Vampire question settled?

[Kish]

I heard a rumor that Durkon never used to swear.

[Falbrogna]

What she said, specifically, was "The dwarves fall under my purview. Your dark spirit was birthed in my hall." The implication there is that whenever a dwarf is vampirized, a dark spirit from Hel's hall gets plugged into the body.

No, the implication of what she said is what she said:
a) dwarfs fall under her purview
b) she can create dark spirits

That is all.

Durkula says "Usually, the process takes a few months," which suggests that this is the normal way of things.

Regarding possession, not necessarily vampirization. It may be a houseruled Stranger With The Burning Eyes ability of Hel's for all we know. The fact that it happened before doesn't mean that it always happens.

I'm not sure what could be more detrimental to Malack's character than the revelation that he wanted to sacrifice millions of sentient beings, but whatever. The guy was brutally evil, and it's a fine fine thing that he's ash.

I didn't care about morality, I was speaking about the complexity and depth of his character.
"Malack who felt his life was more complete as a vampire" is much better than "Good poor Malack got corrupted by EVUL spirit".
Even Buffy ditched that thing, making it so they simply lost their souls rather than having "demons" planted into their bodies.

But my point is this: the Malack we met is the Malack we met, regardless of the process by which he was vampirized. We never met the long-dead lizardman; whatever Malack was, he was (by his own words) not the same as he once was. There is no difference between "really Malack" and "some poseur invader"—they are one and the same.

Their values as a character are completely different, see above.

[asphias]

i have a problem with the theory that all vampires get possessed. namely, there is absolutely no reason for the spirit to impersonate the original soul.
The HPOP currently has a reason. it's because he wants to keep travelling with the OOTS, without giving away he's not durkon. in any other situation though, the spirit has absolutely no reason to impersonate the former soul.

should we accept the theory that all vampires work this way, then Malack would've known that Vamping durkon would mean letting a spirit enter his body(seeing as malack is an evil spirit himself), and thus the spirit(HPOH or otherwise) would have no reason to conceal his identity to malack. thus, no reason to impersonate durkon.
so why would Malack want to vamp durkon specifically, when its just a random spirit who will enter the body?

besides that, in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0879.html malack says that "releasing durkon would be confusing for him". why would it be confusing if durkon is just a trapped soul and the dark spirit is in control? the HPOH doesn't seem the least bit confused to me.

therefor i think that Malack did not expect the HPOH to enter Durkon, and this spirit process is not the normal way of things.

[Kish]

i have a problem with the theory that all vampires get possessed. namely, there is absolutely no reason for the spirit to impersonate the original soul.
The HPOP currently has a reason. it's because he wants to keep travelling with the OOTS, without giving away he's not durkon. in any other situation though, the spirit has absolutely no reason to impersonate the former soul.

should we accept the theory that all vampires work this way, then Malack would've known that Vamping durkon would mean letting a spirit enter his body(seeing as malack is an evil spirit himself), and thus the spirit(HPOH or otherwise) would have no reason to conceal his identity to malack. thus, no reason to impersonate durkon.
so why would Malack want to vamp durkon specifically, when its just a random spirit who will enter the body?

besides that, in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0879.html malack says that "releasing durkon would be confusing for him". why would it be confusing if durkon is just a trapped soul and the dark spirit is in control? the HPOH doesn't seem the least bit confused to me.

therefor i think that Malack did not expect the HPOH to enter Durkon, and this spirit process is not the normal way of things.

How does this theory explain the High Priest of Hel saying, "Usually, the process takes a few months, but it's not a problem if you want to start your eternal dormancy early."?

[Keltest]

How does this theory explain the High Priest of Hel saying, "Usually, the process takes a few months, but it's not a problem if you want to start your eternal dormancy early."?

hes not a unique memory parasite and/or hes an old one. Its actually laughably easy to rationalize that away since the way its phrased specifically doesn't mention under what circumstances it has happened before.

[theinsulabot]

oh good lord.




...it aint just a river in Egypt huh?

[Gift Jeraff]

I'm just going to assume that this is how OOTS vampirization normally works because...well, why not?

Everything Malack said about his identity and the thrall is consistent with multiple interpretations of vampirism, because it was intentionally ambiguous to maintain the mystery of the vampire dwarf.

The idea that some vampires work differently seems needlessly complex.

[Falbrogna]

How does this theory explain the High Priest of Hel saying, "Usually, the process takes a few months, but it's not a problem if you want to start your eternal dormancy early."?

That its "Hel's possessing agents" that work that way, not vampires.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Occam's Razor says that the way we've seen vampires work is the way that vampires work. Enough said.

[Gift Jeraff]

so why would Malack want to vamp durkon specifically, when its just a random spirit who will enter the body?

He didn't want to vamp Durkon specifically. He was going to vamp Belkar at first. Then Durkon turned their duel into a melee fight, making grapple + blood drain Malack's best option.

And I imagine most vampires would want to absorb the host's memories for reasons other than impersonation: better understanding of the world around them, learning how to use their class skills, basic etiquette for being around the living, wanting a sense of identity, an inclination for the pursuit of knowledge in general, etc.

[gsilverfish]

Just throwing this in because I haven't seen it mentioned yet. One of my favorite lines:

Oh you poor dumb elf! Be a vampire, or a ghost, or an immortal with a paint-by-numbers portrait in the rec room. Hell, even a brain-in-a-jar in a pinch. Anything to avoid the Big Fire Below. So what you're telling me is--you're channeling the "raw unlimited energies" of two chumps who didn't have the balls to stay in the game!

This is totally up to interpretation, but I see Xykon saying that these are all favorable alternatives to dying. Maybe also preferable to an eternity of torture, but being an extremely independent character who hates being controlled, I think Xykon would view being controlled by an invading spirit to be as bad as death (and worse than being unable to taste awful coffee again), and yet there's Vampire at the top of his list (way above the lovable Brain-in-a-Jar!), and if anyone in the comic knows how vampires works, I'm betting it's Xykon.

Or maybe it was just a cool-sounding line that we weren't meant to pick over. :)

[Shale]

I would honestly be a little surprised if Xykon did know how vampires work. He's never been one, he hasn't been shown to make one (not without reason; the buggers would be a royal pain to clean up if they got free will), and if he did find one to ask, what would they say, "oh, no, I'm not the original inhabitant of this body, I'm a malign intelligence holding the soul prisoner and siphoning its memories - thanks for asking!"?

[Falbrogna]

Occam's Razor says that the way we've seen vampires work is the way that vampires work. Enough said.

That only works when the theory at hand doesn't have contradicting evidence.

[jere7my]

No, the implication of what she said is what she said:
a) dwarfs fall under her purview
b) she can create dark spirits

That is all.

So, she was just making conversation? They were two random statements that had nothing to do with each other or the situation at hand? Are you familiar with the term "implication"?

The obvious implication is that she was explaining how dwarf vampirization works (really, for the benefit of the audience). The obvious implication of Durkula's "usually" is that he was explaining to the audience how vampirization works, because folks like you were still confused after 946. I get that you want to cling to an outdated interpretation of Malack for some reason, but I don't think Rich could've been much plainer.

This is a story; it's not going to be more complicated than it needs to be. There is absolutely no reason for Rich to postulate multiple methods of vampirization. It needlessly complicates the story for no benefit whatsoever.

Their values as a character are completely different, see above.

They can't be different; they're the same being. The only Malack we've ever had any contact with is the one who was vampirized. The old, dead shaman is old and dead; we never met him. What we met was the spirit that ate his memories and took his place.

[Falbrogna]

So, she was just making conversation? They were two random statements that had nothing to do with each other or the situation at hand?

How did you even get this from my words?
She was obviously talking about the possession process, which still doesn't mean all vampires work the same.

Are you familiar with the term "implication"?

Enough to know the difference between that and jumping to conclusions, like "whenever a dwarf is vampirized, a dark spirit from Hel's hall gets plugged into the body."

They can't be different; they're the same being. The only Malack we've ever had any contact with is the one who was vampirized. The old, dead shaman is old and dead; we never met him. What we met was the spirit that ate his memories and took his place.

When I say "value as a character" I mean from a writing perspective. Nothing of what you said here matters.

[jere7my]

How did you even get this from my words?
She was obviously talking about the possession process, which still doesn't mean all vampires work the same.

And the fact that she draws an explicit parallel between the dark spirit from her hall and "Nergal's snake"? "Nergal's snake may have sired you, but the dwarves fall under my purview." In other words, the spirit occupying Malack's body fell under Nergal's purview; the spirit occupying Durkon's body falls under hers. The process is the same; the source of the spirit is different. The fact that she feels the need to point out that the dwarves are hers implies that lizardfolk are Nergal's, and lizardfolk vampire spirits are birthed in Nergal's dark hall. This is not complicated.

I can't stop you from misreading what happened, but Rich is wielding a mighty big cluehammer in the dialogue here. If he got any plainer he'd have to start with "As you know, Bob."

[Falbrogna]

And the fact that she draws an explicit parallel between the dark spirit from her hall and "Nergal's snake"? "Nergal's snake may have sired you, but the dwarves fall under my purview."

Or, "Nergal's snake may have sired you," (implying raw negative energy undead) "but the dwarves fall under my purview." (implying He'ls negative energy spirit possession).

See?

I can't stop you from misreading what happened, but Rich is wielding a mighty big cluehammer in the dialogue here. If he got any plainer he'd have to start with "As you know, Bob."

Except contradicting statements doesn't make this nearly as certain as you may think.

[jere7my]

Or, "Nergal's snake may have sired you," (implying raw negative energy undead) "but the dwarves fall under my purview." (implying He'ls negative energy spirit possession).

No, that doesn't follow from what she says. If she were trying to draw a distinction between "normal" vampirization and what she'd done, she might've said "A vampire may have sired you, but the dwarves fall under my purview." Then it would be clear that she was doing something unusual. But she didn't. She specifically drew a contrast between the dark spirit she commands and "Nergal's snake." She was telling the audience, "Since Malack worshipped Nergal, you may be wondering why Nergal isn't the one sitting here, sending his own dark spirit in to animate Durkon's corpse. Well, I'll tell you: Durkon was a dwarf, and dwarf vampires are mine. Them's the rules."

When we're looking at expository lines of dialogue that are clearly being used by the author to let the audience in on the rules of the universe, there's generally not a lot of profit in looking for double-blinds and gotchas and needless complications. If that makes Malack a less interesting character for you, so be it.

Except contradicting statements doesn't make this nearly as certain as you may think.

You keep saying there is counterevidence, but you keep not telling us what it is.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I would honestly be a little surprised if Xykon did know how vampires work. He's never been one, he hasn't been shown to make one (not without reason; the buggers would be a royal pain to clean up if they got free will), and if he did find one to ask, what would they say, "oh, no, I'm not the original inhabitant of this body, I'm a malign intelligence holding the soul prisoner and siphoning its memories - thanks for asking!"?

Also, Xykon has a bad track record hen it comes to knowing things about undead. Originally, he had no idea what a lich was until Redcloak told him. He seems to lack knowledge when it comes to things undeath.

[Kish]

and if anyone in the comic knows how vampires works, I'm betting it's Xykon.

Knowledge (Religion) is so far from being a class skill for him, it almost isn't funny.

[Keltest]

Knowledge (Religion) is so far from being a class skill for him, it almost isn't funny.

Why would it have to be Religion?

[Shale]

Because that's the Knowledge skills that tells you how the undead work (presumably because it's tied up with knowing what happens to people after death).

[King of Nowhere]

Occam's Razor says that the way we've seen vampires work is the way that vampires work. Enough said.

Three thousands years ago, occamm's razor told people that the world was flat with the sun and the start going around. they didn't have enough experimental data to realize that was wrong.

This is a similar situation: we really don't have enough experimental data to call the argument "settled". and there are many problems with malack's behaviour if we accept the simplest theory.

I agree that at the moment it is the most likely theory. However, in my job as a researcher, I've never seen a case where what appeared to be the most likely theroy at the beginning wasn't shot down by further experiments. I just don't like drawing conclusions until I have the full picture.

[Falbrogna]

No, that doesn't follow from what she says.

It does, actually. Sure she could have used a different wording (like the one you proposed) but my interpretation still stands.

You keep saying there is counterevidence, but you keep not telling us what it is.

I already did, more than once, in this very thread. I suggest you re-read it.

[Rodin]

"Thor's nuts!" is an out-of-character exclamation?

Quite possibly. It's the first time we've seen him say it, I believe. Even someone who curses a lot will have a preferred subset that they go off (Brian Blessed comes to mind), and going off that with a typically un-used one could raise a red flag.

Not a very big one, perhaps, but Durkon will be doing the same thing every time the spirit asks for memory information. Create enough little inconsistencies, and the rest of the party may just start to wonder...

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Quite possibly. It's the first time we've seen him say it, I believe. Even someone who curses a lot will have a preferred subset that they go off (Brian Blessed comes to mind), and going off that with a typically un-used one could raise a red flag.

Not a very big one, perhaps, but Durkon will be doing the same thing every time the spirit asks for memory information. Create enough little inconsistencies, and the rest of the party may just start to wonder...

At one point, every curse that Durkon has uttered was new. It fits his pattern of calling things Thor's X", and he has used curses before that we haven't seen him use again.

[Keltest]

At one point, every curse that Durkon has uttered was new. It fits his pattern of calling things Thor's X", and he has used curses before that we haven't seen him use again.

It may have something to do with "Nuts" not translating into Durkon's accent well, even more so than "GIVE ME MY STAFF!"

[Cuthalion]

Not sure if anyone's suggested this (they probably have) but does this then mean that if Malack had Resurrection cast on him he probably would've been raised? Or does the evil spirit in control make the decisions?

[Kish]

Not sure if anyone's suggested this (they probably have) but does this then mean that if Malack had Resurrection cast on him he probably would've been raised? Or does the evil spirit in control make the decisions?

...huh?

The evil spirit in control of the vampire lizardfolk we saw was Malack. If someone (level 20 or higher, since you can only Resurrect someone who died no more than 10 years/caster level ago) had cast Resurrection on his ashes after he burned up, the original lizardfolk shaman would have had a choice to come back. Malack would have remained gone. If someone had cast Resurrection on the undead Malack, it would have either done nothing, or potentially destroyed him, the same way Durkon's Heal hurt him.

[Falbrogna]

...huh?

The evil spirit in control of the vampire lizardfolk we saw was Malack. If someone (level 20 or higher, since you can only Resurrect someone who died no more than 10 years/caster level ago) had cast Resurrection on his ashes after he burned up, the original lizardfolk shaman would have had a choice to come back. Malack would have remained gone. If someone had cast Resurrection on the undead Malack, it would have either done nothing, or potentially destroyed him, the same way Durkon's Heal hurt him.

We can assume that if Malack worked the same way as Durkon and some evil spirit absorbed his memories, then "Malack" was indeed the original lizardfolk shaman's name, complete with family and all.
We never got any indication that he assumed an alias after becoming a vampire (or rather, being born a vampire, if the "memory eating parasite" counted for him too).