Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I am working on re-writing something and possibly publishing it...
In the original writing I made it about Cain the First Vampire', but it was also set in the World of Darkness Setting. I want to avoid White Wolf Lawyers so...is there reference to Cain being a Vampire before Vampire: The Mascarade?

My Google-Foo sucks...

Copyright does not protect general ideas like "Cain was a vampire". You might be accused of being unoriginal if you don't make the story your own, but there's nothing the lawyers can do about it.

 Peregrine wrote:
Copyright does not protect general ideas like "Cain was a vampire". You might be accused of being unoriginal if you don't make the story your own, but there's nothing the lawyers can do about it.

Thanks

Yeah. Unoriginal, but not anything that could be litigated against you. I'd still recommend something else, because it isn't a new idea and it's pretty unlikely you're going to get more blood out of that stone, so to speak.

 curran12 wrote:
Yeah. Unoriginal, but not anything that could be litigated against you. I'd still recommend something else, because it isn't a new idea and it's pretty unlikely you're going to get more blood out of that stone, so to speak.

It may not be original, but I think most of my other ideas are, besides what was the last original Hollywood Idea?

What is the idea, exactly?

 curran12 wrote:
What is the idea, exactly?

Well at one point they end up at Castle Dracula (I know, vampire story, Dracula...) where they find that Dracula was not a Vampire, but the worlds greatest Vampire Slayer. He had found a cure for Vampireism, Impalement. This would free the soul to return to God...does not make him any less sane.

I'd also avoid bringing Lilith anywhere into the mix. Besides also part of the oWoD fluff, she is used pretty heavily in pop culture as a vampire originator.

Dracula as a slayer is interesting. Have you researched impalement to see if earlier cultures practiced it on corpses? If so perhaps you could weave that into your backstory as where ol' Drac learned of the cure.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I'd also avoid bringing Lilith anywhere into the mix. Besides also part of the oWoD fluff, she is used pretty heavily in pop culture as a vampire originator.

Dracula as a slayer is interesting. Have you researched impalement to see if earlier cultures practiced it on corpses? If so perhaps you could weave that into your backstory as where ol' Drac learned of the cure.

No plans on lilith, never cared for her anyways.
As far as how he learnd...if I can find an appropriate place.

Originality is over-rated.

Can your writing pull it off? If so then go for it.

 Easy E wrote:
Originality is over-rated.

Can your writing pull it off? If so then go for it.

I don't know if I agree with your first statement, but I do agree with your second statement. Strong writing can make even the most re-hashed and tired subject interesting. I think it bears mentioning that if a writer plans on using familiar ideas/characters then they have to be aware of what they the author, and their readers, know of the established tropes and where the author can insert their own take on those themes.

Tarantino movies are a good example of that in play. His movies usually pay homage to a film genre, and he plays with the established tropes in that genre, but he also makes each film unique to that genre in his own way. He borrows but adds in a satisfying way (for some at least).

I do think it is harder to re-tread old ground if only because reader expectations are more entrenched. The pay off can be spectacular, though. Apocalypse Now is a good example, taking Conrad's "Heart of Darkness"and placing the narrative and themes in the Vietnam War. But it comes with risks.

Just using the name "Dracula" in a story immediately attaches all sorts of baggage to the character in a reader's mind that wouldn't necessarily be present if the same exact character, functioning in the same capacity in the story, but was named something else.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Originality is over-rated.

Can your writing pull it off? If so then go for it.

I don't know if I agree with your first statement, but I do agree with your second statement. Strong writing can make even the most re-hashed and tired subject interesting. I think it bears mentioning that if a writer plans on using familiar ideas/characters then they have to be aware of what they the author, and their readers, know of the established tropes and where the author can insert their own take on those themes.

Tarantino movies are a good example of that in play. His movies usually pay homage to a film genre, and he plays with the established tropes in that genre, but he also makes each film unique to that genre in his own way. He borrows but adds in a satisfying way (for some at least).

I do think it is harder to re-tread old ground if only because reader expectations are more entrenched. The pay off can be spectacular, though. Apocalypse Now is a good example, taking Conrad's "Heart of Darkness"and placing the narrative and themes in the Vietnam War. But it comes with risks.

Just using the name "Dracula" in a story immediately attaches all sorts of baggage to the character in a reader's mind that wouldn't necessarily be present if the same exact character, functioning in the same capacity in the story, but was named something else.

Castle Dracula does not come up till about 1/3 to 1/2 of the way though the story and the plan is to just play with the Tropes there.
The main focus it the Investigation Team finds themselves chasing Cain all across Europe or at least looking for the Mcgufin that is needed to stop him while trying to figure out what Cain is up to.
Each 'Chapter' will focus on some specific things and some trying to turn some Tropes on their ear. My only worry is that I try to do to much of that...

Ahh, the World of Darkness. I played around a lot with this setting when V:TM was the newest edition. I forget what it is called now, for it is dead to me.

I ran a campaign briefly where I messed around with their backstory. The characters would find out later in the story that it was actually Abel, not Cain who was the first Vampire. God had never intended for Man to know Death, so when Cain killed Abel, he had not prepared for it and as a result, Abel became the first Vampire.

Cain, being the first person to kill, was overcome with grief. He could not stand the pain and emotions. Before he could kill himself, God stopped him and cursed him to kill forever. Cain became the first Werewolf.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Ahh, the World of Darkness. I played around a lot with this setting when V:TM was the newest edition. I forget what it is called now, for it is dead to me.

I ran a campaign briefly where I messed around with their backstory. The characters would find out later in the story that it was actually Abel, not Cain who was the first Vampire. God had never intended for Man to know Death, so when Cain killed Abel, he had not prepared for it and as a result, Abel became the first Vampire.

Cain, being the first person to kill, was overcome with grief. He could not stand the pain and emotions. Before he could kill himself, God stopped him and cursed him to kill forever. Cain became the first Werewolf.

That is a twist.

I do actually have everything 'Scripted out'.

I like the story in one of the movies where Dracula was Judas. Cain and Abel is a nice angle, though.

Does it keep the Anne Rice ripoff vamps? Because Twilight has pretty much neutered that line.

Keep in mind that originally werewolves and vampires weren't readily distinguishable from each other or the other myriad monsters and demons that people feared. Vampires may be unusually hairy or have other odd traits. And vampires were certainly not pretty. They were generally horrendous, a trait found throughout cultures from the druagr to moroi. They were often associated with witchcraft or dark magic.

Vampiric entities go back to legends of demonic blood drinkers in Mesopotamia. Lilith seems to be an adaptation of earlier myths regarding lilitu (demons) and enters Hebrew myth during the Baylonian period. This conception of Lilith seems to borrow heavily from concepts associated with Lamashtu as well including blood drinking/cannibalism and preying on mothers and babies. Lamia is a similar adaption by the Greeks.

Given that Cain and Abel are fictional personifications of agrarian and hunter gatherer tribal groups, it seems rather banal to have either as the "original vampire" as it assumes a simple literalness that also treats derivatives as sources. It also gives primacy to Judaistic and Christian traditions which seems odd as they don't actually talk about vampires.

I do like the angle of having Vlad the Impaler as a monster hunter. The idea that he was fighting enemies without as well as within and explains his brutality is interesting. What seems to be the cruel burning of beggars or impalement of political enemies was actually an attempt to contain an ancient and alien menace. Perhaps his line traces it's roots all the way back to those priests of Sumeria who fought or appeased such dark powers who had preyed on men since time immemorial. Perhaps vampires are those who tried to tap into dark forces through forbidden rites becoming something more and something less than human simultaneously.

 jmurph wrote:


Given that Cain and Abel are fictional personifications of agrarian and hunter gatherer tribal groups, it seems rather banal to have either as the "original vampire" as it assumes a simple literalness that also treats derivatives as sources. It also gives primacy to Judaistic and Christian traditions which seems odd as they don't actually talk about vampires.

Are you not familiar with Mark Rein-Hagen's Vampire: The Masquerade setting? It is entirely steeped in Judeo-Christian mythology while taking elements from earlier traditions to lend credibility and a sense of historicity to the fiction and setting.

I can't help but chuckle at the chastisement of contemporary vampire stories that don't conform to the specifics of the original folklore. Especially in a thread discussing the feasibility of using established fictional characters in a new manner.

There is no "correct" way to portray a vampire, werewolf, or mermaid, unless your aim is to honor the original sources.

Bram Stoker's Dracula character is so beloved because it doesn't hold entirely to the established (at the time) concepts of a vampire. While Stoker may have been subverting Victorian social mores about sexuality through his prose, he also re-imagined a monster and made it his own. Rice took that ball and ran further, and her characters of Louis, Lestat, Armand and others, are beloved because they offered new perspectives on an otherwise familiar monster (and again subverting the sexual mores of the time - bi-sexual male vampires kissing! Oh my, it is the 80's can we handle that?!).

Chuckle all you want, the authors you mentioned added something, they weren't just regurgitating a trope that has become a joke. Getting back to the origins can help to see why it endured, not as a mopey sexual superhero, but as a monster. Stoker updated the monster (and butchered the geography and history) but a monster it remained. Rice set the mold that modern depictions so slavishly follow.

Rein-Hagen basically just ported Rice's model to an RPG. And just because he incorporated a heavy dose of Judeo-Christian mythology doesn't mean every author should. That's what leads to the D&D effect and just produces a bunch of bad, poorly researched fantasy. Like Twilight. It rejects the original folklore out of ignorance and substitutes its own banality.

It's why the OP's idea is interesting. Bringing Vlad back to his roots as a cultural hero, albeit a brutal one. Vampires as an ancient menace fits much better than vampires as a sex metaphor which is the current standard. It also allows the author to expand beyond the limited Western view of Christianity as a constraint on mythology and get into threats darker and older. What if the Babylonians, like the Sumerians before them, struggled against the threat long before the myth of Cain and Abel? A threat that traces its origins to the primal origins of man. A predator who whispers in the dark. Unearthly entities that offer great power and demand great sacrifice. Some serve, some die, and some fight.

As far as my Vampires go, they will probably be a mix of Traditional (The Universal 5), Blade (Without the Super Burning Effect, though it is cool) and...I forgot the name, but the one with the town nor of the Arctic Circle.

The Werewolves will be a mix of White Wolf's (The Clan Thing) and the Howling (Infection for the 1st Generation and then being able to breed true).

I am copping out on the group of Mages and just calling them 'The Order'. But the magic will be more on the levels of Indiana Jones. Subtle and light with the occasional powerful artifact like The Spear of Vlad.

 jmurph wrote:
Chuckle all you want, the authors you mentioned added something, they weren't just regurgitating a trope that has become a joke. Getting back to the origins can help to see why it endured, not as a mopey sexual superhero, but as a monster. Stoker updated the monster (and butchered the geography and history) but a monster it remained. Rice set the mold that modern depictions so slavishly follow.

Your original post seemed to indicate that only the folklore should be followed which is why I was chuckling. But now you are saying something different.

So which is it? Did Stoker/Rice/et al add to the vampire myth or not? You seem to be saying two different things in the same paragraph. Rice's vampires are still monsters, just pretty ones. I haven't read the Twilight books and I've only seen a few of the movies, but the vampires (at least the antagonists) are still monstrous in that they kill humans and secretly lord over them in the shadows. Off the top of my head the only non-monstrous vampire I can think of at the moment is Bunnicula and that is a children's story.

Even if you don't like Twilight, or Vampire Diaries, or any of the other "Anne Rice ripoff vamps" that are in popular media, they still hold the vampire as a monstrous creature that steals its vitality from others. It is a parasite, either physically, sexually, or both. As you pointed out those aspects of vampirism have a long tradition in cultures around the world. As does the sexual component evidenced by the Incubus/Succubus entities that are often associated with vampires. So all of these modern interpretations of vampires are doing exactly what you are advocating, but yet are still doing it wrong? I am confused.

 jmurph wrote:
Rein-Hagen basically just ported Rice's model to an RPG. And just because he incorporated a heavy dose of Judeo-Christian mythology doesn't mean every author should.

I don't think anyone in this thread said that.

The OP brought up Cain because his idea was originally connected to V:TM. No one said that Cain *had* to be the first vampire, that is just how OP's story was originally structured. If Anpu42 wants Cain (or Abel, or Noah, or Ezekiel) to be the vampire originator in his story, so what?

Have the vampires expanding until they become hunted...by Predator...

Cain was the original father of all vampires in the Vampire the Masquerade setting. All vampires after him were the second generation etc.

 Generalstoner wrote:
Cain was the original father of all vampires in the Vampire the Masquerade setting. All vampires after him were the second generation etc.

I know, I played 1st Edition. For my story I am trying to get away from White Wolf/Black Dog.

 Frazzled wrote:
Have the vampires expanding until they become hunted...by Predator...

...I'd read that.

 jmurph wrote:

What if the Babylonians, like the Sumerians before them, struggled against the threat long before the myth of Cain and Abel? A threat that traces its origins to the primal origins of man. A predator who whispers in the dark. Unearthly entities that offer great power and demand great sacrifice. Some serve, some die, and some fight.

Now that, sir, is a story.

@ the OP- research as many vampiric myths as possible, and harvest bits of truth as your own. Watch John Carpenter's Vampires. That was the one where the vampire was Judas, and they tied his betrayal into his silver vulnerability. The more ideas you can find, the more interesting your portrayal is. A post like jmurph's should be considered very valuable- because you could go spend hours researching just the myths he mentioned. Once you extend the idea of a vampire to an entity that has blood sacrificed to it, you could even put a South American vampire into the mix. Perhaps the Aztecs really had to keep tearing the hearts out of victims because they were controlled by vampires that still dwell within the heart of the rainforests, or long lost temples.

Look back to history as well- what did people really do to try to stop vampires?
http://www.livescience.com/48924-mystery-of-vampire-burials-solved.html
Would it work, and why?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/13/vampire-grave-bulgaria_n_5973064.html

And why do the Polish people drive rocks into their mouths and place sickles around their necks, while the Bulgarians favor iron stakes through the heart?

With your Vlad Tepes, Vampire Hunter angle- was the staking the fatal portion of the treatment, the inevitable exposure to the sun, or both?

I also highly recommend a Discovery of Witches, by Deborah Harkness. The author spends a fair bit of time on witchcraft, but vampires appear as antagonists of varying levels.

By no means feel obligated to answer these questions here- these are the sort of things to ponder in your story and let your understanding of the folklore and archaeological record color your brand of vampire. Keep us posted!