Re: Disconnected use of Magics (was Vampirism)

From: David Cake <dave_at_5mMUBBLFp6zcjrLpxVueaU0BWyaHjffQYLWyo4JgUflojBSZ2-GfzTAlYlN-puIDIoID9dR>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:20:10 +0800

On 17/12/2011, at 12:03 AM, Jeff wrote:

>> Agree -- but they won't all be vampires. I prefer "lich" as the catch-all for powerful, mysterious undead myself. 

>
> FWIW, Gloranthan "vampires" fall into that catch-all as well. They are all powerful, mysterious unliving creatures that should be terrifying and unpredictable. Just like they were in our own folklore until Hollywood, Dungeons & Dragons, Anne Rice, and White Wolf tried to define them. I suspect the only common thread is that they drink blood (but not necessarily with fangs, I know of at least one that drinks it from a lead goblet encrusted with gems).
        

	I like to imagine them as generally being fairly similar in the nature of their vampirism (but not necessarily habits or other magical abilities) if they are from the same 'lineage' (whether vampires directly create one another in the traditional contagious fashion, or just particular rituals and such are used (like the RQ3 Create Vampire ritual). The origin of their vampiric state effects their needs and abilities. 
	So in a sense, a bit like the vampiric lineage/clan idea from World of Darkness vampires, EXCEPT no one, not even vampires themselves, are likely to know much about more than one lineage of vampires (unless they are unlucky enough to have fought vampires from multiple lineages multiple times). And this should be awfully rare. Vampires just aren't that common.
	I am almost certain that one of the very few people who has significant knowledge about more than one vampiric tradition is Delecti. I think he understands at least the Nontraya and Vivamort traditions, perhaps more.  
	Cheers
		David