head Covens and have an innate ability to be very suggestive to other vampires. Still having affection for their friends doesnt mean they cant be a part of a Coven and come to accept themselves as Sanguine.
 
Can't really build covens if everyone runs back to their friends tho.

It doesn't really prevent covens forming, since it'd only be driving away those who don't want to be there in the first place. My point being, those who want to join the coven OOC still will instead of being forced to via IC manners due to the respect and mindset.

Ok lmao the poll is pretty one sided. You know what, I'll rewrite the section now to include that vampire mentality doesn't kick in until the first mutation, but allow it to occur on infection as well for those who really want it.
 
The way I see it, the change is so that vampires don't just do a 180 after 5 days of being infected. They have a few years before the curse consumes them. Little by little they lose their personality until they fully become corrupted.

Because there is no such thing as a "good vampire" and socializing with them should be seen as heretical.
 
The way I see it, the change is so that vampires don't just do a 180 after 5 days of being infected. They have a few years before the curse consumes them. Little by little they lose their personality until they fully become corrupted.

Because there is no such thing as a "good vampire" and socializing with them should be seen as heretical.
I agree quite a bit, it makes more sense for that to happen anyways. Real-life diseases and even various in-lore diseases don't immediately take 100% effect. They eat away at you, which I think could cause for more interesting character arcs as opposed to flipping at the drop of a hat.
 
Last edited:
I think the psychopathy of vampires should not come as some derangement that magically appears with infection but as something that develops from years living as a monster. A character cannot drink the blood of innocent people for long and remain sane, a character cannot keep its faith or maintain respect to authority when it is hated and has a compulsion to remain as a monster and avoid the cure.

In my opinion adding some derangements that kick in with the first mutation robs players of rich rp. Struggling with a blood addiction, trying to remain sane, justifying one's actions and trying to maintain some links to friends and family despite the infection provide amazing rp opportunities. Our lore could benefit from taking a line from the most successful vampire rp game.
 
I feel vampire psychopathy would vary from vampire to vampire. Mental health is different for everyone, and the mental effects of vampirism would probably vary from vampire to vampire. Maybe more mentally healthy and mentally stable people wouldn't succumb to the mentality of the vampire as quickly as lets say less than mentally healthy and stable people. If not effecting speed of which the person succumbs to the mentality, but how much the person was effected.
Just my little jab of opinion.
 
Just want to point out that even a "good" vampire has to feed so I doubt any organization would hire something that can spread a heretical plague just by going nom xd on their friends and family