Vampires

[asajosh]

Ok I just read the same NASA article I believe you did, Cornholio, and I'm now convinced. No light to cause damage to vampires. I shant go into it all but here is the link for those who care to read it:
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/scien ... holes.html

[lather]

Vampire pancake coming right up.

Stars do not have silver in them, even the supermassive ones. The best they get is iron and that probably would not be surface material. I am just jumping to conclusions based on things I heard a long time ago.

[lather]

Vampire pancake coming right up.

Stars do not have silver in them, even the supermassive ones. The best they get is iron and that probably would not be surface material. I am just jumping to conclusions based on things I heard a long time ago.

actually i was watching that show on history channel "the universe" and our son is mostly iron but stars can be made out of any material with a molten state

Then history channel got it wrong. Our sun is mostly hydrogen and helium. and stars are giant plasma balls.

[Killer Cyborg]

There you go!
It describes the general effects.
That's a great leap forward from your previous indications that the name doesn't have anything to do with the function of the power.
I'm proud of you.

Got to love the way you left out the two important parts of my reply in your quote... The one where I pointed out that your example flat-out contradicts everything you've tried to claim it meant... And the one where I have never said a title heading is utterly disconnected from the power, but that, rather, it is the rules that define it, not the title.
Specifically, I said:
'You can title a section of the rules whatever you want to call it, but it's the actual content - and lack thereof - that's important.'
But hey, if deconstructive misquoting makes it look like you didn't just shoot your own argument in the foot... You have fun. ^_^

"Impervious to Fire" makes you impervious to fire.
Just like the title says.

The rules elaborate on it, but the function of the power is right there in the title.

Now this seems to leave you making the rather absurd claim that the uranium vulnerability was thought of by the authors when VK was written, but that it wasn't set to ink until Triax.
Which doesn't make sense, and isn't true, but at least it's better than what you were saying before.

I've always said that they left a chink in the rules. That chink was to list specific weaknesses and specific invulnerabilities.

Actually, this is the first time you've said that.
You have previously claimed:
-That the authors deliberately left things open, which they did not.
-That vampires have always been vulnerable to Urandium, which they have not.

Nothing that has been published since invalidates my claim -

Which claim are you talking about this time?

the same cannot be said for yours.

It's been a LONG time since you last posted, so I can't say for sure, but as far as I remember my claim has been that the "vampires are vulnerable to Uranium" rule is a change.
This is validated by the books, because pre-Triax they weren't vulnerable to it, but post-Triax they are.
That's a change.

Interesting claim; prove it.

Actually, I believe we already established that you could not disprove it...

You believe a lot of things, but unfortunately your belief does not seem to have any correlation with whether those things are true.

At this point, I don't even remember what claim I was asking you to prove, but I'll point out that lack of proof against a claim does not constitute proof for the claim.

Vampire rules are loosely defined. This lets Palladium writers slip in whammys later on. Those whammys need not make IC *logical* sense (radiation : immune, bullets : immune, uranium bullets : ouch) so long as they are consistant (uranium bullets : always ouch).

It's not consistant for beings that are impervious to radiation to be harmed by radiation or radioactive material.

But by your logic, since "being hit in the head with a tire iron" isn't listed as one of their specific immunities, they might well be vulnerable to it.
And if a future book listed that as one of their weaknesses, your argument would be that this isn't a change; that it's always been that way, it's just that nobody ever tried to hit a vampire in the head with a tire iron before.

And I quote : 'It then goes to give examples of things that do not, and things that do hurt them. These lists are never stated to be complete, conclusive or much of anything else. It just is.' and 'You want this to be an all-encompassing super-ability, I prefer to believe it's a mythic qualifier that may be changed by the process of in-character discovery (perhaps, for example facilitated by the publishing of new books or the views of a certain GM). '
You can make up random and illogical stretches of what you seem to believe is my viewpoint, but I'm afraid I don't have to pretend I ever claimed them.

Uh, you just quoted the part that I'm talking about.
Your claim is essentially, "X is not listed as something that vampires are invulnerable to, therefore it's not inconsistant for X to be later listed as a vulnerabilty."
YOU are making the claim about uranium, but IF the claim holds any validity then it logically follows that the same claim could be made about ANYTHING not listed in the book.
Which it obviously cannot.

You keep saying that, but have provided no evidence that it's true.

Except the text of the rules, in the book.

No idea what this part was about, but it's a safe bet that I disagree that the rules back you up.

Whether or not you believe I'm right doesn't affect whether I actually am right.
It does affect whether you can accept the right answer when it's presented to you, but that doesn't really affect me either way.

In short, I don't really care whether you change your opinion here or not.

Funny how you just keep on posting though, isn't it?

I'm not trying to change your opinion with my posts.
I believe that I pointed out very early on that this argument is an exercise in futility.

In any case, since I suppose I have demonstrated several times the inconsistancy of your position, as well as the innacuracy of your reading of the rules... I'm not sure what more I can do to help you.

Help me!?

Good one.

If you really want to help, then:
1. Take some classes in basic logic and reasoning.
2. Use what you learn there.
3. Read the rules of the book.
4. Figure out the difference between in-game and out-of-game.
5. Make clear arguments.
6. Don't change your arguments mid-argument.
7. Quit with the constant, inaccurate personal attacks and bizarrely random claims of victory.
8. Learn when to give up.

[asajosh]

I for one have never liked the Palladium ruling that DU rounds harm vampires or slow down their regeneration. Believe it or not, though, it has never come up in any game I've played or GMed... Weird but no one has ever said, "Wait, lemme get some DU rounds, just in case." Hmm, can't imagine why...

[lather]

[Qev]

Vampire pancake coming right up.

Stars do not have silver in them, even the supermassive ones. The best they get is iron and that probably would not be surface material. I am just jumping to conclusions based on things I heard a long time ago.

actually i was watching that show on history channel "the universe" and our son is mostly iron but stars can be made out of any material with a molten state

Then history channel got it wrong. Our sun is mostly hydrogen and helium. and stars are giant plasma balls.

Good lord, that sounds like Michael Mozina's 'iron sun' theory. The man is the definition of a crackpot.

Population I and II stars likely have some traces of silver and other heavy elements in them, being borne of clouds of hydrogen that have been 'metal enriched' by previous generations of stars going supernova.

I think traces of silver are a vampire's least worry if it finds itself in a situation where it's been flung towards the Sun.

When it comes to U-Rounds and vampires, the thing I find problematic is... well, the effect they have is to prevent regeneration. They don't specifically do any extra damage to supernatural creatures (they do 25% more damage to -everything- due to their increased density), the only effect is that the damage inflicted cannot be regenerated until the projectile is removed, and even then the rate of regeneration is reduced.

Vampires, however, explicitly do not take damage from physical attacks, except by wood, moving water, and silver. So... what's the point of U-Rounds against them? The Triax book does say that it will affect vampiric regeneration, but if you're not inflicting damage, then the question of their regeneration being affected is somewhat moot, no?

I suppose one could construct vampire-specific U-Rounds, say silver-coated or wood-tipped or something equally crazy. Otherwise U-Rounds aren't doing to do a lick of good against them.

[asajosh]

Vampires, however, explicitly do not take damage from physical attacks, except by wood, moving water, and silver. So... what's the point of U-Rounds against them? The Triax book does say that it will affect vampiric regeneration, but if you're not inflicting damage, then the question of their regeneration being affected is somewhat moot, no?

Cut'em with a silver sword and the shove uranium bullets into the open wound (all while laughing wildly)!

I suppose one could construct vampire-specific U-Rounds, say silver-coated or wood-tipped or something equally crazy. Otherwise U-Rounds aren't doing to do a lick of good against them.

Or do that, lotta prep work though

[asajosh]

If all that matter is condensed down, it will fuse at a nuclear level, becomming a new element, a giant "super atom" if you will (I own the name, "Singularium" hehe).
But its moot, a vampie would be totally trapped by the gravity. There is "dead" and there is "as good as dead"

[Qev]

And no, I'm not the astrophysicist around here....the Forum Member known as Qev is.

Naw, I'm just an Armchair Cosmologist OCC, with secondary skills such as Astrophysics Fan (46%).

Most of the non-supermassive (ie. galactic) black holes we know about -are- in binary systems, so yeah, vampires would likely be crisp before they hit the event horizon.

I don't think it'd be particularly bright inside a solitary black hole, since light entering it is on a one-way trip to oblivion at the singularity. From inside, it'd actually be difficult to tell that you were in a black hole (assuming you weren't being spaghettified by the tidal forces).

Black holes with accretion disks (matter accumulating in a disk as it falls into the black hole, much like water down a drain) are some of the brightest objects in the known universe. But it isn't really 'sunlight', as in the light of a star, so I doubt it'd hurt vampires particularly. Sunlight damage is a magical effect, not a scientific one.

Not sure what you might be referring to as a 'corona of light'... two things I can think of, however. First, the gravity about the hole is strong enough to bend light, acting like an enormous lens. So you'll see multiple full-sky images compressed into rings around the event horizon. Second, black holes possess what's known as a 'photon sphere', which is that distance from the event horizon where gravity is strong enough to bend light into circular orbit around the black hole. Were you somehow able to remain stationary with your head in the photon sphere, looking in a direction parallel to the 'surface' of the event horizon where you are, you'd simply see the back of your own head, again and again, like the 'hall of mirrors' effect.

[Qev]

First off 3 of the planets in our solar system are iron cored worlds its just the ionization of their atmospheres is what caused their cores to cool and is the number one reason they dont share the same fate as earth and makes planets like mars very likely sources for future habitation so wouldnt make sense that the same elements that make up most off the celestial bodys in our solar system would be found in the sun

Oh, no doubt there is some iron in the Sun's make-up, and probably some even heavier elements as well; the primordial cloud our solar system formed from was apparently seeded with heavy elements by a nearby supernova shortly before the Sun began to coalesce.

That said, these heavier elements make up only a tiny fraction of the mass of the entire solar system. The reason Earth and the other near-Sun planets are so dominated by heavy elements is that, while forming, there was this enormous burning ball of plasma (the Sun) blasting all of the lighter elements out of the inner solar system. Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars are all made from the stuff that was too heavy for the Sun to blow away.

secondly my point was not if they were flung into the sun if you read eairlier in this thread you would see my point is a black hole could destroy a vamp if they were drawn into it because black holes are created when a star goes supernova at that point all the mater in that star would be compresed into singularity including the vampire so when they vampire becomes one with the silver poof no more vamp

Oh! My mistake, I thought you were talking about a star, not a black hole.

It could be argued that, whatever something was originally composed of, it's no longer that material once it reaches the singularity of a black hole. If there was silver in the original star before its collapse, it wouldn't be silver anymore... it'd simply be more mass in the singularity.

Similar effects are thought to occur in the less-extreme environments of neutron stars. Originally, they're formed from the iron core of a dying star, but due to gravitational collapse, they're no longer made of iron: electrons are crushed inside the nuclei of the atoms, converting protons to neutrons, and instead of a hyperdense ball of iron, you wind up with what's effectively one huge atomic nucleus.

As for vampires, I'm not entirely sure how to resolve the black hole question. As far as physics goes, I'd say they've had it; nothing survives a singularity. As far as game mechanics go, vampires are invulnerable to such attacks. Maybe they just get squished down really tiny and are stuck until the black hole evaporates.

[asajosh]

Not sure what you might be referring to as a 'corona of light'... two things I can think of, however. First, the gravity about the hole is strong enough to bend light, acting like an enormous lens. So you'll see multiple full-sky images compressed into rings around the event horizon. Second, black holes possess what's known as a 'photon sphere', which is that distance from the event horizon where gravity is strong enough to bend light into circular orbit around the black hole. Were you somehow able to remain stationary with your head in the photon sphere, looking in a direction parallel to the 'surface' of the event horizon where you are, you'd simply see the back of your own head, again and again, like the 'hall of mirrors' effect.

Okies, so I cast Globe of Daylight in this "hall of mirrors" you speak of, what would THAT do to our cosmic vampire?


I tease! Just wanted to make steam shoot outta peoples' ears!

Good science, Qev

[lather]

Vampire pancake coming right up.

Stars do not have silver in them, even the supermassive ones. The best they get is iron and that probably would not be surface material. I am just jumping to conclusions based on things I heard a long time ago.

actually i was watching that show on history channel "the universe" and our son is mostly iron but stars can be made out of any material with a molten state

Then history channel got it wrong. Our sun is mostly hydrogen and helium. and stars are giant plasma balls.

The sun is not "mostly iron". Not by any stretch of the imagination or facts.

Iron is the end of the line of fusion.

Anything else is even more trace amount and left over from exploding stars.

[asajosh]

Ahem <sings>
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas,
A gigantic nuclear furnace.
Where hydrogen is built into helium
At a temperature of millions of degrees!

- opening verse Why does the Sun Shine? (the sun is a mass of incandescent gas) by They Might Be Giants

Always puts a smile on me face.

[lather]

They Might Be Giants might be smarter than the History Channel.

[lather]

And yes, I can get hot about topics, too.

I wanna know those topics

[lather]

I'll bet you say that to all the girls.

not me

Just you Skinny.

[lather]

And yes, I can get hot about topics, too.

I wanna know those topics

be careful skinny girl it doesn't look like he has been around women in while.

[lather]

Flattery is the purest form of mockery

[lather]

Flattery is the purest form of mockery

And very fun to laugh at!

Yea

[lather]

4. Sorry if I drop any jokes about the French . . . I normally don't tell them, but when you're around my brothers, you're sure to here a couple dozen at a time.

If you ever get a high enough post count to join Sound OFF, you'll fit right in.

Worst pick up line ever!

[lather]

4. Sorry if I drop any jokes about the French . . . I normally don't tell them, but when you're around my brothers, you're sure to here a couple dozen at a time.

If you ever get a high enough post count to join Sound OFF, you'll fit right in.

Worst pick up line ever!

I've actuley heard a guy say (to me and my freinds horror) "hey you look kinda sexy you remind me of my mom."
tres creepy

How you say it is important. Was it all in one breath or was it a couple compliments strung together?

Did he say it to you?

And did you inquire if his mom were available?

[lather]

4. Sorry if I drop any jokes about the French . . . I normally don't tell them, but when you're around my brothers, you're sure to here a couple dozen at a time.

If you ever get a high enough post count to join Sound OFF, you'll fit right in.

Worst pick up line ever!

I've actuley heard a guy say (to me and my freinds horror) "hey you look kinda sexy you remind me of my mom."
tres creepy

How you say it is important. Was it all in one breath or was it a couple compliments strung together?

Did he say it to you?

And did you inquire if his mom were available?

1. one breath
2. oh no i would have left quickly and never went back
3.nope but i like your style my soap covered monkey friend

[lather]

and don't worry about french jokes btw you wanna buy some french military rifles only been dropped once

And never been fired.

[asajosh]

Ok we have officially thread jacked this thing into unknown territory.
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/france.html

[lather]

French Vampires. Heh.

[lather]

Who doesn't like French Toast?

[lather]

Who doesn't like French Toast?

Probably the French.

Yea. You all should have let Dennys take over the world instead of McDonald's.

[lather]

Like I can resist your cultural imperialism

[lather]

Racist.

[lather]

Upsize my Freedom Fries would you?

[lather]

It would save ya some bucks all the way round

[asajosh]

The funny part is that the World at large (especially America) is still "shocked" when the French behave so... French.

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/france.html

[Killer Cyborg]

"Impervious to Fire" makes you impervious to fire.
Just like the title says.

The rules elaborate on it, but the function of the power is right there in the title.

Unfortunately, that's flat-out wrong, as I already showed you. Oh wait, that's right, you didn't read that bit. Let's go over it again...

Lets.

RUE : P202 'Impervious to Fire'
(actually does what it says on the tin)

Gee, almost as if the name of the ability has something to do with how the power works.
Shock!

RUE : P168 'Impervious to Fire'
(except magic fire).

Right.
Once again, the power makes the person IMPERVIOUS TO FIRE, just like the name says. The only exception being noted below.

Kind of like how vampires are invulnerable, except as limited specifically in the text below.

Rifts RPG : P102 'Impervious to Fire & Heat'
(oops, one-tenth from MD flames, oh well)

IIRC, the 1/10th damage is from the impact of the flame that they are quite impervious to (just like the power name says).
This idea was later discarded.

Oh, and in case you were thinking of pointing out 'but those are exceptions' - well, yes but since that's rather my point in bit, it won't help much.

It's my point as well, if you remember.
My premise here being that the name of the power describes the power, with exceptions and elaborations described in the text below.

Like how vampires are Invulnerable as a default, with specific exceptions listed below.
Hence, "Limited Invulnerability".

Actually, this is the first time you've said that.
You have previously claimed:
-That the authors deliberately left things open, which they did not.
-That vampires have always been vulnerable to Urandium, which they have not.

Yes, I think we established already that you don't read what I post very carefully and have some real difficulty with interpreting my writing and some of the material in the books. Go back to some of the first posts and try again.

Sorry about that.
I'm not fully fluent in Gibberish, having only taken a 1 semester class in it in high school; I can sometimes understand that language when spoken, but not so much when it is "written".

It's been a LONG time since you last posted, so I can't say for sure, but as far as I remember my claim has been that the "vampires are vulnerable to Uranium" rule is a change.
This is validated by the books, because pre-Triax they weren't vulnerable to it, but post-Triax they are.
That's a change.

Yes, sorry about that - RL has been an absolute pain in the backside lately...

I hear ya.

But the basic argument as I've always seen it is that I've been arguing that the OOC addition to the rules didn't invalidate anything that went before, whereas you've been claiming that it does.
Everything else has just been window-dressing.

Agreed.

Ever wonder why we've spent this much time and energy on it?

You believe a lot of things, but unfortunately your belief does not seem to have any correlation with whether those things are true.

At this point, I don't even remember what claim I was asking you to prove, but I'll point out that lack of proof against a claim does not constitute proof for the claim.

No, but as the one making a claim you're generally expected to have some in the first place, you know how it is - that dead Occam dude again.

Okay; what claim was I making?

Uh, you just quoted the part that I'm talking about.
Your claim is essentially, "X is not listed as something that vampires are invulnerable to, therefore it's not inconsistant for X to be later listed as a vulnerabilty."
YOU are making the claim about uranium, but IF the claim holds any validity then it logically follows that the same claim could be made about ANYTHING not listed in the book.
Which it obviously cannot.

what I am describing, as I have described before is the idea that, because the rules as written are (perhaps) deliberately incomplete, they leave room for new materials, techniques and magics to deal death or damage to their subject.

Right; I get all that.
That's what I'm addressing.
IF the writers are "leaving thing open" with Uranium, then the same logic would apply to anything that the writers later chose to retcon into being a weakness for vampires.
IF a writer decided to add into the books that vampires are vulnerable to tire irons, THEN this would fit your theory perfectly well, as you have stated it so far.
Something that I find to be a rather absurd length to go to just to avoid the idea that the writers have made a (gasp) change in the rules.

Where this new 'whammy' is plausably something that has not been tried before, or has not previously existed (uranium, a new magic) it maintains consistancy. Where is is not (such as your example of the tire iron), it would not.

What makes you think:
a. That it's not likely for somebody to have used uranium as a weapon on vampires before Triax?
b. That it's likely that somebody has used a tire iron against vampires?

:lol:

Help me!?

Good one.

If you really want to help, then:
1. Take some classes in basic logic and reasoning.
2. Use what you learn there.
3. Read the rules of the book.
4. Figure out the difference between in-game and out-of-game.
5. Make clear arguments.
6. Don't change your arguments mid-argument.
7. Quit with the constant, inaccurate personal attacks and bizarrely random claims of victory.
8. Learn when to give up.

Well, let's see...

1-2, actually not an issue - I admit to not having taken the classes, but I was never into remedial studies.

You really should try to catch up sometime.

3, well - I have. I appear to be the only one of the two of us who has though.

Rubber... Glue... you know the drill.

4, heh, you keep banging on this drum, when of course the two are rather intimately connected - well, as far as the OOC rules and the IC description are concerned.

Almost interesting.
Feel free to elaborate.

5, Guilty I suppose, though sheer repetition has dulled the edge of several of these points.
6, My core point has remained fairly consistant, we've just randomly wandered.

Well, since I've forgotten where we were, we can always go back to the core point...

7, I didn't start with them... or, come to that (as I see it), start them. That said, each of us obviously reads the same text differently.

That we do.

But either way, I'll lighten up on the condescention and sarcasm if you drop the insults and such.

8, I cannot belive *you* just wrote that. ^_^

Guilty.

[Killer Cyborg]

oh kc how i missed your arguments

No you haven't.