Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Ergosum said:
Isolationist doesn't mean isolated: Hatalath knew about the Era of the Three Emperors, for example, and that was a lot more recient than the Time of Woes. And IIRC he actually left Laurelorn and wandered the human realms for a while, many of which are near the Mountains. And that's not even accounting for the possibility of other Eonir also wandering around once in a while: five thousand years is a lot of time, after all.

Also, Elven Waystones are fundamentally different from Karak-Waystones; there's no reason to think what applies to ones also applies to the others. If Hatalath or whoever took a walk near any fallen Hold they'd see that the Waystone wasn't working anymore, and after seeing that several times they'd notice the pattern.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It was probably very unhealthy for elven archamages to get within eyesight of dwarven holds.

And we don't know how similar or different elven waystones are from karak waystones. They could be identical just plugged into a different contro node for all we know.
 
Alratan said:
It was probably very unhealthy for elven archamages to get within eyesight of dwarven holds.

And we don't know how similar or different elven waystones are from karak waystones. They could be identical just plugged into a different contro node for all we know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You don't have to get within eyesight of a Hold to 'see' (or, in this case, not see) the Leyline with Magesight. Not to mention that elven archmages sometimes aren't in eyesight at all unless they want to. And that wouldn't even be necessary when talking about already fallen Holds, anyway.

And, sure, we don't know how similar elven and dwarven Waystones are, but I'd bet Laurelorn doesn't know either (because of the part involving Dwarf secrets), so they likely couldn't assume anything either way. And, lacking the theoretical knowledge, they'd have to go by what the few Eonir who ever left Laurelorn (like Hatalath) observed, that being 'fallen Holds don't send any energy to Karaz-a-Karak'.
 
Alratan said:
It was probably very unhealthy for elven archamages to get within eyesight of dwarven holds.

And we don't know how similar or different elven waystones are from karak waystones. They could be identical just plugged into a different contro node for all we know.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ergosum said:
You don't have to get within eyesight of a Hold to 'see' (or, in this case, not see) the Leyline with Magesight. Not to mention that elven archmages sometimes aren't in eyesight at all unless they want to. And that wouldn't even be necessary when talking about already fallen Holds, anyway.

And, sure, we don't know how similar elven and dwarven Waystones are, but I'd bet Laurelorn doesn't know either (because of the part involving Dwarf secrets), so they likely couldn't assume anything either way. And, lacking the theoretical knowledge, they'd have to go by what the few Eonir who ever left Laurelorn (like Hatalath) observed, that being 'fallen Holds don't send any energy to Karaz-a-Karak'.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My hope is that if/when we get the option to analyze a Dwarven Waystone, a Karak-Waystone, it'll have synergy with some stuff we've already done from the Elven ones. Linking up new tributaries, for instance.

But the rest... We just don't know. Maybe Caledor's enchantment can work for connecting individual Karaks directly to KaK instead of having its own mechanism. Maybe each functioning Karak will turn out to have some kind of big Rune that would be impossible to replicate even for Kragg. We don't know, and it may or may not be easier to extract everything possible from Ulthuan than get a good idea from an oath-bound Dwarven King.
 
I suspect being in a dreaming wood gives a different perspective on the world, the same way being in an extremely high tower lets you see further.

Dheer said:
So you are saying, her loyalty is irrelevant to benefit the Empire such as destroying the Necromancy College is irrelevant, her slaying of multiple vampires is irrelevant, the building of the Eye of Gazul is irrelevant, the creation of the rooms of Calamity which has already saved wizards in the College is irrelevant and so many actions which she has done is completely irrelevant in the decision making of those parties?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yep. That person dies when their soul is consumed by a conflagration of dark magic. Just as dead as if the mind had been killed, or the body. Continuity of identity is something I don't think we ever get much of an inside look at? Like, a vampire talking about if they are the same person after the change...

consequences said:
On the topic of shenanigans, we'd be a vamp with a Ranald gifted Wolf presumably still attached to our soul as the most immediately obvious filter/tongs/blatant cheat in the event that the god juice now burns us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ok, this is an under discussed point in the whole Mathilde/vampire thing.

Wolf.

My suspicion is that there are a few possibilities:

1) He does immediately as his soul is consumed by the dhar vortex for fuel.

2) He is mutated by the in-soul dhar exposure to become a monster.
2a) A physical monster, like a chaos spawn
2b) a mental monster, where Mathilde displaces her hunger into him and he kills and drinks. Mathilde might be unaware of why she isn't hungry?

3) Wolf becomes a vampire in and of himself
3a) breaking the familiar bond.
3b) becoming a thrall

4) outside possibility, but the "good" parts of Mathilde's soul could use wolf as a lifeboat when the rest burns to dhar, setting is up for a quest where the enhanced familiar has to go kill the monster his old master has become.

5) remains a normal, god-touched familiar, now enslaved by a vampire instead of partner to a wizard.

So, all in all, wolf would be kinda screwed by Mathilde becoming a vampire, in my opinion.

Protect the fluffy boy! Refuse the blood kiss!
 
Last edited:
Glau said:
Continuity of identity is something I don't think we ever get much of an inside look at? Like, a vampire talking about if they are the same person after the change...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Night's Dark Masters basically says that the person they used to be quickly ceases to matter.

For a narrative about it, you'd probably have to read the Ulrika books.
 
Mopman43 said:
Night's Dark Masters basically says that the person they used to be quickly ceases to matter.

For a narrative about it, you'd probably have to read the Ulrika books.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Night's Dark Masters is a contradictory mess when it comes to the humanity and general personhood of vampires. One moment it tells you that vampires are monsters filled only by their obsessions, the next it explains about how vampires have likes and dislikes loves and hates just like a human. This depending on if it is trying to explain why you should not have a vampire PC or explaining how to build vampire NPCs .
 
Mopman43 said:
Night's Dark Masters basically says that the person they used to be quickly ceases to matter.

For a narrative about it, you'd probably have to read the Ulrika books.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Parts of Night's Dark Masters seem to be written from the perspective of vampire hunters, and parts from more neutral scholars, and parts possibly be vampires themselves. Unsurprisingly, some bits are very hostile and prone to un-person vampires, which makes it much easier to justify murdering them out of hand.

Mannfred certainly seems to disagree in Libris Necris. Neferata and Vashashanesh both seem to have continuity of identity and character.
 
Last edited:
K von Carstein said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So it does not matter what so ever? No wonder then why they don't have a single loyalist or someone with a guilty conscience to the Empire in the entirety of their history attempt to help them once they reach that state then.

Glau said:
Yep. That person dies when their soul is consumed by a conflagration of dark magic. Just as dead as if the mind had been killed, or the body. Continuity of identity is something I don't think we ever get much of an inside look at? Like, a vampire talking about if they are the same person after the change...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

First fine then, nothing matters whatever, they will not accept any context for communication even though we know of scenarios in canon where they talk to vampires. Second Citation to the individuals actually dying as we know that the soul does not die but is bound to their material form.

Mopman43 said:
Night's Dark Masters basically says that the person they used to be quickly ceases to matter.

For a narrative about it, you'd probably have to read the Ulrika books.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

According to character who as you said previously is not exactly the best judge when it comes to this and a document which is written by Mannfred who as we are all aware is not exactly objective in his assessment.

Mopman43 said:
Edit: Interestingly, for the current debate, the next page actually goes into how, as the centuries pass, all Vampires will inevitably come to treat mortals as nothing more than their prey. It's up to personal belief if you want to take that as authoritative, though- it's an in-universe document written by Mannfred, and while I'm sure he's known plenty of Vampires, I wouldn't exactly take him as the greatest judge of human morality.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Mopman43 said:
You're looking for the Liber Necris. In-universe, it's a book written by Mannfred on the history of Necromancy and Vampirism. Gets into some interesting discussion on the Nehekharan conception of souls that Necromancy uses, and at one point, describes Necromancy as using tongs of Shyish to control Dhar.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Edit: Wait a minute is Night"s Dark Masters and Liber Necris the same? Or did I confuse it?
 
Last edited:
Dheer said:
According to character who as you said previously is not exactly the best judge when it comes to this and a document which is written by Mannfred who as we are all aware is not exactly objective in his assessment.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Those quotes you just pulled are from the Liber Necris, the one I was just talking about is Night's Dark Masters, a 2nd edition RP sourcebook.

These are two different books.

Alratan said:
Parts of Night's Dark Masters seem to be written from the perspective of vampire hunters, and parts from more neutral scholars, and parts possibly be vampires themselves. Unsurprisingly, some bits are very hostile and prone to un-person vampires, which makes it much easier to justify murdering them out of hand.

Mannfred certainly seems to disagree in Libris Necris.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Given the quotes Dheer just pulled from me about the Liber Necris, can you point to where Mannfred disagrees?
 
Mopman43 said:
Given the quotes Dheer just pulled from me about the Liber Necris, can you point to where Mannfred disagrees?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Where he tells the history of Vashashanesh and Neferata and Abhorash, and they seem recognisably the same people with continuity of identity with organic character development in response to their experiences explaining how they changed over time before and after they became vampires.
 
Dheer said:
Second Citation to the individuals actually dying as we know that the soul does not die but is bound to their material form.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

...thier soul becomes a vortex of dhar in the process. IDK why you think it's the same soul before and after the being bound to a material form process, since a dhar vortex and a normal soul are observably different things.

Edit:

But seriously, what about wolf?
 
Glau said:
So, all in all, wolf would be kinda screwed by Mathilde becoming a vampire, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
None of those are things that happen to wizard familiars when they become vampires.
Glau said:
...thier soul becomes a vortex of dhar in the process. IDK why you think it's the same soul before and after the being bound to a material form process, since a dhar vortex and a normal soul are observably different things.

Edit:

But seriously, what about wolf?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The whole point of vampirism is to preserve the integrity of the soul against the vagaries of the Warp. It's preserved forever. The vortex replaces the soul's normal presence in the immaterial world because it's a send-through mailing address; the soul is no longer taking unwelcome visitors.

Vampirism makes people into bad people by giving them an alternative set of biological priorities and requiring the sponsorship of a socially maladjusted individual who's had centuries to buy into a destructive political system.

It does not turn people into bad people by changing who they started as.

This matters because 'broody but noble vampire who rails against evil and slightly less broody vampires' is one of the stock tropes, and removing story telling options isn't interesting.
 
Glau said:
...thier soul becomes a vortex of dhar in the process. IDK why you think it's the same soul before and after the being bound to a material form process, since a dhar vortex and a normal soul are observably different things.

Edit:

But seriously, what about wolf?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We don't know their soul becomes a vortex of dhar. We know it includes a Sekhem vortex that can manufacture dhar from the Winds of Magic if
and only if an active vampire doesn't eat enough life force from other people, but the way that's unhealthy for vampires that do so because of the dhar they absorb very strongly suggests that well fed vampires' souls aren't made of dhar. If they were it would have no additional effect.
 
The whole continuity of identity discussion pops up in all kinds of fantasy and scifi media. Theres pages and pages of it everywhere there are teleporters (for example Star Trek). And in my opinion its more or less pointless. Does it matter if its still you if the resulting person acts for all intents and purposes just like you? I say no.
Not that I dont have my own stance on this in that a person that acts like you, feels like you and has your memories is you. Regardless of if its just a freshly built clone or whatever and you just got disintegrated. Everything relevant about you being you lives on.
 
Alratan said:
We don't know their soul becomes a vortex of dhar. We know it includes a Sekhem vortex that can manufacture dhar from the Winds of Magic if
and only if an active vampire doesn't eat enough life force from other people, but the way that's unhealthy for vampires that do so because of the dhar they absorb very strongly suggests that well fed vampires' souls aren't made of dhar. If they were it would have no additional effect.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean for one thing Dhar is unstable as hell, literally and induces mutations, but well fed mentally stable vampires do not mutate, only starving ones and those who have given in to the beast.
 
Glau said:
...thier soul becomes a vortex of dhar in the process. IDK why you think it's the same soul before and after the being bound to a material form process, since a dhar vortex and a normal soul are observably different things.

Edit:

But seriously, what about wolf?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

....... Primarily because of the fact that not only was vampirism designed to preserve the existence of the person who become a vampire mentally and also because them dying in the process and being a homunculus who thinks they are the same person renders the whole effort pointless and also incredibly arbitrary? And lastly the transformation of the soul does not equal to the person ceasing unless you wish to argue Elseiph for instance ceased to exist as the person she is because of her close relationship with Shyish.

And also where are you getting the statement their soul itself becomes a vortex of Dhar? I checked in the Night"s Dark Masters for it and on page 40, It is stated Necrarch Scholars believe it is the case but it is not confirmed that this is what happens to the soul by the book.
 
Orbmorb said:
What, if anything, does happen to them?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
> Else. :V

There is no anything, unless I've forgotten something particularly dramatic. The whole dilemma's been invented from whole cloth (unless I've forgotten something particularly dramatic). The only thing even vaguely related is a dim part of my back-memories insisting that in Dungeons and Dragons Third Edition familiars tended to leave you in disgust, unless you had a bat or a snake or a toad, and maybe Warhammer did something like that, but that's from an entirely different system, and I absolutely cannot recall a book or page or mechanic from Warhammer Fantasy suggesting anything of the sort in concrete terms, and that would be something particularly dramatic that I would need to have forgotten (which is always an option).
 
Last edited:
AsuraAtlas said:
As opposed to the last five pages of thread, which is OOCly trying to convince players that there would barely be any negative consequences to becoming a vampire for a cheap powerup:V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean... this started as a "how bad would it be if we got turned while assualting the Silver Pinnacle", which is not really "going for vampirism as a cheap powerup".
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top