Vampires discussions!

Forum for the upcoming Loren Amazon Princess sequel
User avatar
DarkWolf
Druid
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:26 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by DarkWolf » Fri May 27, 2016 3:56 am

P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:Does killing humans automatically make you bad?
It's certainly bad for the humans whom you kill, as well as their children who are now without parents, or their parents who are now without children.
When did what is bad for a few become an objective bad for everyone? Do you realize that you are basically saying that it is bad if anything negative happens to anyone regardless of who they are? Firstly do you realize that if we did fallow that logic that would include Vampires to as they are sentient beings too, second that is just planly wrong and I could find millions of examples to prove it. Just one random example to prove how silly this argument is, I decide to start robing people and get catch, it is bad for me I am going to prison, it is not bad for all my future victims that I would rob if I wasn't catch, nor is it bad in general.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
Sure they do kill and eat humans but they are not beasts they have intelligence and can choose who to kill and who not to kill,
Sometimes, but not always. If they haven't eaten in awhile or they've been seriously injured the hunger can be overpowering.
That is just one story about vampires and illogical one, humans can get very hungry too, that doesn't mean our hunger will automatically overpower our rational thinking. Sure in some cases it might happen and some too hungry guy might start stealing to eat or something but when did what one does or what one might do make everyone of that race a bad guy? If that where the way things are then we would all be bad and that is a way of thinking that created racism.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
That assumes they always have a larder full of real enemies to drain which is extremely improbable. If they run out of enemies then they will drain the juice boxes that are available, enemy or not.
Witch is why I included random criminals too, and you just can't run out of those, real world or Avaron.
P_Tigras wrote:
This is exactly example of when I said humans can't look very objectively, If humans weren't the only sentient beings then they aren't the only ones who get to decide what is good and what bed much less just human law.
I can assure you that I am not baying into any trend, if anything you probably won't ever meat a person who is more against mainstream and general majority opinions then me. I am defending vampires because I believe that if other sentient beings existed then to look at things objectively (or at least as objectively as possible) you have to put humanity aside and to look from that other beings prescriptive as well witch would be of no less importance. I do admit true that I favor a bit sentient beings that are not human over humanity because of my personal dislike toward humanity but that is part of why I said as objectively as possible. And I also admit that I favor even a bit more beings witch are generally considered evil because I myself am seen the same way in general and because I usually connect with those the most.

PS: Sorry about messed up quotes codes, I don't have time to fix them now, will do it when I return home.

User avatar
Franka
Elder Druid
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by Franka » Fri May 27, 2016 7:14 am

I believe the discussion arose from questioning whether the amazons and the player characters really should just go kill these vampires. I think a lot of convincing arguments have been made that from the point of view of the characters living in that world, that was a very reasonable approach. Meanwhile, arguments have certainly also been made that the player may not feel the same way.

Whether one prefers characters to act "in character" or want a game of wish fulfillment, with total control over characters' actions, is up to personal preference of course. For a story based game, where characters are not completely blank slates for you to write yourself into, I'd say they're doing what makes sense to them, and that's what I'd personally prefer.

P_Tigras
Druid
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by P_Tigras » Fri May 27, 2016 9:59 am

DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:Does killing humans automatically make you bad?
It's certainly bad for the humans whom you kill, as well as their children who are now without parents, or their parents who are now without children.
When did what is bad for a few become an objective bad for everyone? Do you realize that you are basically saying that it is bad if anything negative happens to anyone regardless of who they are?
It's certainly bad for the person who is murdered that they were murdered. You seem to be arguing that vampires murdering humans is perfectly fine, but humans discriminating against vampires as a result of those murders is bigotry.
Firstly do you realize that if we did fallow that logic that would include Vampires to as they are sentient beings too, second that is just planly wrong and I could find millions of examples to prove it.
What's plainly wrong? That being murdered is bad for the person who is murdered? That is self-evident to the vast majority of people.
Just one random example to prove how silly this argument is,
Spoken like a vampire who thinks equating a human life to a vampire life is silly.
I decide to start robing people and get catch, it is bad for me I am going to prison, it is not bad for all my future victims that I would rob if I wasn't catch, nor is it bad in general.
If you were however framed because the judge wanted to seize your worldly goods and/or because the magistrate wanted to force himself on your spouse or child while you were conveniently out of the way, I would call that bad in general. You don't seem to comprehend the conflict of interest you're creating, or you do and don't care.
DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
Sometimes, but not always. If they haven't eaten in awhile or they've been seriously injured the hunger can be overpowering.
That is just one story about vampires and illogical one, humans can get very hungry too, that doesn't mean our hunger will automatically overpower our rational thinking.
And this is where you attempt to argue away the original Vampire, a creature whose appetite for human blood can grow beyond their control if it isn't regularly slaked. You insist that vampires must be just like well-adjusted humans, always able to control their appetites, and that portrayals that say otherwise are simply anti-Vampire bigotry. You are turning vampires into misunderstood humans because that's what you want them to be. There is nothing the least bit logical about your argument. It is based entirely upon your personal desire to subvert the trope and make them just like humans in personality, except maybe a little better since they have cool powers and you like them more than you do regular humans.

If I haven't eaten for awhile and I'm feeling hunger pains, I'd certainly have a very strong impulse to bite into a fresh, juicy burger that was sitting next to me, even a sentient talking burger. It would be difficult to stay in the same room with that juicy burger without eating it. And according to the original myth, a vampire's appetite for blood is even stronger. There is nothing illogical about that. Vampires with a stronger than human appetite aren't illogical, just different from most humans. That's why they're called "vampires" instead of "humans with atypical dietary requirements".
Sure in some cases it might happen and some too hungry guy might start stealing to eat or something but when did what one does or what one might do make everyone of that race a bad guy? If that where the way things are then we would all be bad and that is a way of thinking that created racism.
You have -ASSUMED- that vampires are just like humans in personality, except better, because that ASSUMPTION scratches a personal itch for you, and the rest of your argumentation flows from that. What you failed to realize is that there is nothing illogical about vampires not being entirely human in their personality. The transformation, usually depicted as a curse, changes them. You are the one being dogmatic in insisting that your assumptions about a fantasy creature are the one true way of depicting them, in contravention of the original myth.
Witch is why I included random criminals too, and you just can't run out of those, real world or Avaron.
Random criminal? So anyone labeled a "criminal" can be killed? I find it amusing that in a fantasy society where you cry about racial prejudice against vampires, you also assume the criminal justice system is ideal and perfect, and all criminals deserve to die. They're criminals so of course they deserve it, unlike those poor misunderstood vampires. Your argumentation is illogical.
I can assure you that I am not baying into any trend, if anything you probably won't ever meat a person who is more against mainstream and general majority opinions then me. I am defending vampires because I believe that if other sentient beings existed then to look at things objectively (or at least as objectively as possible) you have to put humanity aside and to look from that other beings prescriptive as well witch would be of no less importance.
This has nothing to do with putting humanity aside. It is about you insisting that vampires are just another misunderstood group of humans, albeit better, because you like them more than you do humans.
I do admit true that I favor a bit sentient beings that are not human over humanity because of my personal dislike toward humanity but that is part of why I said as objectively as possible.
It shows in your argumentation regarding vampires vs human "criminals", that the first group is noble and the victim of racial bigotry, while the latter group is not only never the victim of bigotry, but also deserves to die to feed the former. Despite your claims to logic, your argumentation is anything but. You don't apply the same standard to humans you do to vampires.

User avatar
DarkWolf
Druid
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:26 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by DarkWolf » Fri May 27, 2016 12:43 pm

P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
It's certainly bad for the humans whom you kill, as well as their children who are now without parents, or their parents who are now without children.
When did what is bad for a few become an objective bad for everyone? Do you realize that you are basically saying that it is bad if anything negative happens to anyone regardless of who they are?
It's certainly bad for the person who is murdered that they were murdered. You seem to be arguing that vampires murdering humans is perfectly fine, but humans discriminating against vampires as a result of those murders is bigotry.

Firstly do you realize that if we did fallow that logic that would include Vampires to as they are sentient beings too, second that is just planly wrong and I could find millions of examples to prove it.
What's plainly wrong? That being murdered is bad for the person who is murdered? That is self-evident to the vast majority of people.
Just one random example to prove how silly this argument is,
Spoken like a vampire who thinks equating a human life to a vampire life is silly.
Do you realize that you are basically compering criminals and innocent and claiming that their lives have equal value and are the same thing? They are not, killing an innocent is a bad thing killing a criminal is good, this is exactly the "killing anyone is bad" hypocrisy I was talking about.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
I decide to start robing people and get catch, it is bad for me I am going to prison, it is not bad for all my future victims that I would rob if I wasn't catch, nor is it bad in general.
If you were however framed because the judge wanted to seize your worldly goods and/or because the magistrate wanted to force himself on your spouse or child while you were conveniently out of the way, I would call that bad in general. You don't seem to comprehend the conflict of interest you're creating, or you do and don't care.
Again you fail to look objectively and claiming that only humans should have the right to judge. Sure some innocent might end up being punished by mistake and some criminals might walk free, how is that any different when humans are judging?
DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
Sometimes, but not always. If they haven't eaten in awhile or they've been seriously injured the hunger can be overpowering.
That is just one story about vampires and illogical one, humans can get very hungry too, that doesn't mean our hunger will automatically overpower our rational thinking.
And this is where you attempt to argue away the original Vampire, a creature whose appetite for human blood can grow beyond their control if it isn't regularly slaked. You insist that vampires must be just like well-adjusted humans, always able to control their appetites, and that portrayals that say otherwise are simply anti-Vampire bigotry. You are turning vampires into misunderstood humans because that's what you want them to be. There is nothing the least bit logical about your argument. It is based entirely upon your personal desire to subvert the trope and make them just like humans in personality, except maybe a little better since they have cool powers and you like them more than you do regular humans.

If I haven't eaten for awhile and I'm feeling hunger pains, I'd certainly have a very strong impulse to bite into a fresh, juicy burger that was sitting next to me, even a sentient talking burger. It would be difficult to stay in the same room with that juicy burger without eating it. And according to the original myth, a vampire's appetite for blood is even stronger. There is nothing illogical about that. Vampires with a stronger than human appetite aren't illogical, just different from most humans. That's why they're called "vampires" instead of "humans with atypical dietary requirements".
Again another perfect example of humans determining that anything that could be danger to them is automatically bad, just because it is something that can happen doesn't mean it will happen, at least not always, not in every case. I fully understand that vampires are not human and are very different from them, but different doesn't mean bad or worse. This is again another example of not being able to look objectively because you just assume that the way humans are is good and if you differ from it it is bad. This is a same as many people decide based on their subjective opinions that psychopaths are bad and that normal people are good and never wonder if it might be other way around.
DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
Sure in some cases it might happen and some too hungry guy might start stealing to eat or something but when did what one does or what one might do make everyone of that race a bad guy? If that where the way things are then we would all be bad and that is a way of thinking that created racism.
You have -ASSUMED- that vampires are just like humans in personality, except better, because that ASSUMPTION scratches a personal itch for you, and the rest of your argumentation flows from that. What you failed to realize is that there is nothing illogical about vampires not being entirely human in their personality. The transformation, usually depicted as a curse, changes them. You are the one being dogmatic in insisting that your assumptions about a fantasy creature are the one true way of depicting them, in contravention of the original myth.
Again I am not assuming that vampires are like humans, I fully realize they are not, but that doesn't make them bad... to not repeat myself everything I said above stands here too. Humans don't get to onesidedly decide what is good and what bad and call it objective.
DarkWolf wrote:
P_Tigras wrote:
Random criminal? So anyone labeled a "criminal" can be killed? I find it amusing that in a fantasy society where you cry about racial prejudice against vampires, you also assume the criminal justice system is ideal and perfect, and all criminals deserve to die. They're criminals so of course they deserve it, unlike those poor misunderstood vampires. Your argumentation is illogical.
Yes I am saying I am supporting extreme punishments, the same way I support merciless way of Amazons toward those they deem criminals. Sure some mistakes will happen but if we ware to demolish law out of fear of mistakes where would our end be, the only things that change is severity of punishment.
DarkWolf wrote:
I believe I explain your mistake in witch you are assuming I think that vampires are just like humans several times in this post.

User avatar
DarkWolf
Druid
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:26 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by DarkWolf » Fri May 27, 2016 12:58 pm

Franka wrote:I believe the discussion arose from questioning whether the amazons and the player characters really should just go kill these vampires. I think a lot of convincing arguments have been made that from the point of view of the characters living in that world, that was a very reasonable approach. Meanwhile, arguments have certainly also been made that the player may not feel the same way.

Whether one prefers characters to act "in character" or want a game of wish fulfillment, with total control over characters' actions, is up to personal preference of course. For a story based game, where characters are not completely blank slates for you to write yourself into, I'd say they're doing what makes sense to them, and that's what I'd personally prefer.
Actually this is a reason I joined this discussion at first, While right at a start of dealing with vampires both options of befriending them and making them their enemies is logical for Loren and others and player can decide witch option to choose if you do decide to befriend them after that things stop making sense as they send you to meat death knight and tell you you can befriend him too once you meat him he asked of you to kill vampires no explanation given, if some explanation was given you could call it hard choice between betraying your allies for sake of getting help from someone more powerful then your current allies in your goal or giving up on that help, but with no explanation given it just feels out of place and makes no sense.

User avatar
Franka
Elder Druid
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by Franka » Fri May 27, 2016 8:23 pm

DarkWolf wrote:
Franka wrote:I believe the discussion arose from questioning whether the amazons and the player characters really should just go kill these vampires. I think a lot of convincing arguments have been made that from the point of view of the characters living in that world, that was a very reasonable approach. Meanwhile, arguments have certainly also been made that the player may not feel the same way.

Whether one prefers characters to act "in character" or want a game of wish fulfillment, with total control over characters' actions, is up to personal preference of course. For a story based game, where characters are not completely blank slates for you to write yourself into, I'd say they're doing what makes sense to them, and that's what I'd personally prefer.
Actually this is a reason I joined this discussion at first, While right at a start of dealing with vampires both options of befriending them and making them their enemies is logical for Loren and others and player can decide witch option to choose if you do decide to befriend them after that things stop making sense as they send you to meat death knight and tell you you can befriend him too once you meat him he asked of you to kill vampires no explanation given, if some explanation was given you could call it hard choice between betraying your allies for sake of getting help from someone more powerful then your current allies in your goal or giving up on that help, but with no explanation given it just feels out of place and makes no sense.
I don't think I've followed the quest line quite that way, so I'll refrain from commenting further on the logic of what goes on there.

P_Tigras
Druid
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:58 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by P_Tigras » Sat May 28, 2016 10:29 am

DarkWolf wrote: Do you realize that you are basically compering criminals and innocent and claiming that their lives have equal value and are the same thing? They are not, killing an innocent is a bad thing killing a criminal is good, this is exactly the "killing anyone is bad" hypocrisy I was talking about.
You do realize that some convicted criminals are innocent don't you? While others are guilty of extremely minor offenses? Nevertheless you're consigning them all to being vampire food.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
If you were however framed because the judge wanted to seize your worldly goods and/or because the magistrate wanted to force himself on your spouse or child while you were conveniently out of the way, I would call that bad in general. You don't seem to comprehend the conflict of interest you're creating, or you do and don't care.
Again you fail to look objectively and claiming that only humans should have the right to judge. Sure some innocent might end up being punished by mistake and some criminals might walk free, how is that any different when humans are judging?
Again, I find it amusing that you throw around phrases like "fail to look objectively" when you so clearly have a double standard and aren't the least bit objective. I never claimed that only humans have a "right to judge", but I'm not the one crying about how terrible it is for an innocent vampire to be discriminated against, while shrugging at the thought of some innocent humans dying. You do have a double standard.
DarkWolf wrote: Again another perfect example of humans determining that anything that could be danger to them is automatically bad, just because it is something that can happen doesn't mean it will happen, at least not always, not in every case.
You appear to be arguing that there are nice vampires who should be allowed to live openly as vampires among humans. I think that it's foolish and unrealistic for humans to invite into their cities any vampire who claims to be nice because the overwhelming majority of vampires will cheerfully pretend to be nice, charm the city authorities with their mind control abilities at the first opportunity, and then quietly murder the citizenry, leaving it to their pawns in government to shut down any investigations into their actions and their charmed guards to deal with anyone trying to break into their homes during the day to stake them.
I fully understand that vampires are not human and are very different from them, but different doesn't mean bad or worse. This is again another example of not being able to look objectively because you just assume that the way humans are is good and if you differ from it it is bad.
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm simply pointing out that you have a double standard and are anything but objective yourself.
This is a same as many people decide based on their subjective opinions that psychopaths are bad and that normal people are good and never wonder if it might be other way around.
The issue with psychopaths is that like vampires they have a powerful urge to prey on normal humans that at times they can't control.
DarkWolf wrote: Again I am not assuming that vampires are like humans,
It certainly sounds like you are because your argumentation that vampires are the subjects of unwarranted prejudice and bigotry is dependent upon it.
I fully realize they are not, but that doesn't make them bad...
"Bad" is a relative and somewhat subjective term. When my cat kills a rabbit that is bad for the rabbit. That doesn't stop me from loving my cat, but if I were a rabbit, I wouldn't want my cat, or any other cat, living next door.
to not repeat myself everything I said above stands here too. Humans don't get to onesidedly decide what is good and what bad and call it objective.
Humans and vampires have conflicting interests. What is optimal for one isn't optimal for the other. Having a readily available source of food is important to survival for any species. Unfortunately for humans, they are a vampire's natural food source.
Yes I am saying I am supporting extreme punishments, the same way I support merciless way of Amazons toward those they deem criminals. Sure some mistakes will happen but if we ware to demolish law out of fear of mistakes where would our end be, the only things that change is severity of punishment.
1) Of course mistakes will happen, and they will be especially plentiful when it comes to poorer, less-politically connected humans because the vampires in town do need to be regularly fed and it just wouldn't do to have them preying on the well to do.

2) But what happens when the vampire population grows too numerous and your "justice system" is no longer capable of producing enough criminals to feed them all? Do you force non-criminal humans to serve as food too?

3) How do you keep some of the vampires you've welcomed into your town from mind controlling the mayor, the city council, and the police to literally get away with eating anyone they wish?
I believe I explain your mistake in witch you are assuming I think that vampires are just like humans several times in this post.
You certainly seemed to imply that with your initial argumentation that humans are "hypocrites" and "bigots" for thinking vampires are "bad".

User avatar
DarkWolf
Druid
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:26 pm

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by DarkWolf » Sat May 28, 2016 1:33 pm

P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote: Do you realize that you are basically compering criminals and innocent and claiming that their lives have equal value and are the same thing? They are not, killing an innocent is a bad thing killing a criminal is good, this is exactly the "killing anyone is bad" hypocrisy I was talking about.
You do realize that some convicted criminals are innocent don't you? While others are guilty of extremely minor offenses? Nevertheless you're consigning them all to being vampire food.
I assumed when we say criminals we are not talking about minor offenders, and world of Avaron is ceternly not lacking in bandits and serous criminals who when Loren and other humans/elfs kill innocent people are grateful to so why should it be different when vampires kill them?
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:
Again you fail to look objectively and claiming that only humans should have the right to judge. Sure some innocent might end up being punished by mistake and some criminals might walk free, how is that any different when humans are judging?
Again, I find it amusing that you throw around phrases like "fail to look objectively" when you so clearly have a double standard and aren't the least bit objective. I never claimed that only humans have a "right to judge", but I'm not the one crying about how terrible it is for an innocent vampire to be discriminated against, while shrugging at the thought of some innocent humans dying. You do have a double standard.
Innocent humans dying in this case has noting to do with vampires, there will still be innocent casualties even if it is left to humans and that is a matter that noting can be done about unlike discrimination against vampires.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote: Again another perfect example of humans determining that anything that could be danger to them is automatically bad, just because it is something that can happen doesn't mean it will happen, at least not always, not in every case.
You appear to be arguing that there are nice vampires who should be allowed to live openly as vampires among humans. I think that it's foolish and unrealistic for humans to invite into their cities any vampire who claims to be nice because the overwhelming majority of vampires will cheerfully pretend to be nice, charm the city authorities with their mind control abilities at the first opportunity, and then quietly murder the citizenry, leaving it to their pawns in government to shut down any investigations into their actions and their charmed guards to deal with anyone trying to break into their homes during the day to stake them.
Again this applies to humans too, Humans are also very much capable of quietly murdering the citizenry and if they are smart they would pretend to be nice before it, Does this mean nobody should ever be trusted and treated as criminal the moment s/he shows up? No? Then why should vampires? Just because they are different? Because they are more powerful then humans? But there are humans who are stronger and more powerful then other humans too, especially in world of Avaron. Because they kill humans? but humans kill other humans too, the only difference is that one will also feed while at it.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:I fully understand that vampires are not human and are very different from them, but different doesn't mean bad or worse. This is again another example of not being able to look objectively because you just assume that the way humans are is good and if you differ from it it is bad.
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm simply pointing out that you have a double standard and are anything but objective yourself.
This is a same as many people decide based on their subjective opinions that psychopaths are bad and that normal people are good and never wonder if it might be other way around.
The issue with psychopaths is that like vampires they have a powerful urge to prey on normal humans that at times they can't control. [/quote]

So you are saying that psychopaths should be mistreated just because of who they are and because they are different as well.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote: Again I am not assuming that vampires are like humans,
It certainly sounds like you are because your argumentation that vampires are the subjects of unwarranted prejudice and bigotry is dependent upon it.
No, my argument that vampires are the subjects of unwarranted prejudice is based upon that just because something is different doesn't mean it is bad, just like with psychopaths.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:I fully realize they are not, but that doesn't make them bad...
"Bad" is a relative and somewhat subjective term. When my cat kills a rabbit that is bad for the rabbit. That doesn't stop me from loving my cat, but if I were a rabbit, I wouldn't want my cat, or any other cat, living next door.
True, but from beginning I talked about more objective type of good and bad and I do believe that I pointed it out. To begin with there is practically noting in this or Avaron world that is good or bad for absolutely everyone.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:to not repeat myself everything I said above stands here too. Humans don't get to onesidedly decide what is good and what bad and call it objective.
Humans and vampires have conflicting interests. What is optimal for one isn't optimal for the other. Having a readily available source of food is important to survival for any species. Unfortunately for humans, they are a vampire's natural food source.
Witch is why it is important to look from both sides point of view to be able to see more objective picture. This is true with pretty much everything, but you are constantly only looking at things from one side. Sure if we look only at things from human perspective there will definitely be some vampires that are bad and humans aren't loosing anything if all vampires good and bad disapired so for humans it might ultimately be a good thing to kill all vampires guilty or innocent but from more objective point of view it is not a good thing to kill innocent vampires, and weren't you the one complaining how some innocent humans might be mistakenly labeled as criminals yet you are ok with treating all innocent vampires as bad just because of existence of those who are bad. So how are you not failing to look at things objectively?
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:Yes I am saying I am supporting extreme punishments, the same way I support merciless way of Amazons toward those they deem criminals. Sure some mistakes will happen but if we ware to demolish law out of fear of mistakes where would our end be, the only things that change is severity of punishment.
1) Of course mistakes will happen, and they will be especially plentiful when it comes to poorer, less-politically connected humans because the vampires in town do need to be regularly fed and it just wouldn't do to have them preying on the well to do.

2) But what happens when the vampire population grows too numerous and your "justice system" is no longer capable of producing enough criminals to feed them all? Do you force non-criminal humans to serve as food too?

3) How do you keep some of the vampires you've welcomed into your town from mind controlling the mayor, the city council, and the police to literally get away with eating anyone they wish?
#1) Again this is true even when it comes to only humans and has noting to do with vampires except that they wouldn't be excluded from it.

#2) Overpopulation of any race is bad, if humans overpopulated they would also devour all food on earth and in the end be result of death of not just everything humans eat and everything that eats same things as humans but also of humans themselves. I am sure there are far better resolutions to this then random mass killing or/and genocide with you suggest for vampires.

#3) The same way you keep them and humans from secretly killing, you notice it and do something about it, and again just because it is a possibility doesn't mean it will happen not in every case and where would we be if we punished people/beings for possibility of doing something bad? Well everyone and everything would have to be punished then.
P_Tigras wrote:
DarkWolf wrote:I believe I explain your mistake in witch you are assuming I think that vampires are just like humans several times in this post.
You certainly seemed to imply that with your initial argumentation that humans are "hypocrites" and "bigots" for thinking vampires are "bad".
They are also racists if they claim all vampires are bad.

Troyen
Elder Druid
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Loren 2 romances

Post by Troyen » Mon May 30, 2016 6:59 am

So this whole vampire discussion started off as an aside, but now that it's been going on for several pages, it may be better to splinter off into a separate topic entirely.

User avatar
jack1974
Pack leader
Posts: 13698
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Vampires discussions!

Post by jack1974 » Mon May 30, 2016 7:16 am

Good idea, I've just split this, so people can continue to discuss about vampires here and not in Loren 2 romances main thread :) thanks

Post Reply