Spoiler: Western vs. Northern Vampires

[Aron Times]

So, with the most recent strip...

Hold on. I almost forgot. This post will have plot spoilers, so if you haven't already read the latest strip, do so before reading further.

Anyway, it turns out that vampire Durkon is an entirely different entity from mortal Durkon. According to literal Word of God(dess), vampire Durkon's spirit was born in Hel's domain. I'm not sure exactly what that means, but for now, I'm thinking that he is the spirit of Hel's high priest, and basically possessed Durkon's body.

We now know that vampires in OotS work like those in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, in that they are actually demons/spirits who have access to the dead mortal's memories. But what about Malack? He showed no signs of being a foreign spirit possessing Malack's dead body. He seemed to be Malack himself, except in blood drinking immortal form. He referred to the living Malack as if vampire Malack and living Malack were the same person, and he seemed to be under the impression that vampire Durkon, once freed from thralldom, would be the same person as living Durkon.

If vampire Malack isn't the same person as mortal Malack, then he would know from personal experience that vampire Durkon would not be the same person. Unless... Unless Western (Nergal's) vampires work differently from Northern (Hel's) vampires. Nergal, being neutral, would probably leave the same soul in charge of the vampire's body. Hel, being evil, would send a spirit to possess the body and leave the original soul trapped within. What do you think?

[Keltest]

Living Malack died so long ago that we really have no idea how different a person Vampire Malack is. Obviously he considers himself to be radically different. I think its plausible that Vampire Durkon would be "Durkon, but Evil" if it weren't for the whole "Direct Minion of a Goddess" thing he has going.

A person is largely shaped by their experiences after all, and vampires are more or less blank slates in terms of experience, so theyre shaped by that of their mortal "host" instead.

[IW Judicator]

It's also relatively possible that, over the past 200 or so years, that the 'original Malack' was eventually absorbed by the consciousness of Vampire Malack*

*Though Vampire Malack did imply that the original Malack could still come back if he were resurrected, so I suppose Malack's original soul was still around in some form, though it'd take a power greater than we've seen in comic, on the mortal plane at least, to bring him back at this point.

[TheOtherErnie]

We now know that vampires in OotS work like those in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, in that they are actually demons/spirits who have access to the dead mortal's memories.
That's one case. And it is where an LG character is turned into a vampire.

But what about Malack? He showed no signs of being a foreign spirit possessing Malack's dead body. He seemed to be Malack himself, except in blood drinking immortal form. He referred to the living Malack as if vampire Malack and living Malack were the same person, and he seemed to be under the impression that vampire Durkon, once freed from thralldom, would be the same person as living Durkon.

If vampire Malack isn't the same person as mortal Malack, then he would know from personal experience that vampire Durkon would not be the same person.
Malack would only know what Malack had personally experienced. Not necessarily all the rules and special cases.

Maybe it works differently when the character is already evil. Since we do not know Malack's original alignment.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I think it is possible that each vampire is a special case. Then again, there are so few vampires that it is difficult to draw any conclusions. We need more data points to be certain.

[Thanatosia]

But what about Malack? He showed no signs of being a foreign spirit possessing Malack's dead body. He seemed to be Malack himself, except in blood drinking immortal form. He referred to the living Malack as if vampire Malack and living Malack were the same person
What?????

This is 100% the Opposite of True, Vampire Malak very clearly stated he and living Malak were completely different beings.... when Durkon Proposed that Malak just allow him to stake him and ressurect him so they could both be living Friends, Malak refused stating that it would kill the being he is now, replacing him with the barbarian shaman he was 200 years ago.

Yes, he does use first person when speaking of his living self, but thats just because he does have access to the memories of his living self, he clearly knows that they are 2 different beings and that if he was staked and rezed, it would be the living self as a seperate entity that would be rezed, not a living version of himself now.

As for his willilngness to kill Durkon to create Durkula given that he knows that Vampires are seperate entities from their living selves, I posted this to the main discussion thread:



I think Malak was just willing to sacrifice his friendship with Durkon to replace it with a friendship with Durkula - affably evil he may be, Malak IS still very very evil, so his interest in his friendship with Durkon is entirely based on what social satisfaction HE (Malak) gets out of the relationship - if he can get the same satisfaction from a friendship with a Durkula, there's nothing in his nature to make him want to preserve Durkon .

[TheOtherErnie]

As for his willilngness to kill Durkon to create Durkula given that he knows that Vampires are seperate entities from their living selves, I posted this to the main discussion thread:
I think Malak was just willing to sacrifice his friendship with Durkon to replace it with a friendship with Durkula - affably evil he may be, Malak IS still very very evil, so his interest in his friendship with Durkon is entirely based on what social satisfaction HE (Malak) gets out of the relationship - if he can get the same satisfaction from a friendship with a Durkula, there's nothing in his nature to make him want to preserve Durkon .
But if that was the case then why was Malack resistant to creating new vampire "children" after Nale killed the others?

Why bother looking for the "right person" when the new personality will be the personality of the vampire spirit that moves in?

One explanation is that the process is different with different alignments.

Another explanation is it might just be different for dwarves.

[ti'esar]

Another explanation is it might just be different for dwarves.

Hel seems to imply this somewhat: "...but the dwarves fall under my purview". It's possible that this was a unique situation resulting from a dwarf becoming a vampire and doesn't represent how vampirism normally works in Stickworld.

[Legato Endless]

It's also possible this isn't a specifically different for Dwarves, but different in this particular case. Hel's comment could easily mean that since Durkon falls under her sovereignty, she decided to interfere here and implant a spirit, which wouldn't have happened normally.

[Gray Mage]

I think Malak might've assumed Durkon would be a servant of Nergal instead of someone from his original pantheon and/or Durkula would be/is made from a template derived from Durkon's personality and not something completely different. It seems to me though that Vampire "souls" do come from a god's realm by standard.

Also, Durkon might be her High Priest due to her not having other Clerics. That could also explain her being more hands on with his case.

I do wonder though, if a Cleric from the 12 gods were turned, would he/she become a Cleric of Rat?

[SavageWombat]

I support the theory that V-Malack absorbed the memories and possibly spirit of L-Malack over time. 200 years of undeath would dwarf the living personality.

[Connington]

There are a lot of good possibilities here. Unlike Malack, Durkon was Lawful Good, a dwarf, serving the Northern Pantheon, and serving a pantheon that had a goddess without clerics (suppoesedly). Any of those could trigger a total possession by a completely distinct entity and not do the same for pre-vamp Malack.

However, I would point out that Rich has had to conceal the way vampirism would affect Durkon until now. So there's an authorial reason for Malack to lie or speak evasively.

Also, it's probably worth bringing Xykon into the mix, even though he's a lich. In his case the only gap between pre and post mortem behavior is easily explained by how bored he finds being undead. Although for all we know, human Xykon is soul-trapped and constantly tortured by lich Xykon. I can't say I'd be torn up over it.

To be honest, I wouldn't feel comfortable making any hard statements about how being undead works in the Stickverse, save that somehow or another you always wind up Capital-E Evil.

[dps]

It's also possible this isn't a specifically different for Dwarves, but different in this particular case. Hel's comment could easily mean that since Durkon falls under her sovereignty, she decided to interfere here and implant a spirit, which wouldn't have happened normally.

Personally, that's how I interpret Hel's statement about his spirit being birthed in her realm.

[Thanatosia]

But if that was the case then why was Malack resistant to creating new vampire "children" after Nale killed the others?

Why bother looking for the "right person" when the new personality will be the personality of the vampire spirit that moves in?
The Vampiric entity is clearly a seperate entity - but it's a newborn entity. Hel spoke of the Dark Spirit inhabiting Durkon being "Birthed", and no vampire we've seen yet seems to have any memories or history prior to it's birth as a vampire. It looks to me, that much like Buffy Vamires, Vampires in OOTs are entirely seperate entities from their original hosts (who have seperate souls), but their new identities are 'shaped' from an evil-twisted mold of the original.

My theory is that while Malak knew Durkula would not be Durkon, it would be very similar to Durkon in many ways.

[Grey Watcher]

There are a lot of good possibilities here. Unlike Malack, Durkon was Lawful Good, a dwarf, serving the Northern Pantheon, and serving a pantheon that had a goddess without clerics (suppoesedly). Any of those could trigger a total possession by a completely distinct entity and not do the same for pre-vamp Malack.

However, I would point out that Rich has had to conceal the way vampirism would affect Durkon until now. So there's an authorial reason for Malack to lie or speak evasively.

A Doylist reason, yes, but not a Watsonian one. Once the bat's out of the bag, Malack really doesn't have much cause to be evasive about his nature, does he? I mean, sure, he's not going to go into a long discussion about his inner nature with someone he's literally trading blows with, but still... . Of course, as you say, with only two known examples of vampires, and incomplete data about one of them (Malack) it's really hard to say if Durkon's case is different from any other vampire's and, if so, why.


Also, it's probably worth bringing Xykon into the mix, even though he's a lich. In his case the only gap between pre and post mortem behavior is easily explained by how bored he finds being undead. Although for all we know, human Xykon is soul-trapped and constantly tortured by lich Xykon. I can't say I'd be torn up over it.

Based on Start of Darkness, I'd hazard a guess that Xykon is following the "It's Still Me, But Corrupted" model of undead souls. The (few) limitations of lichdom robbed Xykon of his few pleasures that didn't involve killing, torture, and generally being a jerk, so between that and the negative energy that's literally keeping him up and walking around has probably pulled from "merely" a horribly depraved human being into something truly horrible.


To be honest, I wouldn't feel comfortable making any hard statements about how being undead works in the Stickverse, save that somehow or another you always wind up Capital-E Evil.

Agreed.

[thereaper]

Malack specifically spoke of the "Durkon that was".

In hindsight, this should tell us something about vampirism (specifically, that the vampire is technically a different entity, but one heavily influenced by the host).

[Balain]

It's also possible this isn't a specifically different for Dwarves, but different in this particular case. Hel's comment could easily mean that since Durkon falls under her sovereignty, she decided to interfere here and implant a spirit, which wouldn't have happened normally.

This is what I believe too. Granted the evidence can be taken many ways, but I saw Malack's speech about killing who Malack is now and bringing back the old Malack if resurrected was not so much about a foreign spirit in Malack but more like Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker

[Connington]

A Doylist reason, yes, but not a Watsonian one. Once the bat's out of the bag, Malack really doesn't have much cause to be evasive about his nature, does he? I mean, sure, he's not going to go into a long discussion about his inner nature with someone he's literally trading blows with, but still... . Of course, as you say, with only two known examples of vampires, and incomplete data about one of them (Malack) it's really hard to say if Durkon's case is different from any other vampire's and, if so, why.

Yeah, my intention was to note a possible Doylist reason for Malack's words. Since the Durkon revelation was the scene that this book closed on, it's more than reasonable for Rich to obfuscate Malack's words a little to avoid giving away the surprise. There are plenty of plausible (not great, but plausible) reasons for him to be a little evasive, so it wouldn't be an out of character moment.

[Clistenes]

So, with the most recent strip...

Hold on. I almost forgot. This post will have plot spoilers, so if you haven't already read the latest strip, do so before reading further.

Anyway, it turns out that vampire Durkon is an entirely different entity from mortal Durkon. According to literal Word of God(dess), vampire Durkon's spirit was born in Hel's domain. I'm not sure exactly what that means, but for now, I'm thinking that he is the spirit of Hel's high priest, and basically possessed Durkon's body.

We now know that vampires in OotS work like those in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, in that they are actually demons/spirits who have access to the dead mortal's memories. But what about Malack? He showed no signs of being a foreign spirit possessing Malack's dead body. He seemed to be Malack himself, except in blood drinking immortal form. He referred to the living Malack as if vampire Malack and living Malack were the same person, and he seemed to be under the impression that vampire Durkon, once freed from thralldom, would be the same person as living Durkon.

If vampire Malack isn't the same person as mortal Malack, then he would know from personal experience that vampire Durkon would not be the same person. Unless... Unless Western (Nergal's) vampires work differently from Northern (Hel's) vampires. Nergal, being neutral, would probably leave the same soul in charge of the vampire's body. Hel, being evil, would send a spirit to possess the body and leave the original soul trapped within. What do you think?

As many people (me included) said before today, Malack always treated Durkon and Durkula as different creatures. He tried to avoid converting Durkon, he felt bad after killing him and said that he would spare the rest of the Order as a last favor to his deceased friend. If he believed that he was just giving a few supernatural powers to the real Durkon, he wouldn't hesitate so much before doing the conversion.

Plus he considered his past self a different creature than his vampires self. and claimed that resurrecting his living past self would be the same as killing him.

Malack knew what he was doing to Durkon, and he felt bad about it. It must be hard: If you want to have a vampire friend/child/spawn that you like you have to kill and entrap the soul of a living person that you like. That explains why Malack had so many doubt about making more children.

[factotum]

It could be something to do with what Malack did to bring Durkon back from the grave quicker. Normally a vampire would spend three days in the grave before rising, and the fact Malack said "as refreshing as it is" suggests he himself had to do that. Maybe the spell he cast to bring forward Durkon arising as a vampire allowed Hel to inject a foreign spirit to take over from Durkon?

[Heksefatter]

Hel seems to imply this somewhat: "...but the dwarves fall under my purview". It's possible that this was a unique situation resulting from a dwarf becoming a vampire and doesn't represent how vampirism normally works in Stickworld.

That's my guess too. One could imagine that Hel capitalized on a special opportunity - in fact, her words ("serendipitous servant") imply as much - and sent a soul from her halls. If she had NOT done so, Durkula would likely be Durkon, but evil. It is also possible that the only reason that she could do so was the very special circumstances relating to Durkon's becoming a vampire. It is rare for a vampire to be created as a thrall, and then released due to the death of its master shortly after. If Durkula had been released under more controlled circumstances, by Malack, who knows?

It seems likely to me that Hel only sent the evil soul when Malack died. After all, why would she send the soul of a powerful servant entity into the body of a thrall of the high priest of Nergal?

Also, dwarves are a special case. Hel gets the dishonored dead, which could plausibly include the undead. But if Malack was really a servant entity of Nergal - ie. not the original Malack at all - he would likely know what he was, just as Durkula knows, and be under no illusions.

In short: Hel capitalized on a special and highly valuable opportunity and Durkola is therefore most likely a very special case.

[Koo Rehtorb]

There are some really weird and convoluted theories to explain something that seems pretty simple.

Someone being turned into a vampire has an evil spirit injected into them. Malack's spirit came from Nergal because whatever he was fell under Nergal's domain. Durkon was a dwarf, so his spirit came from Hel, regardless of who created him.

edit -

in fact, her words ("serendipitous servant") imply as much

Or, you know, he was serendipitous because he was a high level dwarven priest in life, and one who just happened to be affiliated with a group of adventurers who are headed to dwarven lands to fiddle with a powerful artifact.

[maxi]

These are the salient points to consider here. Some ridiculous, some less so.

1) Why would a bite from cleric of Nergal inject Hel-owned spirit into the victim?
2) Does the injected vampire spirit has any choice in the matter of being injected?
3) Is it normal for a vampire to prevent the spirit of the victim from departing to outer planes?
4) Is preserving the spirit of the dead person a decision of the vampire invader, or something that happens regardless of the invader's will?
4a) If it is a decision - what are the factors of that decision?
4b) If wrestling down the invaded soul is something that the invader just has to deal with, what is the "vampire-biology" laws that govern this?

Here is my take. Anything from this point is strictly IMO, with tons of leaps of unjustified logic included.

[rampant speculation mode]

Vampires in general are spiritual parasites that normally exist outside of living plane, but infect the bodies of living people, overpower their spirits and take their bodies for themselves.

A vampire's bite weakens the host and also creates a sort of teleportation beacon that a spirit of a vampire can warp directly to from other planes of existence. The bite, therefore, only affords infection, but is not infection itself.
Vampires are actively looking for hosts to infect, willing and able to respond within the short time frame during which the creature is being bitten by a vampire. This might mean that vampire spirits actively want to be embodied.

Evil gods seem to able to exert some influence as to which specific vampire spirit gets to jump in. We do not know whether this is a result of divine intervention on part of Evil God, or something special in biology of given species.
Maybe only Hel's vampire spirits can establish link with dwarven hosts, due a way some quirk of interaction between Dwarven biology and vampiric bite-beacon.
Alternatively, it may be that in general all bitten are up for grabs for the first vampiric spirit that responds to the beacon, but in some high-stake cases, evil gods can call and enforce dibs, based on preexisting intergod agreements and loyalty of vampiric spirits to their respective gods.

Once inside the victim's body, the vampiric spirit defeats and imprisons the spirit of the victim. For some reason, however, the vampire does not consume the victim spirit entirely and outright. I believe the explanation here is that the victim spirit is simply too massive of an entity (in metaphysical terms) for a vampire to just consume, so he has to devour it in stages.

That, in turn, begs the question of how much the victim's spirit is able to throw that metaphysical mass around, and what form said "throwing around" is able to take, given that vampires seem to be instinctually adept at keeping the victim spirit contained nonetheless.

Also there is one more question
5) Does the vampire have free will?

Durkula has so far demonstrated the kind of mechanical willfullness you'd expect out of a Terminator (well, Terminator that is marginally adept at social manipulation anyway). In that, he is very different from Malack, who seemed to be a free individual, despite vampirism.

If we accept the notion that vampiric bite-beacon is generally free-for-all, unless a specific divine entity steps in, then the difference in free will between Malack and Durkula may be the result of Malack not being actually chosen for the task by Nergal, and thus not beholden to him. That would mean that vampiric spirits are basically free-willed, even if in case of some vampiric spirits this is masked by loyalty towards their respective gods.

Alternatively, it can be said that Malack's sheer ages of experience formed a sort of freedom of will for him in a quantity-to-quality fashion. Knowledge, after all, is power. And power easily translates into freedom to act. That would mean that vampiric spirit is not necessarily free-willed, at least not until it accumulates enough knowledge to start having at least a brief facsimile of personal agenda.

And the final alternative - vampires may be complete Terminators indeed. In this case, the likely explanation for Malack's apparent individuality may be that Malack's victim spirit was not entirely devoured and has found a way to manifest upon / merge itself with Malack's vampire spirit, thus regaining a share of control and lending the resultant gestalt entity we came to know as Malack a modicum of free will.

I personally feel this final case makes for a much better story than the first two :D

[/rampant speculation mode]

[Heksefatter]

There are some really weird and convoluted theories to explain something that seems pretty simple.

Someone being turned into a vampire has an evil spirit injected into them. Malack's spirit came from Nergal because whatever he was fell under Nergal's domain. Durkon was a dwarf, so his spirit came from Hel, regardless of who created him.

edit -


Or, you know, he was serendipitous because he was a high level dwarven priest in life, and one who just happened to be affiliated with a group of adventurers who are headed to dwarven lands to fiddle with a powerful artifact.

Except that Durkula, at the moment of his creation, WASN'T going in that direction. He was going to travel back with Malack, initially as his slave and later as a free-willed vampire. Why would Hel waste a powerful spirit in order to send it to be Malack's slave/crony? If she had to send a spirit, why not just send a run-of-the-mill one?

Also, if Malack was, himself, such a spirit (just from Nergal instead), he would know that Durkula wasn't Durkon in any way whatsoever. However, he believes that Durkula would feel more like himself when he was released from Malack's thrall.

[Charity322]

Also, Durkon might be her High Priest due to her not having other Clerics. That could also explain her being more hands on with his case.

Does it actually say somewhere that Hel has no Clerics? There have to be some evil dwarves whom she would appeal to. And there are duergar in OOTS.

[RMS Oceanic]

Does it actually say somewhere that Hel has no Clerics? There have to be some evil dwarves whom she would appeal to. And there are duergar in OOTS.

"...nobody worships 'er, much less serves as 'er priest!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html)

It clears the way for Durkula to have an instant promotion to head of the Church, since there is effectively no Church until he comes along.

[Charity322]

"...nobody worships 'er, much less serves as 'er priest!" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html)

It clears the way for Durkula to have an instant promotion to head of the Church, since there is effectively no Church until he comes along.

Hmm, that might just be Durkon's prejudice. "Noone would worship her, it's dishonourable." I seriously doubt Thor worshippers hang around with Hel worshippers. Well, we will probably see.

I just noticed. What are they feeding Mr Scruffy in that comic? :O It looks dodgy lol.

[AstralFire]

It's entirely possible that the same situation holds true for Xykon, but human-Xykon is viewing it more as this awesome TV Show he gets to watch.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Except that Durkula, at the moment of his creation, WASN'T going in that direction. He was going to travel back with Malack, initially as his slave

I figure the spirit is bound to the sire until such time as it's released. Hell, maybe the spirit is as suppressed by Malack as Durkon's soul is by the spirit itself.


and later as a free-willed vampire. Why would Hel waste a powerful spirit in order to send it to be Malack's slave/crony? If she had to send a spirit, why not just send a run-of-the-mill one?

Well you sort of answered your own question there. Because there is a strong likelihood of Durkon being freed eventually, either from Malack dying or from Malack releasing him. Consider it an investment in a fairly powerful cleric, even if you don't get your hands on him immediately.

For the record, though, I don't think the spirit was a particularly expensive investment in the first place. I suspect that all the power comes from Durkon's own level so it doesn't really matter what you stick in him.


Also, if Malack was, himself, such a spirit (just from Nergal instead), he would know that Durkula wasn't Durkon in any way whatsoever. However, he believes that Durkula would feel more like himself when he was released from Malack's thrall.

Malack was extremely reluctant to turn Durkon, if you recall. He looked for many other ways to stay friends with living Durkon and only killed him when it became clear that there was no other way to keep Durkon around and on friendly terms.

That's because Malack is perfectly aware that the new vampire Durkon would be a different person than "The Durkon that was", but it would still have his memories and be better than the nothing that he'd otherwise get out of it.

[Koo Rehtorb]

It's entirely possible that the same situation holds true for Xykon, but human-Xykon is viewing it more as this awesome TV Show he gets to watch.

I doubt it. Liches probably work differently from vampires, especially considering that liches have to make the choice to do it to themselves in the first place. I strongly suspect that Xykon's soul is still in full command.

[RMS Oceanic]

I doubt it. Liches probably work differently from vampires, especially considering that liches have to make the choice to do it to themselves in the first place. I strongly suspect that Xykon's soul is still in full command.

That's my gut reaction. Also, until he had time to experience some of the consequences of Lichdom, Xykon's personality was exactly the same once he became posthumous.

[AstralFire]

I doubt it. Liches probably work differently from vampires, especially considering that liches have to make the choice to do it to themselves in the first place. I strongly suspect that Xykon's soul is still in full command.

I also doubt it, though I also doubted that Vampire Durkon was a separate entity, albeit not with the certainty that others did here. I try to remain open-minded to possibilities that might make sense.

[hamishspence]

Complete Divine is probably the most informative source on the subject:

Complete Divine (p126):

The souls of characters who die in specific ways sometimes become undead. Those driven to suicide by madness become allips, while humanoids destroyed by absolute evil become bodaks. As with ghosts, the soul creates a new body, whether it's incorporeal such as an allip's or corporeal such as a bodak's. The soul is twisted toward evil if it wasn't already. The new undead creature retains some general memories of its former life, but doesn't necessarily have the same mental ability scores, skills, feats or other abilities. Not every suicide victim becomes an allip, and not everyone destroyed by absolute evil becomes a bodak; as with ghosts, the exact nature of the transformation is unknown. Similarly, liches are characters who've voluntarily transformed themselves into undead, trapping their souls in skeletal bodies.

Some undead such as wights and vampires create spawn out of a character they kill, trapping the soul of the deceased in a body animated by negative energy and controlled by a malign intelligence. Sometimes the undead creature can access the memories of the deceased (vampires, spectres, ghouls, and ghasts can) and sometimes they can't (as with shadows, wraiths and wights).

So - in this context - the implication is that all spawning undead are like Durkon is now, in nature.

[Heksefatter]

I figure the spirit is bound to the sire until such time as it's released. Hell, maybe the spirit is as suppressed by Malack as Durkon's soul is by the spirit itself.



Well you sort of answered your own question there. Because there is a strong likelihood of Durkon being freed eventually, either from Malack dying or from Malack releasing him. Consider it an investment in a fairly powerful cleric, even if you don't get your hands on him immediately.

For the record, though, I don't think the spirit was a particularly expensive investment in the first place. I suspect that all the power comes from Durkon's own level so it doesn't really matter what you stick in him.



Malack was extremely reluctant to turn Durkon, if you recall. He looked for many other ways to stay friends with living Durkon and only killed him when it became clear that there was no other way to keep Durkon around and on friendly terms.

That's because Malack is perfectly aware that the new vampire Durkon would be a different person than "The Durkon that was", but it would still have his memories and be better than the nothing that he'd otherwise get out of it.

The last part I very much doubt. Malack tells Durkula that he will feel more like himself when he's released from Malack's thrall. But if that's to be believed, he won't feel like himself at all, simply because he won't be himself.

Furthermore, I don't see Malack releasing a powerful completely and utterly unknown being from his thrall. It makes sense for him to do so, if the vampire in question is more or less Durkon, who was his friend, but not at all, if it is a completely different entity and Malack knows that.

Also, to me it doesn't really make sense for Hel to make some nobody spirit her high priest, even if the spirit suddenly gains in power. That's a position that requires trust and competence. Consider also that the likely outcome at Durkon's vampirization was that Malack would take him back to the Empire of Blood, with no real way to reconnect with the Order. Especially not without a protection from daylight spell. Besides, when Durkula was created, Hel wouldn't know that Malack was planning to release him. That is a very rare thing for vampires to do.

Finally, I don't see what the problem should be in Hel sending a spirit to take over Durkon's body, just as another external, controlling force (Malack) disappeared.

[TheOtherErnie]

The last part I very much doubt. Malack tells Durkula that he will feel more like himself when he's released from Malack's thrall. But if that's to be believed, he won't feel like himself at all, simply because he won't be himself.And that seems to be shown in-comic. The vampire Durkon's personality is different than Durkon's.

Furthermore, I don't see Malack releasing a powerful completely and utterly unknown being from his thrall. It makes sense for him to do so, if the vampire in question is more or less Durkon, who was his friend, but not at all, if it is a completely different entity and Malack knows that.
I agree. If Malack went through the same process as Durkon then Malack would know that the vampire Durkon is not Durkon. And only has Durkon's memories when it specifically retrieves them. Without the need to disguise itself, would it bother to retrieve those memories?

Also, to me it doesn't really make sense for Hel to make some nobody spirit her high priest, even if the spirit suddenly gains in power.
Don't forget that Rich isn't bound by the rules as written. This could be a specific spirit that Hel created (at the moment or in the past) or that had joined her in the past. Her reference to "serendipitous servant" might be about circumstances prior to Durkon's death.

And it's ability to cast cleric spells could be a result of Hel's direct attention. Not Durkon's cleric level. It might not have the ability to gain levels.

Finally, I don't see what the problem should be in Hel sending a spirit to take over Durkon's body, just as another external, controlling force (Malack) disappeared.
Also quite possible. And it would explain the seeming inconsistencies in Malack's dialog.

[Koo Rehtorb]

The last part I very much doubt. Malack tells Durkula that he will feel more like himself when he's released from Malack's thrall. But if that's to be believed, he won't feel like himself at all, simply because he won't be himself.

More like himself as in "A free willed creature as opposed to an obnoxious thrall." Malack wanted a peer, remember.


Furthermore, I don't see Malack releasing a powerful completely and utterly unknown being from his thrall. It makes sense for him to do so, if the vampire in question is more or less Durkon, who was his friend, but not at all, if it is a completely different entity and Malack knows that.

Malack was a reasonable sort of guy who believed in the power of compromise. He half-expected to be able to come to some sort of arrangement with living Durkon too. I expect he imagined that two high level vampire clerics would be able to find enough common ground to be able to get along with each other, especially since having access to Durkon's memories would probably at least influence the spirit somewhat.


Also, to me it doesn't really make sense for Hel to make some nobody spirit her high priest,

Unless he was literally the first priest of Hel in the world, which is a distinct possibility. I really don't think the spirit was some big investment, though. I got the impression that it was just something that any evil god could whip up on command to take control of an available host.

[SavageWombat]

I don't know if it's still in the books, but originally flesh and clay golems could break control of their masters and become possessed by a CE spirit. It never said where those spirits came from either.

[mikeejimbo]

My thought is that Malack knew that a new spirit would inhabit Durkon, but with access to the living Durkon's spirit and memories, he'd eventually take on attributes of the friend that Malack appreciated.

Also, even though Hel did refer to Malack as Nergal's snake, if Malack were still alive and Durkon the free-willed High Priest of Hel, I could still see them being friends and helping one another with their goals. What does Hel care if thousands on the Western Continent are sacrificed to Nergal? Likewise, would Nergal really mind if Hel brings Thor to his knees?

[The Pilgrim]

But what about Malack? He showed no signs of being a foreign spirit possessing Malack's dead body. He seemed to be Malack himself, except in blood drinking immortal form. He referred to the living Malack as if vampire Malack and living Malack were the same person, and he seemed to be under the impression that vampire Durkon, once freed from thralldom, would be the same person as living Durkon.

Actually, it's the exact opposite.

1) Malak was well aware that he was not the same person as his mortal host was. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html) The fact that he informs Durkon that resurrecting his body would anihilate him, drives the point home.

2) After centuries of occuping the host body, he will have that poor barbarian soul nerfed and well under control.

3) Malak was aware as well that the child he created was no longer Durkon. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0879.html)

[Grytorm]

The actual meaning of those phrases is ambiguous. Malack could be saying he is some sort of servitor spirit of Nergal possessing the corpse formerly known as a barbarian shaman. Or it is possible that he was speaking in metaphor about his identity.

Personally I'm thinking now that Durkula is not a fully typical case where some sort of servitor spirit is sent to posses a corpse. However the recent development does suggest the addition of a vampire soul. I think normally new vampires might be more of a blank slate and be more influenced by former identity. At least I hope it is like that.

[ti'esar]

1) Malak was well aware that he was not the same person as his mortal host was. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html) The fact that he informs Durkon that resurrecting his body would anihilate him, drives the point home.

While that bit was what seemed to really bring the idea of "Buffyverse" vampires (which is actually not quite what this situation is) into consideration by forum-goers, I'm still not convinced it should be taken literally. If "Malack" was an external entity possessing the lizardfolk shaman's corpse, then resurrecting him wouldn't be a "complicated way of annihilating the person I am today" - it would be a pretty straightforward one. There's ways of explaining that, but I don't think it can be taken as solid evidence that what happened to Durkon is how vampirism universally works in Stickworld.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

It is technically more complicated, since it involves the extra (albeit redundant) step of resurrecting the corpse. However, I do agree that what Malak said does not entirely match up.

[TheOtherErnie]

3) Malak was aware as well that the child he created was no longer Durkon. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0879.html)
Except that in panel #2 of that page Malack seems to be saying that Durkon will be Durkon again (sort of).

"You will feel more like yourself once I release you from my thrall - but I worry that doing so now would be ... confusing for you."
But we now know that there is a different spirit driving the vampire Durkon and that Durkon's spirit and personality are locked away inside that.

And there is no reason for any confusion on the part of the vampire spirit. The vampire spirit owed no allegiance to the OotS, the Linear Guild, the Vector Legion, Dwarves or Thor. As was shown when Malack was killed and the vampire Durkon was released from his thrall state.

[Seward]

I strongly suspect that Xykon's soul is still in full command.

Yeah. And he knows what's up if he gets destroyed.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html

last two panels

[Clistenes]

As I said in another thread:


Lichdom is a technique created by mortal evil spellcasters in order to give themselves immortal bodies. Of course that they would want to keep their own souls in control as opposed to being hijacked by some external force.

Vampirism is a curse of undeath that is forced into you, forcefully changes your nature and alignment and makes you turn agains those people you would have previously tried to protect. Whoever or whatever created it didn't want the original personality/soul to be in control.

[mikeejimbo]

Yeah. And he knows what's up if he gets destroyed.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html

last two panels

Huh, interesting though. He says being a vampire is preferable to dying. I wonder what the implications of that are.

[AKA_Bait]

Huh, interesting though. He says being a vampire is preferable to dying. I wonder what the implications of that are.

Probably not much more than that he has lousy ranks in knowledge religion.

[Clistenes]

Probably not much more than that he has lousy ranks in knowledge religion.

This. Xykon didn't even know about sentient undead before Redcloak turned him into a lich, so he probably has zero knowledge about how vampirism works.

[wyrmhole]

Actually, it's the exact opposite.

1) Malak was well aware that he was not the same person as his mortal host was. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0874.html) The fact that he informs Durkon that resurrecting his body would anihilate him, drives the point home.

2) After centuries of occuping the host body, he will have that poor barbarian soul nerfed and well under control.

3) Malak was aware as well that the child he created was no longer Durkon. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0879.html)

What's great is that while in hindsight the implications seem obvious, without that knowledge it's perfectly fair to interpret these statements as simply referring to the dramatic (un-)life change that becoming a vampire would represent. Even assuming continuity of personality, becoming a vampire, living forever, feeding on mortals, would likely change a person -- with the result that they may not want to change back to how they were, seeing it as essentially a different person. Even just disregarding how being infused with negative energy would change you. If it had ultimately been revealed that this is exactly the case, Malack's statements wouldn't be mysterious or seem out of place at all.

So it was a pretty brilliant way of hiding the twist -- all the evidence in plain sight, but none of it in any way conclusive or only open to a single interpretation.

[DrBurr]

The way I see it

Living Malack(LM) and Vampire Malack(VM) are two separate but intertwined entities. Likely LM was also evil or at least not good, so was more willing to become a Vampire and accepted his new vampire spirit.

The two became interwoven essentially a composite being, then Malack lived for another 200 years and these experiences can be attributed to his vampire half and turned him into the Malack we know. So if Durkon had raised VM he'd have erased those 200 years including their friendship making the Malack he knew dead, and instead would bring back a simpleton shaman, LM.

Now Durkon's vampirism(VD) could be different because hes Dwarf but I think its more likely that the same rules apply. I speculate the reason he became a servant of Hel though is because he lacked an adviser

Remember Malack was keen to bring VD back to the empire of blood before ending his thralldom. Why? We know Malack detests thralldom so If Malack thought he had his now evil friend with him he should have released him right there and Durkon would of been of more use to the Linear Guild. Likely Malack wanted to bring him back to the EoB so he could mold VD to become more like him and the Durkon he wanted. Malack for all extensive purposes was his father and likely the newly released thrall would still be somewhat obedient to the wiser vampire. If Malack could influence VD's development he could of finally had the companion he desired.

But Malack died before he could perform his reeducation on his thrall, setting a young vampire loose? And what does Durkon do? Avenge his father first then go help his former team. Now without Malack's guidance VD looked through the memories of his living self and learned of his gods. Naturally Hel the goddess of Death was eager to have a priest finally and gladly took him into the fold.


At least thats my theory

[SavageWombat]

Hmm. Who would you trust to answer a question about death and the afterlife -

the priest with 20 ranks in KN: Religion, or
the wizard with 20 ranks in KN: the Planes?

[Rakoa]

Hmm. Who would you trust to answer a question about death and the afterlife -

the priest with 20 ranks in KN: Religion, or
the wizard with 20 ranks in KN: the Planes?

The wizard. His intelligence is probably higher. :smallbiggrin:

[mikeejimbo]

Of course, Xykon is a Sorcerer, so I guess it would make sense for him to fail a Knowledge (Religion) check. No need for Int :smallbiggrin:

[factotum]

What's great is that while in hindsight the implications seem obvious, without that knowledge it's perfectly fair to interpret these statements as simply referring to the dramatic (un-)life change that becoming a vampire would represent.

It doesn't even have to rely on the massive change of becoming a vampire--at the end of 200 years of existence you are bound to be a different person than you were at the start, wouldn't you say? Heck, I'm pretty darned sure I'm a different person than I was when I was 20, and that was only a little over 20 years ago.

[The Pilgrim]

Except that in panel #2 of that page Malack seems to be saying that Durkon will be Durkon again (sort of).

Except that in "You will feel more like yourself", the "yourself" may not mean "Durkon", but "with your own personality".

Notice how, after turning him, Malack never refers to his thrall as "Durkon". In fact, the only time he adresses him by name (in his death scene), he calls him, simply, "Thrall".


What's great is that while in hindsight the implications seem obvious, without that knowledge it's perfectly fair to interpret these statements as simply referring to the dramatic (un-)life change that becoming a vampire would represent. Even assuming continuity of personality, becoming a vampire, living forever, feeding on mortals, would likely change a person -- with the result that they may not want to change back to how they were, seeing it as essentially a different person. Even just disregarding how being infused with negative energy would change you. If it had ultimately been revealed that this is exactly the case, Malack's statements wouldn't be mysterious or seem out of place at all.

So it was a pretty brilliant way of hiding the twist -- all the evidence in plain sight, but none of it in any way conclusive or only open to a single interpretation.

It's just like when Malack said that line, "neither Gods of Death not their clerics are necessary evil (...) If anything, neutrality suits them better (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html)". A masterful way of suggesting he and his God were neutral, without lying about his true alinment, evil-to-the-root.

[TheOtherErnie]

Except that in "You will feel more like yourself", the "yourself" may not mean "Durkon", but "with your own personality".
There's no need to chop up Malack's sentence. You left out the part about the thrall experiencing "confusion" if the thrall were released then.

But once Malack was killed, the vampire spirit did not seem "confused" at all. It took immediate steps to reduce the threat to the OotS, rejoin them, supply them with potions and claim to be Durkon.

There seems to be a slight delay between Malack being destroyed and the vampire spirit attacking but that might be because Nale was speaking.

[The Pilgrim]

There's no need to chop up Malack's sentence. You left out the part about the thrall experiencing "confusion" if the thrall were released then.

You would be confused too, if you were a newborn negative energy evil spirit just flushed into a host with a soul full of memories attached to you.

Anyway, notice how Malack, after the turning, never adresses his thrall as "Durkon", but simply as "Thrall". He is very aware the thrall was no longer Durkon.


But once Malack was killed, the vampire spirit did not seem "confused" at all. It took immediate steps to reduce the threat to the OotS, rejoin them, supply them with potions and claim to be Durkon.

Really? because there are like 10 panels in which Durkula is totally frozen in the same pose and expression, including a beat panel after Nale finishes his speech. Plus, by the time Malack got killed, Durkula has been already "alive" for some hours, so he was confused for having got freedom, but no longer for being just born.

Also, you forget it's Malack we are talking about. So don't discard that all the "I'd release you now but you'll feel confused" was just bull**** to justify that he is keeping him as a slave because it was convenient for him to do so at the time.

[Clistenes]

Crackpot theory: What if Malack was planning to order the vampire spirit to allow Durkon's soul some freedom? Like a shared control of the body or something similar? Could he even do that?

[wyrmhole]

It doesn't even have to rely on the massive change of becoming a vampire--at the end of 200 years of existence you are bound to be a different person than you were at the start, wouldn't you say? Heck, I'm pretty darned sure I'm a different person than I was when I was 20, and that was only a little over 20 years ago.

Exactly! And if someone said they wanted to remove some essential part of your current identity, and revert it to how you were when you were 20, you'd probably tell them to screw off. I mean I'm just guessing, since I know I would. :).



It's just like when Malack said that line, "neither Gods of Death not their clerics are necessary evil (...) If anything, neutrality suits them better (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html)". A masterful way of suggesting he and his God were neutral, without lying about his true alinment, evil-to-the-root.

Indeed! >:]

[TheOtherErnie]

You would be confused too, if you were a newborn negative energy evil spirit just flushed into a host with a soul full of memories attached to you.
Except that that does not seem to happen, in-comic. At most the vampire spirit stands around while Nale and Z and the imp talk after Malack is destroyed. Then the vampire spirit attacks Nale and Z and then kills Z. The imp disappears and Nale flees. Then the vampire spirit joins the OotS while claiming to be Durkon. Dispenses potions and helps save Haley and fight the elemental.

That does not seem like the vampire spirit is confused at all.

Really? because there are like 10 panels in which Durkula is totally frozen in the same pose and expression, including a beat panel after Nale finishes his speech.
Really. Remember that talking is a free action. All of that chatter might have been less than a single round. And whether he is "frozen" or listening to the exposition and considering his options is a matter of interpretation.

Plus, by the time Malack got killed, Durkula has been already "alive" for some hours, so he was confused for having got freedom, but no longer for being just born.
I think you mean approximately 20 minutes 35 seconds. Remember that V was taken soon after Durkon was killed and returned after Malack was destroyed.

And, as above, the "confused" vampire spirit seems to be able to execute a rather elaborate plan after Malack is destroyed.

Anyway, notice how Malack, after the turning, never adresses his thrall as "Durkon", but simply as "Thrall". He is very aware the thrall was no longer Durkon.
Comic 878. Malack says "Rise, Brother Thundershield. Rise and seek the blood of the living!"

[Vargouille]

I think you mean approximately 20 minutes 35 seconds. Remember that V was taken soon after Durkon was killed and returned after Malack was destroyed.

You seem be forgetting the dream sequence which, according to Roy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0890.html), took "at least a few hours".

[TheOtherErnie]

You seem be forgetting the dream sequence which, according to Roy (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0890.html), took "at least a few hours".
Good point.

[The Giant]

This thread has the exact same topic (and some of the same arguments by the same people) as this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=332223), which predates it. Rather than merge them and cause confusion, I'm locking this one and ask that everyone take their discussion over to that one.