Can a vampire be redeemed TG?

>Can a corpse, an object, be capable of distinguishing good and evil enough to make a meaningful decision?
Signs point to no

If you are looking for a general setting-agnostic response there is not one but I can tell you that even in settings in which overcoming the condition is possible its usually very difficult to do so.

ebenbs on be sebbing

Not all vampires have to be redeemed because they aren't evil in the first place. Most just feed off of animals or have a few kinky love slaves that get off to getting their blood drank.

They don't really need to be. They need vital energy to survive but they need not kill. It's just more expedient and easier to. So long as they can restrain themselves a bit there's no issue.

I can't tell if this is a Nosferatu ratsucker, or a Twilight superman figure.

This thread has fare less Vamp QT pics than I would expect. I feel like we should already be discussing Jitsu Wa Watashi Wa at this point.
RIP The best harem comedy that wasn't actually harem, and was actually funny.

If they're lucky, as a phlebotomist. Most work night shifts.

That is until they get a ghoul or two to earn some dough and make sure nobody kills them.

>tfw no cutie vampchaser gf who gets off to you sucking out her bright, life-giving blood
>she will never offer her neck to let you feed upon her, then let you spoon her in her feeble state as she recovers

I should just stake myself now

There are vampires that are just animals that can imitate human form and behavior to prey on us. There are vampires that aren't undead. There are settings where substitutes for blood exist.

Yes retard, it's fantasy, everything can be done.

I'm not against the idea of redeemed monsters, as long as the rules of the universe don't make that concept utterly ridiculous like a redeemed Daemonette or something, but I feel like the concept gets cheapened and overused by hack writers. It shouldn't be easy or cheap, and it should be something they can barely conceive of, let alone want to do, which would never happen under normal circumstances. It definitely shouldn't just happen because they get the hots for a human, or because someone was nice to them one time and they "discovered kindness." They're abandoning what they are, who they are.

In the Classic World of Darkness they can
>A road of mercy, and you shall call this road Golconda. You shall tell your children of this road, for by it your children may come once again to dwell in the light

Perhaps, but not against their own will.

Have them go full Blade.

Angel was a whiny bitch, though. "Oh woe is me, I can't possibly ever be redeemed from the horrible things I did when I didn't have a soul which is arguably both why I did what I did, as proven because I feel so horrible about it now that I have my soul back!"

Which is actually quite an existential crisis. Can crimes weigh your soul down to hell that were only committed because the soul itself wasn't present for the crimes? On sure you get some mileage out of the fact that some of them were convinced to become vampires, effectively giving up their souls, so it's true they bear some responsibility - but how many of them made the choice knowing full well what it meant? Not shit like eating babies and the like.

The thing I'm getting at is it seems more of a psychological issue, and a fully understandable one given you remember in vivid detail everything you did, but I certainly don't see it the way Angel does as his irredeemable past he can never make up for and no matter how hard he fights for good he's destined for Hell. No matter how you parse it, a vampire is a literal soulless monster, so the acts of evil they commit, as horrific as they are, would never be as innately vile if committed by a human with a soul, and thus a spark of potential goodness, who willingly commits the same act. That's something that truly damns you, staining your very being. But if the soul is basically absent while your animated corpse runs around and murders people? That's not the soul's fault, especially if those murders are only committed because the soul is absent.

>setting has vampires that can drink little enough from their victims that it's not even unhealthy for them
>still treats them as irredeemable monsters

What setting actually does this?

Okay, put this into a different perspective. If someone is vamped against their will and turned, like say Harmony, as long as that person was relatively innocent during their life they should go to the local heaven equivalent. Mostly because the soul isn't consumed when they become a vampire. Other settings function differently.

Because of this I cannot see how their soul would be striped of heaven eligibility the instant their animated corpse does something sufficiently naughty. It's not really them committing the sins, it's a demon hot-rodding in their meat suit even though sure it is running off of all their memories, which seems to be the primary cause of confusion here.

Ok fine it's not THAT common.
WoD does, but just from the "divine" perspective not the human one.

With sunlight

Arguably any and all of them. Even if they require the entire blood volume of a human body as nourishment they can still make that up from multiple sources without fully draining any one of them. It's basically the same as if they feed from a blood bank which also acquires quantities of blood from a person without necessarily harming them. Give them a cookie and some juice and they'll be fine.

Vamps typically don't do this for various reasons, but there we are. Pretty sure Underworld and I think maybe the Blade Trilogy had vamps running the blood industries and developing cloned blood which means they could get all they needed without harming anyone, ever. Of course they still did.

What is this undergraduate thesis.

Yeah but God in WoD is generally an asshole

But then you are arguing about writing quality, yes its shitty when authors arbitrarily decide that vampires need to be evil even if they have free will and reasonable means to avoid harming people but the fact still remains they are being villified because they are hurting people, not simply because they are vampires.

Exactly. Why actually discuss vampires like the OP wanted when we can post big titty anime vamps? Or the underage but teehee not really because she's actually three thousand years old vamps.

>But then you are arguing about writing quality
Are we, though? Vampires could find blood through other means. Hell, in Buffy/Angel animal blood works fine. They don't because they get off on the murder. It's the apex predator shit. You don't get the same thrill sucking off goats. Sorry, Chupacabra.

Depends.

Elder Scrolls, yes, only the weak-willed actually fall and remain Vampires. It used to be far more difficult to become human but after Skyrim any dickass with a Soul Gem can do it apparently.

WoD, entirely theoretical, and insanely hard to a degree that only one of two have ever succeeded and even then no one is sure if they actually exist. Probably the most difficult setting to redeem yourself in.

Most other settings.
No.

>They don't because they get off on the murder. It's the apex predator shit
If it's just for the thrill they should go diving and drink shark blood or some shit.

>three thousand years old
you're thinking milf kitsune, the loli vampire is "just" three hundred

That's like asking if a lion can be redeemed. Vampires are predators, just doing what they're programmed to do.

Oh shit did that actually end? How long ago?

Not the one that sucked off Jesus if you know what I mean

Lions can be tamed and trained, though. You just need a cute enough vampire and a along enough whip. Call yourself Belmont for extra kink, too.

Logical error. The most dangerous game of all is man.

Unless there are additional reasons that support why vampires are especially drawn to kill humans thats a fucking shitty justification, if its just "welp theres the thrill of it" then under that logic why dont more people practice cannibalism in that setting?

The majority of vampires in literature (not sure about various mythologies) can drink without killing.

Dunno why they couldn't do it like in WoD where they have to drink but it's very difficult to stop yourself feeding before you kill your bloodbag.

Same in the Witcher Universe, high-tier Vamps don't even need blood but they just drink it to get crunk

>thats a fucking shitty justification
Hardly. It works for every other monster, user. Even the ones that are just normal, everyday run of the mill non-supernatural psychotics skinning their victims to create their formal wear for the debutante ball.

What you want is monsters who don't act like monsters. That's a subversion, not the standard operating model.

>Lions can be tamed and trained, though.
That doesn't mean they no longer need to eat.

Forget literature, go historical!

smithsonianmag.com/history/the-great-new-england-vampire-panic-36482878/

...

You, user, need to have a nice chat with Robbie

Couple months back actually. Manga did at least.

obligatory youtube.com/watch?v=xkR2XEYEFgk

They never make a point to go after the strongest humans, not for their blood anyway.

So you are pretending a creature has free will and then immediately robbing it from it by implying its inherently evil instead of just beign honest with what you want out of them, thats shitty writing

Well damn. Guess I gotta sort through the /a/ archives then

Is she yawning or flailing that sword at me. Its difficult to tell.

Either way I don't think my dick minds much

She's yawning. The sword was for that armored guy lying on the floor behind her.

Presumably he died too easily and she's bored.

Considering philosophers still argue whether non-vampire humans even have free will what does that have to do with anything?

The point is why not just go for "my vampires are just inherently evil" instead of "my vampires totally have the agency to not be evil, but they still all are and Im an idiot who cant come up with a convincing reason for it"

Possibly. Like any species if you take the power out from under them and keep them in check as a slave, they may redeem themselves.

The point is you can do that if you're so inclined, and why not? But don't expect your version to become the new template. They were created as monsters. Their entire mythos is monsters. Even if it did threads like this would be replaced with, "Can vampires ever be irredeemable assholes?"

Who was the guy who did the soldier vampires, vices, virtues, and werewolves. I forget his name

Not in D&D

So you dont have a point at all then

Not if they are female and you are trying to waifu them.

What if they are male and I'm trying to waifu them?
Shota vampires are criminally underrepresented!

It's the only one needed because, hey, it's the actual fact of the matter. But hey, if you want to keep tilting at windmills by all means go to Bram Stoker's grave and start reading him your "how vampires shoulda been, doge" manifesto.

It's a power point presentation, dammit! He'll have to respect that! You'll all respect it!

What is a shota? (flings his wine glass aside) A miserable little pile of fetishes!

...

I prefer to call them a malleable pile of young eagerness.

>get turned
>go eat madmen, terrorists and murderers and vampires that kill innocent people
It's not that hard.

pretty sure Underworld did.
That Van Helsing series does.

Discworld did and that's all Veeky Forums really needs to accept it.

A better question is: Can OP be redeemed?

its not that great an analogy.
Vampires only need blood to to feed. you can take some of a person (or animals, most settings seem to let vampires drink animal blood as well) blood without harming them.
you can't take some of an animals meat to feed a lion without harming the animal.

arguably it makes the more monstrous. Not needing to kill people but doing so anyway.

Arguably, yea. The thread touched on that a bit though personally I think it's more a metaphysical distinction that largely falls to scoring extra evil points that doesn't actually mean anything (to most people). An interesting topic for philosophical debate but surely doesn't matter to the victim whether it's a human trying to kill them or a soulless undead.

It helps that vampires don't need to actually feed on blood in Discworld, thought Reformed vampires start to lose some of their powers. Their weaknesses are also largely psychological, too.

That said one of the books (I hate to say I can't recall which one) did stress that a certain type of people find being a vampire's "dinner companion" quite enjoyable.

Classically no because there's no person there to redeem. The Vampire was an improperly buried corpse and so the person's soul/essence isn't even left in the Vampire to redeem. Other versions must necessarily renounce God or commit other unforgivable sins to obtain their powers, which if we're talking the Christian God means they're damned, yet more modern iterations have no supernatural spiritual element and are simply afflicted with a biological disease. In those cases there's no spiritual element to be redeemed.

with a stake up the ass yes

They're people enough, at least in their reactions. Arguably you could psychologically condition them. Might make for an interesting story, especially as a period piece since Pavlov did his experiments in the 1890s.

Basically you capture a vampire and every time you feed it human blood you subject it to negative stimuli. Sunlight, fire, garlic, holy symbols, whatever works. Give it animal blood and subject it to positive stimuli. Potentially you don't even need animal and human blood to be distinguishable by taste, though you could "flavor" the blood so the vampire can tell the difference during early conditioning. You could even go so far as to taint the human blood with small amounts of garlic powder and holy water (whichever works) to induce sickness but not kill it. Keep going until the very thought of human blood becomes physically repulsive to the vampire.

Nurture CAN beat nature, especially when the nurture is beaten in.

>Extremely wealthy noble uses trained vampires instead of hunting dogs.

Why would you want to redeem such a delicious devilish creature? Are you a cleric by chance?

>species
Vampires are supernatural dude.

Probably a cleric. Paladins are busy making, "Succubi redeem yes/no?" threads.

I've read that Pavlovian responses are weak with humans and the conditioning doesn't last, so probably the same for vampires if we consider vampires as human-enough. Still this isn't necessarily regular Pavlov, this is conditioning via presumably long-term torture. In which case it would be more lasting, especially if you subject it to periodic reinforcement for the conditioning.

This surely wouldn't work with every vampire, and even with the ones it does work on there would be a certain population where recidivism rates are higher. You don't need it to work with every vampire, just on enough for whatever purpose you desire them for.

This is one of those stories were it turns out that the humans are the greater monsters all along, like they're using their conditioned vampires to lure in other vamps with the stories of a promised land/great rewards and it's too late for the new vamp to back out once they're attached to the electrodes.

What would we call this? Clockwork Red? Oh no, wait, Clockwork Crimson. The alliteration makes it cooler.

...

It depends on how you define "redeemed."

Redeeming a vampire is kind of like redeeming a pedophile. Sure, a vampire can stop being a complete asshole. Given time, you could probably walk a vampire through how his actions hurt other people, and how good is different from evil, and that self sacrifice can sometimes be beneficial. If he hasn't killed, you may even mistake him for a good person.

Vampires don't have souls, though. There's nothing behind their eyes that accepts you as a person with the same moral worth as them. That human bundle of empathy and kindness has been hollowed out of them and replaced with hunger and malice. Much like how pedophiles are incapable of not lusting after children, vampires can't not want to murder you and drink your blood. It's a part of what they are.

> "We were made to dominate. The will to power is in our blood. You feel it in yourself, do you not? I can be trusted. I know this. But they do not. Onikaan ni ov dovah. It is always wise to mistrust a dovah. I have overcome my nature only through meditation and long study of the Way of the Voice. No day goes by where I am not tempted to return to my inborn nature. Zin krif horvut se suleyk. What is better - to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?"

requiem chevalier vampire?

Being fair this is less redeemed than domesticated.

Well, you got quite a few already but here's another one.

Depends on the Setting.

In some settings vampirism is just a desease/mutation, as long as you manage to keep it stable you can be a good guy.
In settings that have vampires as evil entities or selfishness incarnate you can make them redeemable through acts of goodness or selflessness, usually in a Redemption Means Death kind of scenario.
If soulessness is the cause one can suck a soul back from the beyond in order to either cure the vampirism or turn the vampire good.
Just use your imagination.

I like the idea of vampires that don't want to harm people, but what if the vampires need not only blood but also the soul of their victims?

Drinking blood to give them some nourishment and drinking souls to keep their fleeting soul anchored to their undead body, preventing them from turning into mindless undead monsters under the control of whatever entity created them, if any.

Angel/Buffy has redeemed vampires who don't even have souls, Angel is a exception due to curse and a bad example.

Harmony and Dracula both end up living morally acceptable 'non evil' unlives despite being soulless monsters, both of them just learn how to function acceptably in society.

Arguably the demon that replaced Harmony's soul might end up in heaven seeing as after the final ep of the show she ended up doing a massive amount of good and intentionally saved many thousands of lives.

It may be different in the comics, but I just remember that Dracula was less of an asshole than most vampires and had a sense of fair play. Course he also had auto-resurrection. The whole episode was largely played for laughs so I guess that fits. I know some people actively ignore it given she, eventually, let Dracula go after chastising him about turning into mist and escaping early forcing him to retreat back into "death."

Harmony is a far iffier case given she was just trying to fit in for a job she needed and ultimately betrayed Angel. She's probably not getting that reference letter.

>WoD
No, they are corpses fuelled by tainted blood and a ravenous clawing beast infests every thought.
They might be able to ascend but they can't ever be 'redeemed'
>D&D
Depends on the vamp but generally no since they are big shits who enjoy draining levels
>Warhammer
Super no

>Super no
Ulrika?