I would add 6) What do they feed on (and related to this, how do they feed)? Most often it's human blood, but sometimes it's a specific component of blood like plasma, sometimes it's "lifeforce", sometimes they can live on non-human blood or even normal food...
What about if there are multiple types of vampires in a setting and if so how do the differences between the types arise.
Working on cleaning up List of Shows That Need Summary
Nevermind, found the answer already. Now I just have to find out how to delete this post...
Edited by Shinyo
I have a problem. I am going to start a new page about the manga series called Vampires, but that's currently an alternative title of this page. What do I do to remove that alternative title, so that the name Vampires will be free to use for that new page?
Hide / Show Replies
The page should be Manga/Vampires. To create the page; https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Manga/Vampires?action=edit
Simple, Oni
In spirit of what it literally means, Vegetarian Vampire does EXCLUDE other animals, and scientifically humans constitute as animals, maybe an highly sentinent strain, but an animal nonetheless. And it's not 'blood' they need, it's energy, spiritual or otherwise. Maybe because blood is readily apparent and a good source for it is what everything's trying to get at, but it's not blood specifically (Besides, it's drain not suck). Convenient methods may be the common depiction in fiction, but it's not as common than the real cases.
Until death do we part
likes the cheeses.
This page is being split due to length. It has reached a size where it is in danger of causing server performance issues. See this thread for details.
To alleviate this, I split off the current content along the lines of the current folder structure. New examples should be placed in the appropriate media sub-pages.
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!
Never Trust
Is there a trope for Monsters are a Disease? The trifecta for vampires is garlic, silver, and UV light. Garlic contains Allicin, a potent anti-biotic and anti-fungal agent. Silver has biocidal properties. The idiomatic "silver spoon" is very effective at killing bacteria on contact. Silver nitrate is one of the oldest disinfectants, and one of the few such remedies still commonly used. Ultraviolet light is ionizing radiation (by definition, light capable of tanning skin is ionizing), which is often used to sterilize tools and food. Remember that the original vampire myths described them as plague carriers instead of angsty nobility or teenage estrogen bait.
Mr
On the subject of holy symbols and the power of faith, when they're used as tropes; Does anyone know of an example, from any media, where an atheist holds off a vampire by dint of, say, belief in themselves? Or, possibly, in humanist ideals, or something similar? The image of someone holding off a vampire by brandishing a copy of Origin Of Species strikes me as mildly amusing (plus, the Vampire would inevitably say something like "You don't believe in that, you know it to be fact, and knowledge doesn't count.") but as for sheer self-belief... I think the Doctor held off vampires in one serial by reciting the names of past companions as what he believed in, but I was looking for something even more direct than that.
Hide / Show Replies
The Doctor and his companion Ace held off Vampire-like Haemaovors with their belief in each other. One kid in Steven King's "It" held the titular monster off with a book of birding.
But Belief in themselves—not so much.
The only thing that comes close is Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann's Spiral Power.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Does the trope apply to all manners of blood-sucking creatures/characters, or does it have to be undead blood-sucking creatures/characters?
Edited by MarqFJA Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus. Hide / Show Replies
In folkloric circles, all a monster needs to be in order to be considered a vampire is to be at least partly nocturnal and predatory.
Most have the "Was once human" in their descriptor, but not all do.
That definition is so broad that we really should not consider it.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
... So? Is it "all" or "only undead"?
Or to put another way: By "that definition", you mean the "folkoric circles" one or the "most have the 'was once human' (...)" one?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
The "Was once human" is a small subset of the Folklore/Mythology research model.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
So you're saying "only Undead", right? What of the "vampires that are 'supernatural' rather than 'undead'" that are rather prolific in Japanese folkore and fiction?
And if non-vampire bloodsuckers do not fall under Our Vampires Are Different, then what do they fall under?
Edited by MarqFJA Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Who says you need to die in order to become something other than human. Japanese folklore in particular is filled with such creatures.
As for "Vampires" that are prolific in Japanese folklore? Yaeh, there's only two: Shuten-Doji and various Floating Head Monsters.
What I'm specifically trying to exclude are the following types of creatures which are often often classified as Vampires:
Sasambonsam: A nocturnal, tree-climbing, flesh eating monster with long hind legs. Yara-Ma-Ya-Who: A tree-Dwelling creature with tentacles for fingers which swallows people whole, drains blood from them that way and then spits them out.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
As for "Vampires" that are prolific in Japanese folklore? Yaeh, there's only two: Shuten-Doji and various Floating Head Monsters.Okay, "profilic in Japanese modern fiction".
Let me restate my query this way: Do non-undead creatures/characters who suck blood True Vampire-style (i.e. via biting with fangs) count under Our Vampires Are Different?
Edited by MarqFJA Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Let's cut to the heart of the matter: What are you worried about adding?
Keep in mind, we can easily get to them if they are called Vampires In-Series.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
I don't want to add anything; I have a Bleach Fan Fic WIP, and one of the characters is an Arrancar. They have a semi-physiological quirk, part of their Bizarre Alien Biology, that allows them to suck blood via biting from Shinigami, Arrancar, normal Pluses/Souls and even mundane Humans, though it's only fatal if she wants it to be. They're not really undead, since they're completely nonphysical in nature. (excluding Gigai, but that's another story...)
The crux of the matter is that I'm wondering if having one iconically vampiric trait qualifies them for Our Vampires Are Different, because I'm also writing up a trope portfolio as I further flesh out their background, abilities, etc.
Edited by MarqFJA Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
I wouldn't say so.
Also, there's this:
- One of Bleach's earlier arcs focused on the Bounts, a tribe of artificially developed supernatural soul-suckers. Historically, they've been known as vampires although they notably don't conform to many of the usual tales; for example, people simply die after being a Bount's meal. And no one knew about the talking supernaturally powered dolls, all with German names and summon commands.
Not even if someone makes a passing comparison that quirk to vampires? If no, then what trope would cover that aspect of the character?
We really need to have some minimum requirements for what counts and what does not count as Our Vampires Are Different. By your logic, Rider and Zouken Matou from Fate Stay Night do not qualify, yet Fate Stay Night's Our Vampires Are Different entry lists them as examples.
Edited by MarqFJA Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
"Not even if someone makes a passing comparison that quirk to vampires? If no, then what trope would cover that aspect of the character?"
Actually, for this trope, that's all that's needed. I don't want to have to deliberatly spell it out for you, but again, look at the entry on bounts! They're referred to as Vampires but only have the energy/life force sucking aspect of vampirism.
If they were not, they'd barely qualify as anything other than Anthropophagi or other forms of Life-force/Blood consumer.
Succubai are often said to suck souls, but they are not vampires. It takes more than a feeding apparatus to classify them as something.
Also, on the main page, Fate Stay Night has no list for vampires on the main page. Why? Because it takes place in the Nasuverse and the Nasuverse explicitly already has vampires.
The problem is that there are multiple sets of criteria. In one, it only takes a single check to get in.
In another, it takes 2 or more checks.
- The Nasuverse (emphasis on Tsukihime) muddles the meaning of "vampire" quite a bit:
- True Ancestors are the original vampires, spirit beings so powerful they can manifest in a physical form. They were willed into being by the planet itself as a self-protection program against the spread of humanity. They don't need to drink blood at all, but because the Crimson Moon tricked Gaia into using him as the template, they inevitably succumb to bloodlust anyway.
- Dead Apostles start out as mindless zombies (created by another vampire injecting some of their own blood into a person) that gradually gain in power and intelligence over hundreds of years as they feed on flesh and blood until they finally evolve into complete vampires. Arcueid gives specific, vanishing odds for undead to make it out of each stage. Of course, if you have the magic potential and/or sheer luck, it is possible to skip a few steps, like Satsuki, who skipped straight to the final stage, complete with a Reality Marble.
- And then for the wtf-factor, we have: a mobile bloodsucking forest, a phenomenon that doesn't actually "exist", a crow-man/thing, a little boy with demons for limbs, a chaotic composite of 666 familiars that feast on human flesh, and an Eldritch Abomination/personification of Mercury that half got the designation by virtue of killing a Dead Apostle who tried to study it.
- In any case, neither are susceptible to water, stakes, or the traditional anti-vampire weapons. While cannon fodder vampires can be harmed by guns and swords, most of the stronger Dead Apostles (and all of the True Ancestors, as well as the strange group of Dead Apostle Ancestors) cannot be harmed by "real" weapons. By the rules of the Nasuverse, this means something mythical on the same scale as a "mythical" being like a vampire. Not to mention, even if they are hurt, the stronger ones can come back to life by reversing time. The most extreme example? Roa regenerating himself after being slashed apart down to his ankles by Arcueid in Tsukihime. Granted, that was only possible because the moon was full.
- Basically, the one "weakness" common to all Nasuverse vampires (True Ancestors and Dead Apostles) is
Nanayasunlight. On one end are most Dead Apostles, for whom sunlight greatly hastens their bodies' degeneration; on the other end is Arcueid, who during daytime ranges from "somewhat weaker" to "sluggish and lethargic" (on the sunniest of days). Arcueid also seems to have very allergic to garlic, though whether this applies to all vampires (or should even be considered canon) is not clear. - Then again you could probably count on your fingers the amount of times the word "vampire" was actually said.
- Arcueid: "Dead Apostiles eat people and True Ancestors are out to hunt them."
Shiki: "oh you mean like vampires right"
Arcueid: "Yeah, I guess you can call it that."
- Arcueid: "Dead Apostiles eat people and True Ancestors are out to hunt them."
When I said "Fate Stay Night's Our Vampires Are Different entry", I meant "the Our Vampires Are Different entry on Fate Stay Night's main page". Wrong wording on my part; sorry.
On the Bount: As I understand, they're almost explicitly supposed to be the source of all the vampire myths in the Bleach setting, even though they're not true vampires; it stands to reason that they still qualify for Our Vampires Are Different, because they are the "vampires" of their world, but are also very different from their world's (and our) perception of "vampires".
A similar case could be made for the Nasuverse's various kinds of Vampires; they're collectively the source of vampire myths in the public consciousness, yet are also ironically Shrouded in Myth and misconceptions, as not all that the public believes about vampires is correct - on one hand, they do have the ability to suck blood (though not all require it to live... and some require it only to stay sane.), but on the other, most (if not all) traditional "vampire weaknesses" are completely false. I wouldn't be surprised if Nasu decided to reveal that Vampires were responsible for spreading these misconceptions.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Addressing Einar Osidur, here. Seriously, my friend, there is no element of vampirism that bears examination from a logical viewpoint. They are all about Suspension of Disbelief.
Of course they don't make any sense. Sense is not the point.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty Hide / Show Replies
Equally seriously, friend, there are points that bear discussion. And the point about not being real: Hardly anything represented on this website is real.
Some kind of sense is always the point, but another point you seem to have missed is that TV Tropes are not serious so most anything can go in for fun, which it was for me in the beginning.
Wikipedia is probably better suited to your tastes.
You think so? I should try that Wikipedia thing, I guess. I mean, if that is where I need to go to learn about how I got this whole 'fun' thing wrong, and all.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Einar, just to be clear, you do know who you're arguing with, right?
A mod.
But perhaps a note should be made about the inherent illogic of having creatures with no heartbeat bleed at all. I'd vote for Fridge Logic rather than You Fail Biology Forever.
Unless we want to go the Spider Man rout and simply say "It's magic! I don't have to explain it!"
Which wouldn't really apply since it is more about what the applied trait actually does to a body.
Reviewing movies is a lot like Paleontology: The Evidence is there...but no one seems to agree upon it.
Which proves that mods can be nitpickers too and also delete things on reflex without considering whether something they don't see eye-to-eye with might still be justified under a different heading.
As a fan of Buffy's, I can't count the times I laughed at the lack of breath etc., clearly violated in almost every episode. That plus the fact that vampires visibly bleed and that every living (or undead for that matter) thing needs some kind of circulation.
To me this all is pretty funny, and I know I'm not alone.
Which category it belongs to is open to discussion, your suggestion sounded fine, but the place I put it in at least fits.
All in all a case of taking things too seriously, and I don't mean on my part.
Anyway, I'll cease and desist. Whatever I write there is doomed from the start. Others may indulge to their hearts' content.
All the best.
To Fast Eddie: Yes, you seem to have got the fun thing wrong.
I've been told as a warning, that you are a mod. That really doesn't mean anything except for editing power and probably a bit more.
I assume mods are human, so you might have made a mistake. Or it is an example of Peter's Principle.
Humour comes in many shapes and forms, but not everybody has the same sense of humour.
So think a bit longer and reflect on what would be right instead of just knee-jerking something away.
All the best.
Fridge Logic does seem to be a better fit.
I guess we have here a different take on what's funny. Trying to apply science to vampires seems so off-base to me, and some others, that there is no 'funny' involved. We get people, especially around the You Fail X Forever examples, who are just missing the Suspension of Disbelief gene.
A portrayal of vampires that was trying for a science based explanation of vampirism would be fair game for a few gigs against the science when the portrayal falls short of the mark. Those are pretty rare, though. A blanket statement just doesn't work.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Suspension Of Belief works for me as well.
That said, having learned the tweensiest bit of science, the gigantic science errors do leave me laughing. To take an example from the discussion: A thing with no circulation at all (doesn't have to be the heart) is simply dead.
And OK, we may, and probably do, have a different sense of humour. It comes with the territory - literally. You are probably American and I am, well, that's for you to find out - easy enough.
Anyway, and I am not saying this applies to you personally, Americans are often flabbergasted at what others think is funny. The website is American, the readership is international. You can't force one standard on all of them.
Americans also tend (correct me if I'm wrong) to be ignorant of tales and tropes that are ubiquitous elsewhere.
The example of Harry Potter: The Philosopher's Stone, rendered as The Sorcerer's Stone in America springs to mind. Now Americans know the words philosopher and stone, but the concept Philosopher's Stone was apparently considered as too sophisticated for all the "dumb readers", who, I'm sure, would have bought and read the book anyway - go Americans.
My nation at least owes the U.S. a debt of gratitude for being the first to acknowledge us as an independent state. (But that happened so long ago that no living American can take credit.)
The way I see it, this trope can be boiled down to five questions. In this work... 1) How are vampires created from humans? 2) How does the victim's appearance change as a result of the transformation? 3) How does the victim's personality change as a result of the transformation? 4) What are the vampires' abilities? And 5) What are the vampires' weaknesses?
Hide / Show Replies