Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The tag implication #37617 vampire -> undead has been rejected.
Reason: According to the wiki page of vampire, to Wikipedia and to common sense, vampires are undead beings.
EDIT: The tag implication vampire -> undead (forum #305096) has been rejected by @Millcore.
Updated by auto moderator
While the classical version of a vampire is an undead creature, that doesn't necessarily mean *all* vampires are undead.
drakkenfyre said:
While the classical version of a vampire is an undead creature, that doesn't necessarily mean *all* vampires are undead.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
drakkenfyre said:
While the classical version of a vampire is an undead creature, that doesn't necessarily mean *all* vampires are undead.
These are broad categories.
The exact same argument could be made about zombies (disease), ghouls (mutated humans in Shadowrun), etc. Doesn't mean that we should stop tagging them as undead.
drakkenfyre said:
While the classical version of a vampire is an undead creature, that doesn't necessarily mean *all* vampires are undead.
What would be an example of a non-undead vampire?
What does an undead look like?
watsit said:
What does an undead look like?
I was just about to ask that. The typical "mottled flesh, bare bones" that would be zombies and skeletons wouldn't describe a vampire... would sharp teeth and pallor (a vampire's fangs and pale skin) be enough to be labeled undead?
gattonero2001 said:
What would be an example of a non-undead vampire?
Off the top of my head, say I create an OC that's an anthro vampire bat. Sucks blood, is a vampire, but isn't necessarily undead. Yes probably 90% of the cases for a vampire will be undead, but not necessarily all. I'd be willing to bet within a month of the implication being implemented someone would be coming in complaining that their character isn't undead, and wants the tag removed.
Updated
drakkenfyre said:
Off the top of my head, say I create an OC that's an anthro vampire bat. Sucks blood, is a vampire, but isn't necessarily undead. Yes probably 90% of the cases for a vampire will be undead, but not necessarily all. I'd be willing to bet within a month of the implication being implemented someone would be coming in complaining that their character isn't undead, and wants the tag removed.
vampire_bat is a separate tag and does not imply undead. Your hypothetical character would not be tagged vampire either, since it would have to be undead to fit the definition of "vampire" used by the wiki.
gattonero2001 said:
Your hypothetical character would not be tagged vampire either, since it would have to be undead to fit the definition of "vampire" used by the wiki.
So if the character's lore stated they died and are a perfectly-preserved reanimated corpse, it'd then qualify for undead/vampire despite looking the same? That doesn't sound very TWYS-ish. How do you visually distinguish an undead character from a living one?
gattonero2001 said:
vampire_bat is a separate tag and does not imply undead. Your hypothetical character would not be tagged vampire either, since it would have to be undead to fit the definition of "vampire" used by the wiki.
The wiki also goes into pretty specific details that don't apply to all vampires. E.g. sired lesser vampires being little more than zombies, the whole process of initially becoming a vampire, etc.
It looks like it was written based on a specific source of lore. If it included vampires dying from exposure to sunlight, does that mean that the ones from Twilight (I know, gag) wouldn't be tagged as vampires based on the wiki, then?
The tag implication vampire -> undead (forum #305096) has been rejected by @Millcore.
