V:TM - Bloodlines

Multidirectional said:
Lynette said:
Yes and no. Kindred usualy dont know much about werewolfs and ghosts.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's true for regular vampires but not for Beckett. He says himself how usual and unimportant for him are such things as ghosts. "I generally pay wraiths no mind" the line is if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

And thats true. Kindred and wraiths/ghosts rarely interact with another exept the Giovani.
That canot said from werewolfs, however its mostly kill them or they kill us. I doubt for example that the kindred in Chicago learned alot exept they have claws in the events from "under a blood red moon"

Von Drunky, I play Vampire the Masquerade since the mid 90s and my statements are based on the 2nd/3rd edition on wich this game is based on.
 
Lynette said:
And thats true. Kindred and wraiths/ghosts rarely interact with another exept the Giovani.
That canot said from werewolfs, however its mostly kill them or they kill us. I doubt for example that the kindred in Chicago learned alot exept they have claws in the events from "under a blood red moon"
Click to expand...

The point was - it's perfectly reasonable of Beckett to be sceptical in regards to Gehenna even if there are such things as ghosts and werewolfs in his world. He knew about existance of werewolfs and ghosts, latter even being quite common occurence for him, but he never witnessed a Gehenna before, did he? Plus the point was made in the game that every single religion has it's form of apocalypse so it's quite a healthy position to remain sceptical about these sort of things.
 
SuAside said:
UniversalWolf, how does him being a vamp and living in a world with werewolves and such make him being a sceptic odd?
Click to expand...
[spoiler:ad17560cc0]Well, if he were a skeptic about UFOs and alien abduction (which I assume he is), it wouldn't seem odd at all, but a large part of the game is about how the PC becomes a vampire, and suddenly discovers that all sorts of supernatural things that were supposed to be myths are actually real.

Consider Professor Johanssen. Johanssen is a skeptic about vampires and werewolves and ghosts because there's no evidence to support the existence of such things. Except we know they're real, and that's why the first time you play the game, you never completely trust Beckett's skepticism. Beckett poo-poos antidiluvians the same way Johansson poo-poohs vampires, and for the same reason: there's no evidence.

I don't know whether I answered your question, but I think I answered my own. :mrgreen:

Beckett's purpose in the game is to provide a confident, rational point of view the player can never completely trust. It's a very effective way to create story tension.[/spoiler:ad17560cc0]

Addendum:

[spoiler:ad17560cc0]I just thought of a way to explain what I'm talking about. It's not reasonable for Beckett to be ardently skeptical about antidiluvians because antidiuvians are purported to be vampires. Different vampires, yes, more powerful, yes, but ultimately just vampires in another form. Beckett does know that vampires exist. Even if all the mythology surrounding antidiuvians is hokum, the antidiuvians themselves could very easily be real. In fact, nothing in the game disproves their existence. It's not the same thing at all as being skeptical about, say, the moon being made of green cheese.[/spoiler:ad17560cc0]
 
Think of it this way: for example we discover that the aliens are real, but aren't the same as portrayed, say in the Alien movies. Now if somebody said that those kinds of aliens exist too and are coming to destroy the Earth, what would a scientist specialized in alienology say?

It's the same with Beckett. It's not that he denies the existence of Antediluvians as such, but merely doubts that they have managed to survive this long. If you remember, Antediluvians are the same old vampires as the one you play, except older (third generation, as described on one of the loading screens). Given all the things that could possibly happen over the 1000-some years, I can see how someone can be skeptical they still live, much less when dressed in a prophecy form.


One thing I could never figure out about the game though, is the episode when Beckett [spoiler:c07e8a11b6]runs up to you in the street with the warning against opening the box. Why would he do that? Did he get a wind of Jack's plan before you do?[/spoiler:c07e8a11b6]
 
UniversalWolf, the Antediluvians are not just more powerful eldritch vampires... they're the founding fathers as it were. and they're supposedly one step away from Cain.

if we take a random scientist, vampire or otherwise, he wouldn't believe there is such a thing. he thinks vamps evolved (see for instance thin bloods as an evolution of the weakening of the strain rather than a curse to herald Gehenna), instead of magically appearing due to an age old curse from a forgotten god that hasn't done anything that proves his existence since.

believing in Antediluvians, means believing in Cain. believing in Cain means believing in Lilith, a fuckton of other demons and most importantly GOD.

i don't know if B. thinks like the proposed scientist, or if he just doubts any Antediluvian could be alive today, but i think it's fair enough to say B.'s character isn't illogical as you would like to make it seem.
 
[spoiler:e363ecf6eb]
SuAside said:
believing in Antediluvians, means believing in Cain. believing in Cain means believing in Lilith, a fuckton of other demons and most importantly GOD.
Click to expand...
I don't see any reason why that's true any more than believing in vampires means believing in Cain. Vampires are supposed to come from Cain too, afterall.

Ausdoerrt said:
One thing I could never figure out about the game though, is the episode when Beckett...
Click to expand...
Oh, I think that's one of the best parts of the whole game actually. The first time you play it through, you don't know what's actually in the sacohpagus. It could be some horrible demon that will kill everything, or it could be nothing, or it could be anything in between. The fact that Beckett has spent the whole game laughing at the thought of any kind of danger coming from the sarcophagus, but he suddenly changes his mind at the end, and actually seems frightened, is a great story-tool for tension-building. Very well executed. It actually makes the player worry about what might happen if he opens the sarcophagus. I'd say that little episode is Beckett's primary purpose for existing in the game.[/spoiler:e363ecf6eb]
 
Well, yeah, I get that, but story-wise, I was wondering what HIS reasons for it were...

And actually, I finished my first game as a Tremere, so I didn't find out what's in the sarcophagus until next playthrough ;)

As for Cain, one of the loading screens says something about him being a largely mythical figure for most. There's no real proof of his existence, nor his relation to the curse, hence B.'s skepticism.
 
UniversalWolf said:
I don't see any reason why that's true any more than believing in vampires means believing in Cain. Vampires are supposed to come from Cain too, afterall.
Click to expand...
you mean like we have to take it on faith we came from Adam & Eve, right?
 
The belive in that all Vampires are decendants from Cane is one of many Vampiric creation Myths. Infact the source of this Myth is the Sabbath. The Camarilla (the doctrine) denies the existence of Caine and the Setites for example claim that Seth is the founder of Vampires (and even they are divided with that story)

The pure existence of the Tremere prooved (to those who know) that there is absolutely no reason for a first Vampire to exist.The same goes for the Nagaraja.
 
Lynette said:
The pure existence of the Tremere prooved (to those who know) that there is absolutely no reason for a first Vampire to exist.The same goes for the Nagaraja.
Click to expand...

Well, the Tremere stole their vampirism from already existing vampires. This isn't creating vampires, but passing on the curse to another subject. What's the story with Nagaraja, though? I know little about them, aside from the one in Downtown clinic in Bloodlines.
 
[spoiler:824682b724]I think my point is that it's unreasonable, given the parameters of the game's world, to observe an ancient Assyrian sarcophagus with carvings of demons and a blood-drinking king on the outside, and say, "It's preposterous to think there might be an ancient vampire in there! I scoff at the idea!"
[/spoiler:824682b724]
 
[spoiler:50ed9caab4]UniversalWolf... those things exist in the world today (which is as far as i can tell without Vampires). we've got legends, myths and so on of such behavior. we've got drawings, paintings, sculptures, COFFINS and so on with references to it.

saying there's a vamp inthere is jumping to conclusions. saying there's an ante inthere is jumping even further ahead of yourself...[/spoiler:50ed9caab4]

anyhow, since so many people don't see eye to eye with you on the matter UniversalWolf, it should be bloody obvious to you by now that B.'s stands is NOT unreasonable nor going against the grain of the story.
 
SuAside said:
[spoiler:e377aac2b4]UniversalWolf... those things exist in the world today (which is as far as i can tell without Vampires). we've got legends, myths and so on of such behavior. we've got drawings, paintings, sculptures, COFFINS and so on with references to it.

saying there's a vamp inthere is jumping to conclusions. saying there's an ante inthere is jumping even further ahead of yourself...[/spoiler:e377aac2b4]

anyhow, since so many people don't see eye to eye with you on the matter UniversalWolf, it should be bloody obvious to you by now that B.'s stands is NOT unreasonable nor going against the grain of the story.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not obvious to me at all. I think he's a somewhat illogical character who exists in order to affect the story in the way I've described. The rationality of his position is secondary to that purpose.
 
SuAside said:
if he's rational, he's not illogical. ;)
Click to expand...

[spoiler:c7e188603e]I think the fact that he eventually admits he was wrong should tell you something.

"Oops, maybe I shouldn't have been so hasty in my judgements..."

:wink: [/spoiler:c7e188603e]
 
I love Lady Gaga and Becket, both of their messages should be placed in the equilibrium on the same simple level. That is to say that while being confidant in one's action and discourse of day to day or century and so fourth can be changed in a moment by a simple whelp or any other form of a revaluation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top