Vampire: The Masquerade
Exchange ideas, questions and stories about Vampire: The Masquerade.75 Post(s) on this Topic
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/12/2004 16:22:34 - N/AThere seems, at least to me, to be ample evidence that Saulot and Malkav were one and the same. (At least in theory). Please follow:
1. We know the sire of Saulot (or, rather, that he walked with his sire to discuss religion and philosophy). We know little about Malkav's sire, if anything.
2. Assuming Saulot gave rise to the Baali, a reasonable assumption, then it shows the breadth of the blood, so to speak (that is, his blood could give rise to such differentiated individuals as saints and demons).
3. There are hints in some of the Dark Ages books that he was easily enraged. There are also hints that he could show dispassion that would make an elder vampire seem like a cry-baby.
4. According to the Book of Nod, only Saulot could calm Malkav's madness -- which would make sense if Saulot WAS Malkav.
5. There are few mentions of any 4th generation Malkavians to my knowledge, and, likewise, few 4th generation Salubri (not that either of these are strong arguments, just interesting asides).
That's all I can think of at the moment. I'm sure there are more, but I'm right tired at the moment. G'night.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/12/2004 16:27:10 - N/AHe sired three blood lines (depending on how you count them). There was the Baali, Salubri (Healers and Warriors) , and the Wu Zai (Eastern Salubri that are a completely different culture but practicly identical mechanics.)
As far as the Malks, I would debate it; but don't know enough about their history to engage in a fair debate / conversation. I can however tell you that if you can argue that old Sal thought he could reach enlightenment through the Malks he could have had something to do with it. The Salubri, Baali, and eastern brethern were all "experiments" in reaching enlightenment and the paths to it. I could see an arguement for "clarity through madness" approach to enlightenment, but it doesn't seem likely to me.
But, I wouldn't be the expert to really know.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/12/2004 16:28:51 - N/AInteresting theory. But here is my two punch KO of the theory.
First punch,
How can brothers be the same person?
Stuns the target making it weave a little bit.
Second punch,
Set is said to be a brother of Saulot and Malkav. Thus indicating that Saulot and Malkav are individuals otherwise it would have been stated differently.
The target sees the floor jump at him as he lands on the ground.
Now, that is an interesting idea. And I would be inclinded to use it if I run an alternate WoD chronicle.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
PsyOpMstr - 08/12/2004 16:32:20 - N/Ashould be a very convincing one two its in the Malkavian Revised Clanbook. The story of Malkav's early times as a vampire when he used to walk with his brothers Set and Salout. Malkav put blood onto his finger and smeared it onto salout's forehead giving him the third eye.
also to add another argument against. Reading the Gehenna book Malkav became the Malkavian madness network and Saulot has taken over Tremere's body after his diablerie.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/12/2004 16:44:10I think they are two seperate entities. :D
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/12/2004 16:44:55PsyOpMstr, makes better points then I do. More relevant points using actual WoD events that are verifiable then my points of ancient history that is mostly story.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/12/2004 16:45:41 - N/AI do agree -- they are separate individual. Merely stimulating conversation.
Now, as for the one, two punch:
Jacob and Esau are said to be brothers in the bible, yet in WoD they are the same person (he dodges). Set is said to be the brother of Saulot and Malkav? You're making my point right there -- not Malkav is said to be the brother of the other two, or Saulot of Set and Malkav.. Besides, even if they take long bloody walks together in the park, that STILL doesn't mean Set wasn't basically talking to one person with two personalities.
As for the eye thing -- do your arms reach to your forehead? Thought so. Now draw a circle.
Uhm.. I really dont have a good response for your last comment, tho, except to say, maybe Auspex...? Saulot finally forced Malkav out into the MMN, which allowed him to focus all attention on Tremere? Who knows. Magic and logic are ill-advised companions.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
James Spencer - 08/12/2004 17:00:25 - N/A
By that logic then Set has also has be another of Malkav personalities as they were considered brothers in the ancient nights. There is also good proof that they were physically seperate beings.
How can Saulot be disblerized if Malkav still has a body at that point? This is in the dark Ages.
Haqim own writings never states that Saulot/Malkav were one being and I think he would qrite it down if it was true. Being that he valued scholorship as well as the blade.
As for Saulot being able to ease Malkav madness that not proof of sameness just a use of a healing discipline.
Caine if you go by the Enryines Fragmenst was the one who gave Saulot his third eye as a mark that he upheld Rafeal promise of salavtion.
Mentioning Jacob.Esu is not proof that Saulot and Malkav are one and the same.
You can't use one cainite as proof that there sire must be the same.
Stick to there verifiable facts at hand.
I also know that that the Followers Of Set viewed as a divieded person.
Though they were referring to the creation of the Baali, the two castes of his Salburi clan and becoming part of Tremere clan by use of a level 8 discipline.
They were referring to the contradiction his goals.
That on one hand he battles demon, yet he sired a clan of demonic vampires.
He viewed himself as a healer but encourage martial skills in many of his childer.
He sought out golconda but chooses to lose it.
He seeks out enlightment with the Cathyans but betrays them.
He viewed himself as a healer but made many of his childer such as Samial seek out combat training from Gangrel and Haqium and even Brujah.
And there is mention of of other 4th generation Salburi.
Such as Enosh Of Jersualam.
The main reason that there is few of them as I imagine he is quite particular of whom he brings into the clan.
There is plenty of record mentioning 4th generation malkavian such as Emmlich The Dammed and many others in the revised Malkavian cb.
I think your reaching with this.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/12/2004 17:35:23 - N/AThus far I have yet to read ANYTHING verifiable. All of this reaches so far back into history that it might as well be myth.
As for the 4th Generation... who knows how the embrace -- or magic -- work?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/12/2004 17:43:38>>There is plenty of record mentioning 4th generation malkavian such as Emmlich The Dammed and many others in the revised Malkavian cb.<<
He isn't Malkavian nor is he 4th Generation. Children of the Night shows this. He could be ANYTHING.
As for Malkav/Saulot. In lair of the Hidden, Saulot is still walking the earth the same time as Malkav is supposed to be the Malkavian Madness Network.
You can't be incorperal and corpera at the same time.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/12/2004 20:48:17 - N/A>>You can't be incorperal and corpera at the same time.<<
Don't tell that to any Christians.. The whole concept of Christ walking the earth while God and the Holy Spirit are, well, incorporeal is, uhm... yeah.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/12/2004 21:32:18 - N/A>>Don't tell that to any Christians.. The whole concept of Christ walking the earth while God and the Holy Spirit are, well, incorporeal is, uhm... yeah.<<
There is a reason why they do mention its one thing we mortals cannot fathom.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
MrGonev5 - 08/13/2004 01:27:40So if Salout and Malkav were indeed one and the same, which clan, Salubri or Malkavian would be considered the bloodline?
I mean, at one point, both were considered full fledged clans (until the Tremere wiped out the Salubri), but if they both had the same clan founder, which is the clan and which is the bloodline?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 01:37:41 - N/AI personally would say both. They both descend from an Antediluvian, after all...otherwise, I'd say probably the Malkavians, since they didn't get their asses handed them :0)
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 02:14:12>>Jacob and Esau are said to be brothers in the bible, yet in WoD they are the same person (he dodges). Set is said to be the brother of Saulot and Malkav? You're making my point right there -- not Malkav is said to be the brother of the other two, or Saulot of Set and Malkav.. Besides, even if they take long bloody walks together in the park, that STILL doesn't mean Set wasn't basically talking to one person with two personalities.<<
Kinder I have no idea where you picked up your arguement style but you seriously need to think about something before you type it.
You Jacob/Esau example would be correct if Saulot/Malkav if they were the same individual with two personalities. But your Jacob/Esau example is missing an independent verifiable party that Jacob/Esau lacks, Set. Set is a third individual Jacob/Esau does not have but Saulot and Malkav do have.
James Spencer made some points which were close to what I was going to make but I am glad they were not my points.
So Kinder you keep shooting down forumites proof that they are individuals where is your proof that they are? You have ideas an theories but no proof. Let FoBC and House Tremere tell you about the proof that Malkav and Saulot are different. Let CbR Malkavian and LotH tell you proof about Malkavian and Saulot are not the same.
But more importantly Kinder I want you to tell me what every Salubri's derangement is in their bio when they are traited. Every Malkavian has to have a derangement so tell me Kinder what are every published Salubri's derangement. Answer that and I will agree with your theory, your idea.
Oh, Kindred the moment you use the word Bloodline when describing your attempt to prove your theory is the second you lose. You should know the difference between Clan and Bloodline.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
James Spencer - 08/13/2004 02:51:01For the people who have yet to understand what a clan is and what a bloodline is.
Here goes.
A clan is one in which a kindred can trace his or her lineage to a third generation vampire.
A Bloodline can be a clan that has lost it's clan sire and has been reduced to such an insignifcant size that they are little more then myth such as the True Brujah and the Baali.
Or a group of vampires who can't trace there hertiage to a 3rd generation cainite but at best to a 5th generation one such as The Najaraga.
The True Brujah, Salubri, Cappodicans were clans who founders were destroyed by amarath and were scattered to the four corners of the earth.
You don't see or hear much of the True Brujah as they keep a very low profile and have rarely comprimised there standards of who they decide to embrace thus the small numbers.
Likewise with the Salburi.
The Cappadocions and the Salburi still exist but with the clans that replaced them still wanting them gone. Keeping a low profile is more important then doing sucide battles.
The Najaraga can be considered a true bloodline as we don't know who there clan founder is. As they were a group of Eathontous mages who foolishly experiemented with cainite vitiae and became vampires without being directly embraced.
Though I'm sure some st who actually used them hinted that maybe they traced there lineage to the Cappadocions.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
MrGonev5 - 08/13/2004 04:16:22 - N/ABasically, I consider any clan of vampires that lost their clan founder a bloodline.
So any remaining cappadocians, as well as any Salubri are no longersidered a clan, but a bloodline.
Tho it could be said they are psuedo-clans, since they at one time did have an antedulivian at the top of their lineage.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 05:49:02James Spencer, I like you but your helping the contender know information they should be schooled on when they are attempting to make their case hehe. See my plan was to let the contender put out his theory and then educate him on the difference between bloodline and clan. The question and statement was loaded and I was patiently waiting to pull the trigger. You just had to go and foil this "Dr Evil" plot grrrr LOL!
STHBR talks specifically about bloodlines. Mentioning in black and white (telgar) that the Giovanni were a bloodline before becoming a clan.
Well since my loaded question is foiled *shoots James Spencer a evil stare, LOL!*, I will have to think of a more clever loaded question to make the point.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
James Spencer - 08/13/2004 07:58:22 - N/ASome people need to be educated Elisa.
Anyway Kinder here's the final nails to your theory of Saulot being also Malkav.
Tremere who does Saulot in by amarath in the early dark ages whenever he would have control over his body again would have told his clan that the Malkavians are also of Saulot and to include them in there list of targets of exetrimination.
Yet the Tremere clan never go after them. This clan has always had standing order to destroy all those who are of Saulot lineage.
Far to many clans all agree that Malkav and Saulot are not dual personalities of the same enitity.
The Followers Of Set, Nosferatu, True Brujah, Assamites, Ventrue and the Toreador all agree on this.
The other clans just don't care.
Speaking of Toreador, she is supossed to be the twuin sister of Malkav and she would know her brother alot more intimately then the others and would mention that he is also Saulot.
You know I'm almost tempted to do a bad spoof of this using the third generation telling there direct childer that Saulot is also Malkav.
Good example of this would be.
Haqium at Alamut talking to Sharara, Uri-Shurgi, Jamal, and Mankchea.
"My childer I have a secret to reveal....... Saulot is also Malkav."
Or having Samial, Enosh of Salburi, then having Nergal, Molock of the Baali clan hanging out for saulot to tell them the big secret.
"My childer I'm also apprantly Malkav."
Or my Favorite Tremere
"Good Ettrius, Goatrix, Eliane, Lotharious and the rest of my cast of ulimately forgettable kindred. I have learned that Saulot whom I consumed those many centuries ago is also Malkav."
Anyway there is far to much proof that discounts your theory of them being a spilt personality.
Tremere being one of the biggest clinchers.
If you had posted is Troile and True Brujah is one and the same. You might have had a leg to stand on. As in there revised clanbook.
They also strongly consider that idea.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 08:13:42 - N/AIt is not necessary that one personality know of any others. There are numerous cases in history where this is true. Maybe Tremere 'diablerized' Saulot, who wasn't aware that Malkav was there (thus making Tremere insane as well, which explains what appears to be obsession with order on the part of all Tremere).
Or maybe Tremere didn't see anything wrong with some nutbags running around, but demon-killing, three-eyed weirdos... well, that could be a problem.
Or maybe Saulot, in HIS lucid moments within Tremere's body, said, "I need to get rid of this part of my blood, but not this part... and I cant even find the Baali, but still...). (Although admittedly, Tremere seemed to have little trouble with the antitribu.)
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
James Spencer - 08/13/2004 08:48:19 - N/ATell me Kinder have you even read the VTM books what so ever?
I also noted you ignored all the proof we and the others have supplied you.
You have not to this point proved to have any credible evidence to back your theory.
Yes sometimes other personalities are unaware of the others.
I think a kindred with auspex 10 or greater would discern that two clan sires are in fact one person with two personalities.
Auspex is an extremely effective invesitagtive power at the higher levels.
Tremere wanted all of Saulot lineage gone lest they might join forces decide to extreimate his brood.
So it would make no sense that keeping the lunatics around esspecially when they seem to have an eerie way of learning a clans inner workings.
Secrecry is the Tremere stock and trade and they don't want anyone outside there line to know what really goes on in there clan.
You mentioned that the Tremere are obessed with order.
That's to be expected when half a dozen clans all want there collective heads on a pike and presenting a unified front is the only means of survival. Those early experiences made a lasting impression of the young ursuper clan that they can only trust themselves and not the others.
It's not a mental derangment. However mix in the partial blood bonding with the Inner Council and you get a reinforced notion of order that mingles down to the lowest neonates.
Saulot is a cold engima of a cainite but insane is something I never saw him as or that obvious in his plans.
So I repeat Saulot and Malkav are not dual personalities of a single cainite.
You have no proof. So conceed that you had a theory that was disproven by us and our facts.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 08:51:39 - N/ABy your own arguement you started with Saulot being the only one to calm Malkav's madness. So, if he calmed him, it wasn't just the emergence of a personality - it was an active attempt to help him. Besides, honestly tell me that someone who's specialty discipline involves the soul, cleansing it, healing, and repairing it would be oblivious to a having a fragmented soul?
I would have bought "Saulot had a nervous breakdown and "Malkav" emerged to create the Malkavians and then when Saulot got well enough to correct things he kicked the crazy shard of personality out....and somehow it found a home by becoming the madness network."
But you know what - it still won't explain everyone calling them brothers, or them walking and talking to each other. Which the walks above all else point out that they were aware of each other, and could not have been split personalities. (As the personalities are partitioned and unable to communicate with each other, in most cases not even aware the others exist at all. At best they are backseat drivers, only aware of who is doing what but not that they are the same person.....but still not able to "walk and talk with each other".)
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 09:03:05>>Tell me Kinder have you even read the VTM books what so ever?<<
All of them, with very few exceptions, and those I am attempting to acquire.
>>I aklso noted you ignored all the proof we and the others have supplied you.<<
You have not to this point proved to have any credible evidence to back your theory.
Nor need I do so. I am not arguing that I BELIEVE this theory; I am merely questioning whether it is POSSIBLE. I do not have to prove a negative -- I have only to suggest that your positive assertion isn't enough.
If you demand my personal opinion, I believe they were different individuals. I also believe there were more than thirteen Antediluvians. I also believe there were likely more than 3 members of the 2nd Generation, although that is based on shaky evidence.
>>I think a kindred with auspex 10 or greater would discern that two clan sires are in fact one person with two personalities.<< Ah, now THAT is a good argument. I hadn't really been considering all the highest-level powers of the ancients. I doubt it would even take Auspex Level 10... Normal soul-sight (2) would probably be enough to show that SOMETHING strange was happening.
>>Tremere wanted all of Saulot lineage gone lest they might join forces decide to extreimate his brood.<<
I disagree, in part. I think Saulot may have wanted the Salubri gone, as well, for various reasons (there are suggestions that this is the case -- where did I read a letter from one Salubri to another that said Saulot had gone mad and wanted to survive the "eastern wheel" by being totally evil during the 6th age, and totally good when the wheel returned to the first? Anyone remember? I think it may have been Clanbook Baali, but I could be mistaken).
>>So it would make no sense that keeping the lunatics around esspecially when they seem to have an eerie way of learning a clans inner workings.<<
As noted, an Antediluvian could blind his clan to whatever he wanted to blind them to, at least in all probability.
>>That's to be expected when half a dozen clans all want there collective heads on a pike and presenting a unified front is the only means of survival.<<
Granted.
>>Those early experiences made a lasting impression of the young ursuper clan that they can only trust themselves and not the others.<<
Perhaps. More likely that's a result of Jyhad.
>>Saulot is a cold engima of a cainite but insane is something I never saw him as or that obvious in his plans.<<
Strange, I always saw him as a little... disturbed.
I have heard a single strong argument against my suggestion. I hope that's not the ONLY thing... that would be depressing.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
James Spencer - 08/13/2004 09:05:15 - N/AI always saw Saulot as arrogant and a once maybe an idealist befere becoming a mainpulator who kept changing his goals when he saw his plans were not reaching the desired effect that they should have.
Anyway I think The Book Of Nod, The Enryines Fragments and every clan records on Saulot possibly being Malkav would be mentioned.
Even if both accounts are at best a bunch truths, halfs truths mixed in without lies.
Such as the generational curse along with the signature clan weaknesses.
If Saulot was spared from any curse, why does his clan have generation weakness.
When in fact all his childer should be potentinally as strong as him.
Anyway back to the topic at hand.
While there are limits to what Auspex can do I think the highest levels of that power should have mentioned at least a hint of such a possiblity of a dual personality clan sire.
While it wouldn't be without precendant.
One possible source is in the VTM supplements is that Troile/True Brujah are one and the same and that there was no amarath. Some support this as there is little to no info on Troile and that's he a spilt personality.
Which would make the True Brujah really question everything they know about there lineage and maybe call off there little Jyhad against the Rabble.
As for theries should't they have at least some foundation to stand upon. Such as verifable hints and such.
As for the second generation there might have been more. There was defintely at one time more then 13 grandchilder running around.
Certainly in the revised Toreador book, the narrator of the story said that before Enoch was sired.
Caine embraced two lovers whom uliimately killed themselves and forbid his other childer to refer to them.
This is why Nosferatu was hideusly disfigured for mentioning them.
Then again Tzismce claims credit for that, but most think he just puffing himself up as cainites of a equal or lower generation can undo the effects of a fiend alterations on there form.
It's not easy but it can be done.
Come to to think of it there at least three or more version of why Nosferatu looks the way he does.
There might have been others certainly the old Assamite clan book tried to depict Haqim as a member of the second generation.
Now it appears they decided to make him a third generation cainite to aviod unnesscary trouble.
Tremere and Saulot I find them a match as they fit perfectly personality wise.
Being arrogant and ignorant of each other's conditions.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 09:05:47>>Being arrogant and ignorant of each other's conditions.<< Bet they're not ignorant of each others' conditions anymore. *G*
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 09:06:49Kinder you must be blind or ignorant or both. Here are some good points that you never contested.
>>You Jacob/Esau example would be correct if Saulot/Malkav if they were the same individual with two personalities. But your Jacob/Esau example is missing an independent verifiable party that Jacob/Esau lacks, Set. Set is a third individual Jacob/Esau does not have but Saulot and Malkav do have.<<
Good point number one.
>>So Kinder you keep shooting down forumites proof that they are individuals where is your proof that they are?<<
Good point number two.
>>But more importantly Kinder I want you to tell me what every Salubri's derangement is in their bio when they are traited. Every Malkavian has to have a derangement so tell me Kinder what are every published Salubri's derangement. Answer that and I will agree with your theory, your idea.<<
Good point number three.
Kinder, I am REALLY interested in your answer for derangement question.
Oh, Kinder. You said you read all of them, with very few exceptions. Well if you did you would know that Saulot wanted the Salubri to die. Not that he may have wanted the Salubri gone.
Your question as you mentioned is not that you believe it but that you are curious if it is a possibility. And from everything I have brought forward, including otherwise, indicates that it is not a possibility. Now granted it is a very interesting idea and I would probably use it in a different vampire chronicle I ran but from what I know from reading about a quarter of the books, not all as you mentioned, it is not possible.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 09:09:01 - N/A>>Kinder you must be blind or ignorant or both.<<
First, kindly resist with using insults. Set does possibly exist, though I have yet to see proof of that, either. I've seen prove that his childer exist, but other than that... that's hardly an independently verifiable fact. As I have noted several times now: logically, I have to prove nothing, merely disprove your assertions. I am not saying they ARE the same person; you are trying to prove they are NOT. Both are impossible tasks (so essentially we'll spin around endlessly, never getting anywhere). In answer to your question, however, I dont put forward any proof before I don't have any. I don't believe that Saulot is Malkav. It was a question for the sake of argument. Elenchus produces aporia... and apparently foaming at the mouth in your case. Yeesh. And Why must they all have derangements? As I said, do YOU know the way the Curse of Caine works? I doubt it. Maybe the madness gets passed on only when the Malkav personality is dominant, but when the Saulot personality is dominant some other trait (Valaren, for instance) is passed on. Ir maybe a million other things.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
TROLLROOT - 08/13/2004 09:09:39 - N/A>>I would have bought "Saulot had a nervous breakdown and "Malkav" emerged to create the Malkavians and then when Saulot got well enough to correct things he kicked the crazy shard of personality out....and somehow it found a home by becoming the madness network."<<
Irrespective of the original veracity, that would make an interesting Noddist speculation.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 09:23:22It would be a cool plot if you disregarded parts of canon while maintaining others.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 09:37:20Ok, I am offically confused, if you are not saying they are the same person what idea are you proposing? And why am I, and MANY other forumites, coming up with reasons why they are not the same person?
To end your attempt to dodge the topic you created. Is the idea/theory you presented that Saulot/Malkav the same person? Before you answer that you might want to read your first post.
I have no issue, and seemingly several other forumites, coming up with reasons why they are not the same person. But if that is not what your idea/theory is about what is it about then? Because I am sure me and several other forumites would like to know exactly what we have been coming up with reasons against this entire time?
In order to say that Set is not an individual you have to say the same thing about Malkav. Going by your logic. And if Sets childer are not proof that Set exists then the same thing goes for Malkav.
My loaded clan/bloodline question/statement still goes off, thanks Kinder.
Ok, in order for a member to be apart of a clan/bloodline they have to share the same weakness. As you must not be very versed in but I will help you with this. See, if Saulot and Malkav are the same individual all of Saulots childer (also Malkav's because they are the same vampire, from your theory) would have a derangement. You asked why do they all have to have a derangement. Well that is because every Malkavian is insane. They gain a derangement when Embraced. Now, a Bloodline is different from a Clan. How? Well when something happens to a member of the clan, magic potions, spirit rituals, embracing necromancers and the progenitor of new style of vampirism Embraces another they are not apart of the clan that the changed progenitor was from they are from the blood of the progenitor after its change. Now it is impossible for a vampire of 5th gen to be of the same bloodline if the progenitor of the bloodline is 6th. Because he is the beginning of the bloodline and 6th cannot Embrace a 5th gen vampire. Their can be none greater then him through Embrace.
Now I would be open to either Saulot or Malkav personality first creating the Salubri or Malkavians and then sometime down the road the Antediluvian Saukav or Mallot were to work with one of his childer, say 4th gen and change the vampire into a malkavian or salubri and having him learn Dementation or Valeran and that is how the other "clan" which is a bloodline at this point, the big point finisher is coming up, came into being from the same Antediluvian.
But that is where our problem lies. You see both Salubri (now bloodline) and Malkavians are clans. Meaning they can trace their lineage back to an Antediluvian 3rd gen. Not to a 4th or 5th gen vampire from a Clan which would make it a Bloodline. And neither Salubri or Malkavians were bloodlines in the first city. They were both clans. Thus they each have a different Antediluvian. Oh, and Kindred, I agree with Endwyn. Embracing does not work that way in this system. Maybe in another system, which would be cool. But if Saulot thought he was Malkav and Embraced someone they would still gain the third eye and the clan weakness. Same for Malkav if he thought he was Saulot while Embracing someone they would have to choose a derangement. So in effect if we used your idea/theory. Anyone Embraced from Malkav or Saulot would have Valeran and Dementation as two of their clan disciplines with both weaknesses. Again using your idea.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 09:37:45 - N/A>>Oh, Kindred, I agree with Endwyn. Embracing does not work that way in this system. Maybe in another system, which would be cool. But if Saulot thought he was Malkav and Embraced someone they would still gain the third eye and the clan weakness. Same for Malkav if he thought he was Saulot while Embracing someone they would have to choose a derangement.
So in effect if we used your idea/theory. Anyone Embraced from Malkav or Saulot would have Valeran and Dementation as two of their clan disciplines with both weaknesses. Again using your idea.<<
Granted, it doesn't work this way. However, the argument that all childer of Saulot have a third eye is fallacious (they dont; only those reaching the second level of Valeren do), and madness is a thing ill-understood even in today's world, so who am I -- or you -- to sat how the embrace interacts with madness?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 09:41:32 - N/AIMO The only way that everyone couls say that they walked and talked to the other two (Set, Sal, and Malk) and still fall under your theory they were the same person would be as follows:
Sal and Malk would have to "co-exist", and talk freely; being lucid at all times and aware of the situation around them. That way all three could converse. This would also have to mean the Sal and Malk were aware not only of the other but able to talk between themselves and communicate with other. To illustrate this exampl - think of Set walking and talking to a Goa'uld (specificly Tok'Ra). Then Set could converse with both and this is the only set up I can see actually working with your theory.
Now, I ask you to think about it and let me know if you come up with any other idea of how it "could" have worked under your theory or if you see problems with anything I have typed above.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 10:01:16>>IMO The only way that everyone couls say that they walked and talked to the other two (Set, Sal, and Malk) and still fall under your theory they were the same person would be as follows:
Sal and Malk would have to "co-exist", and talk freely; being lucid at all times and aware of the situation around them. That way all three could converse. This would also have to mean the Sal and Malk were aware not only of the other but able to talk between themselves and communicate with other. To illustrate this exampl - think of Set walking and talking to a Goa'uld (specificly Tok'Ra). Then Set could converse with both and this is the only set up I can see actually working with your theory.
Now, I ask you to think about it and let me know if you come up with any other idea of how it "could" have worked under your theory or if you see problems with anything I have typed above.<<
Another very good point: If Malkav and Saulot spoke, it would be difficult to contend that they were inhabiting the same body. Possibly, but so highly unlikely it's not even funny.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 10:02:21 - N/AThat was kinda the point. If you want to debate them being the same person - you have to come up with a way that that and someone talking to both of them at the same time can happen.
I threw that out there as the most logical conclusion to support your theory, and still - like you said "funny but not likely". So then what is likely?
My point was that Set made it clear that the two of them existed at the same time (would walk and talk to both of them). So, if you’re putting them in the same body then two people are talking out of one body to another person. What I was going to show was that if the two of them were talking to someone out of the same body it would be highly unlikely they weren't aware of each other. And if Sal was aware of Malk he would want him out of his body. And guess what - he has just the right discipline to do it!
Which means that the only way the two could co-exist would be for them to not be aware of each other (because well, Saulot never liked sharing bodies.....he wants it for himself) so that Malk doesn't get the snot kicked out of him before getting kicked out of the body. SO the Malks would have never been embraced if ol' Sal knew what was going on.
Now, try to put a walk with three people discussing something when the two who share a body have to talk to each other but can't be aware they're in the same body. How much sense does that make?
As far as your argument that we have to prove they weren't and you don't have to prove anything - that's nothing more than an excuse to hide behind. (Not calling you a coward, but it's lame.) The only time only one side has to prove their point and the other doesn't is in "burden of proof" situations. The two most common of these being legal and scientific. Legal doesn't apply as no "crime" is being debated. In scientific, the theory that conflicts with popular convention has to be proven - not popular convention. (The reverse of course could be disproving popular convention.) Popular convention is they were two separate people. Either that has to be disproven or a counterclaim has to be proven; not the other way around. Just because you start a debate doesn't mean you can ignore your burden of proof.
I don't mind debating it with you, but not if you absolve yourself from any responsibility to hold up your own arguements.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 10:09:01 - N/A>>My point was that Set made it clear that the two of them existed at the same time<<
I disagree. Set is nothing. But Saulot and Malkav would have been able to talk to ONE ANOTHER. Set could have talked to his brother, who happened to have two personalities, and he could talk to both personalities.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
the whiterabbit - 08/13/2004 10:25:27 - N/AFirst I'd like to say I don't think the evidence points to Saulot and Malkav being one and the same. However, that said, I haven't seen a compelling argument as to why it couldn't be that way.
Realize that Malkav would've had very high obfuscate, dementation, auspex and dominate. If Saulot can create a new bloodline with a different weakness (Wu Zao) simply by charging them with a specific task, why couldn't Saulot and Malkav be a split soul in one body? When Malkav was in control and embraced people, Malkavians were sired. When Saulot was in control and embraced people, Salubri (or any of the various Salubri bloodlines) were sired.
A lot of stock is being put into the statment, "but Set, Malkav and Salulot were brothers and all talked together," and given the lack of hard information on most of the vampires of the 3rd generation (even with the canonical relevations towards the end of the V:tM game line), I see no reason why those accounts couldn't be wrong, misinterpreted, or if perhaps Set was just tricked by some combination of Dementation, Obfuscate, Dominate or other wacky discipline powers.
Again, I don't really think that Saulot and Malkav were the same person or a split soul living in the same body--but I don't see why it absolutely couldn't be the case, at least not with the reasons given. I think it'd be an interesting twist to a STs own chronicle, and I don't think that the in-character information availible contradicts it (not that if it did the ST couldn't golden rule it, but still).
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
grimfangtheghosthand - 08/13/2004 10:36:40I thought the third eye manifested with Obeah?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 10:47:15
Obeah and Valern are the same discipline with different names. (For all effective purposes.) The main difference is Valern has two sides - Way of the Healer and Way of the Warrior. Obeah is assumed to be the Way of the Healer in modern times. And when I said Set made it clear they both existed at the same time, I was not specifically saying two bodies, I was talking about the two personalities. My point was that the two personalities had to be able to interact with each other - which leads into my contention that Saulot has a way to "correct" the deviation in his "soul".
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
grimfangtheghosthand - 08/13/2004 10:56:58 -Ahhhhhh i see thanks Elisa
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 11:18:54Your welcome.
I became Elisa? Oh well, guess I will get a credit card....... Hey Elisa - do you know what your credit score and spending limits are? Do you think citybank will give me....I mean YOU a good deal?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 12:04:18He gets discount on cyborg ninja party suits.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
grimfangtheghosthand - 08/13/2004 12:27:34Ack sorry. *Kicks himself* many apologies I think i was half dead when I posted the thank you (( either just waking up or just going to bed ))
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 13:50:31 - N/AIt's cool; I needed another credit card anyways.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 13:50:46 - N/AOk, Kinder you have just made me think your ignorant. Both you and I are no one to decide how the Embrace interacts with madness. But I do know what irrefutable piece of proof that does. The Vampire the Masquerade Revised corebook. This should include both supporting evidence, A) Vampire the Masquerade 2nd edition and B) Vampire the Masquerade 1st edition. All books state that a Malkavian when Embraced gains a derangement. So if Saulot and Malkav were the same vampire all Salubri would have a derangement.
Kinder, do you even read my posts making points to your lack of providing proof arguement Endwyn mentioned?
For those who feel they need some good strong evidence as to Malkav and Saulot not being the same individual I have copied the last two paragraphs from my earlier post.
>>Now I would be open to either Saulot or Malkav personality first creating the Salubri or Malkavians and then sometime down the road the Antediluvian Saukav or Mallot were to work with one of his childer, say 4th gen and change the vampire into a malkavian or salubri and having him learn Dementation or Valeran and that is how the other "clan" which is a bloodline at this point, the big point finisher is coming up, came into being from the same Antediluvian.
But that is where our problem lies. You see both Salubri (now bloodline) and Malkavians are clans. Meaning they can trace their lineage back to an Antediluvian 3rd gen. Not to a 4th or 5th gen vampire from a Clan which would make it a Bloodline. And neither Salubri or Malkavians were bloodlines in the first city. They were both clans. Thus they each have a different Antediluvian.<<
Malkavians and Salubri cannot be from the same Antediluvian if they are both clans! For pete's sake read the paragraph and learn something. If either Malkavians or Salubri were created by a 4th or less generation vampire they would be a bloodline and they are not. Each are a clan with two different Antediluvians. That is the defining factor in determining what a clan is compared to a bloodline. Learn something people!
Kinder, please quote where I said
>>all childer of Saulot have a third eye is fallacious<<
I never typed that. Never will. I know how and have known how the Salubri get the third eye for many years now. Please Kinder show me where I typed that, please.
Just so that both Endwyn and I both know Kinder, are you arguing that Malkav and Saulot are the same vampire? If you are not then why are preaching to the choir? There is no need for me to convince someone to buy something if they have the product in the bag with receipt and change in the other hand.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 14:11:18>>Just so that both Endwyn and I both know Kinder, are you arguing that Malkav and Saulot are the same vampire? If you are not then why are preaching to the choir? There is no need for me to convince someone to buy something if they have the product in the bag with receipt and change in the other hand.<<
I'm really not sure what part of "I dont believe this personally, but..." you didn't understand.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
the whiterabbit - 08/13/2004 14:27:52 - N/A>>Ok, Kinder you have just made me think your ignorant. Both you and I are no one to decide how the Embrace interacts with madness. But I do know what irrefutable piece of proof that does. The Vampire the Masquerade Revised corebook. This should include both supporting evidence, A) Vampire the Masquerade 2nd edition and B) Vampire the Masquerade 1st edition. All books state that a Malkavian when Embraced gains a derangement. So if Saulot and Malkav were the same vampire all Salubri would have a derangement.<<
Why MUST this be the case? Why is it that not all of Saulot's childer have the same weakness? Bali, Wu-Zao, the new Salubri of the Sabbat and modern Salubri all have different weaknesses. Why couldn't some of Saulot's childer (embraced when his Malkav personality was dominant) have a derangment instead of one of the other weaknesses? And why couldn't the others not have a derangment, but instead the other clan weaknesses they exhibit?
>>Now I would be open to either Saulot or Malkav personality first creating the Salubri or Malkavians and then sometime down the road the Antediluvian Saukav or Mallot were to work with one of his childer, say 4th gen and change the vampire into a malkavian or salubri and having him learn Dementation or Valeran and that is how the other "clan" which is a bloodline at this point, the big point finisher is coming up, came into being from the same Antediluvian.<<
But that is where our problem lies. You see both Salubri (now bloodline) and Malkavians are clans. Meaning they can trace their lineage back to an Antediluvian 3rd gen. Not to a 4th or 5th gen vampire from a Clan which would make it a Bloodline. And neither Salubri or Malkavians were bloodlines in the first city. They were both clans. Thus they each have a different Antediluvian.
Now here's my question . . . how do you KNOW both aren't clans? What is a clan and what is a bloodline isn't so neat and easy to define as you seem to be making it. Bear in mind that the antediluvians started embracing childer around 10,000 years ago. If Saulot and Malkav are actually two different personalities of the same vampire, why on earth wouldn't two different clans have come from the same vampire? Hell, we can't even be sure exactly how the 3rd generation expresses their clan weakness when it seems that different childer of thiers often exhibit different weaknesses (at least in the case of Saulot--which is the true clan and which are bloodlines?)
>>Just so that both Endwyn and I both know Kinder, are you arguing that Malkav and Saulot are the same vampire? If you are not then why are preaching to the choir? There is no need for me to convince someone to buy something if they have the product in the bag with receipt and change in the other hand.<<
What I (and I believe Kinder is too) am asking is this: Is there any definitive proof that Saulot and Malkav aren't actually one vampire?
So far NOTHING you or anyone else is very good proof. "The they couldn't be CLANS if they were sired from the same vampire, one is a bloodline then" argument is weak because both groups would believe that they ARE clans, with a proper third generation founder. Given the disciplines likely to be held at very high levels by Malkav and Saulot, who is going to be able to tell that they actually aren't two different people? Perhaps Malkav's first and primary derangment is the second personality of Saulot, which has gained such strength as to actually split his soul and develop its own disciplines. Perhaps Saulot/Malkav is only one very crafty personality who, for reasons unknown to mere mortals, has managed to convice the otheres that he is actually two separate beings (I can see Dominate + Obfuscate alone being handy in accomplishing this).
So while I don't believe this was the case in the oWoD, I don't believe that there's enough evidence to prove beyond all doubt that it wasn't the case.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 14:36:42 - N/A>>What I (and I believe Kinder is too) am asking is this: Is there any definitive proof that Saulot and Malkav aren't actually one vampire?<<
That's exactly what I'm asking. That you for putting is so succinctly.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 14:53:15P15 - Clanbook Malkavian
"The two glared long at one another, (Set and Malkav) and turned to their brother Saulot."
So, that shows they are two seperate people. There was three people gathered there, Set and Malkav glared at each other before turning to face Saulot for advice.
Actually, I have about 8 different page quotes regarding them being different people. However, I'm pretty sure any of them I post will be shot down by incredibly stupid arguments:
"Hey, they never said about their bodies!"
"They could have been glaring in a mirror!"
"Well, thats just an IC perspective!"
I can't be asked to post anymore than that. Take it or leave it, its obvious they are different people but some people just want to argue.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 14:57:11 - N/A>>"Hey, they never said about their bodies!" "They could have been glaring in a mirror!" "Well, thats just an IC perspective!"<<
How's about, "That never really happened?"
It's not just a matter of arguing; it's a matter of conversation. It's a topic of interest, at least to those of us with an open mind for that sorta thing. No one yet, that I am aware of, has said they believe the two are one and the same. We're asking a hypothetical question. Like, say, what if vampires existed and lived behind the curtain of a Masquerade...
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 15:06:32 - N/AIts a matter of being utterly pointless. You are asking a hypothetical question which has no real purpose.
What do you want? Evidence that they are the same? They are many books saying the opposite so this question has been answered. You seem to want to prolong a question that has been answered and to me its pointless.
If no-one supports the theory anyway, why are we discussing it?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 15:31:14 - N/AWhy do humans discuss anything? Because they LEARN by discussing. That's what philosophy is all about. That's what MOST things are all about -- learning. It's NEVER pointless to want to know another person's opinion. However, you, too, have proven Socrates' point that Elenchus produces aporia.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 16:09:09Then your early argument is invalid then. You are trying to find out if they are the same person. We have proved they are not. No-one thinks they are the same person either.
So, we have learnt the obvious which was clear from the start. You can quote socrates all you want but its not changing the fact they are the same person.
Also this thread has no purpose to anyone at all. No-one is going - Well, they are the same person in my game. Or is it aiding anything nor will the end result do anything.
I can't be asked to reply anymore on this post. I could post page quotes to show they aren't but it won't do anything nor be useful. Its just wasting space for something which cannot be fullfilled in your sentiments.
Obviously I was referring to your idea of them being the same person before you start saying - I don't believe them to be the same person.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 16:24:46 - N/AOK Kinder, Here's my response to the following post you made:
>>"Hey, they never said about their bodies!"
"They could have been glaring in a mirror!"
"Well, thats just an IC perspective!">>How's about, "That never really happened?"<<<<
I respect the idea that some things may not have happened the way they have been explained throughout the history of a people; but if NOTHING of a history can be accepted as it was explained to the clans (through printed source material) then why bother with the debate - because their can't be one. If nothing someone can pull from a book is considered acceptable because it "never really happened" then you have taken away all the source amterial and asked us to prove you wrong based on only speculation and conjecture.........ya, because you will accept speculation and conjecture after easily dismissing written material.
I don't want to be a jerk, but really; come on. If you want to debate "canon" then you can't take away the published material and expect anyone to debate you without it. I really almost want to throw out there a question like "Prove Saulot exisits", I mean - you can't trust any published material, perhaps the entire Third Gen was one person named Saulotmalkavventuretyphoonlasombrabrujah......... ect. You can't prove they were different people, can you? (Slaps wrist!) "No, no. Don't use the book. That's conjecture. It might not have happened. Use your imagination."
or
"Prove to me that Russia existed but don't use any published books, refrence material, or any other media. Prove it to me without proof. Please."
Just make it clear - like - set up rules. I understand that you want to debate this; but our frustration is that you so quickly dismissed published refrences. We all know that it could have gone down a different way, but this is what we have as the recorded truth. So why don't you try a different angle. YOU should show us there is something that supports your theory or provides a plausability to the things that might have happened.
Hey Elisa - Do you think Alaxander the Great might have really been a girl. I mean - SHE conquered the whole known world, perhaps it was all one big cover up to keep the world from knowing a chick was ruling them. Just don't use any historical refrecences to disprove my theory unless you were there and saw it first hand. Cool with you?
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
the whiterabbit - 08/13/2004 16:24:54I believe the "that never really happened" statment comes from the fact that the quote given is from a parable.
Do you believe the bible is literal truth? If you do, we can stop the argument right here. If not, why would an in-game parable be any more belivable or any better of a source than the bible?
Nobody has shown anything that proves that Malkav and Saulot were different vampires. Why? Because there isn't any PROOF. It's all speculation and all based on infromation, in game, that is thousands of years old and subject to interpretation by those who repeat it. Even the OOC info in Gehenna about the antediluvians (p. 18) doesn't eliminate the possibility that Saulot and Malkav were once two personalities in one body.
You're right in the lack of need to continue the argument--but not because it's been proven that Malkav and Saulot were different vampires. But because White Wolf deliberately left a lot of the information about the antediluvians unclear so that storytellers could do what they wished.
The idea of Saulot and Malkav being one and the same is exactly the sort of reason they did this. It's an interesting idea that doesn't conflict with official sources that a storyteller could use in his chronicle (if the chronicle were ambitious enough for characters to actually find anything out about antediluvians in the first place).
Now my next question is WHY are people so adamant that Malkav and Saluot were different vampires? Several of you seem to be getting upset that it's being questioned, almost angry. Why?
>>Just make it clear - like - set up rules. I understand that you want to debate this; but our frustration is that you so quickly dismissed published refrences. We all know that it could have gone down a different way, but this is what we have as the recorded truth. So why don't you try a different angle. YOU should show us there is something that supports your theory or provides a plausability to the things that might have happened.<<
I can respect this, but my point is that there IS NO published reference that PROVES that Saulot and Malkav are different people. Yes, I'm willing to accept that this IS most likely the case, and I concede that published material doesn't really hint that they are one and the same.
But the point was that published material doesn't anywhere suggest that they couldn't be the same person, and that's the question that Kinder was asking. Yes, "nothing says they weren't the same person" *is* a far cry from "they are they same person" but the point is that it is a possibility that a storyteller could use.
Of course, most chronicles I've played or STed in haven't ever even come close to revealing any of that sort of information to the players--we just never quite get to relatively new vampires being able to track down that kind of information. They're too busy being afraid of their sires and grandsires to worry about the antediluvians.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
MrGonev5 - 08/13/2004 16:27:59You know....I've been thinking. Theres been all this talk about proving Salout and Malkav were the same person from the books.
How about this.
Using the books, prove to me that Salout and Malkav WERE the same person.
It cant be done..
MrGone
Vicissitude Infected Malkavian of the True Black Hand™
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
the whiterabbit - 08/13/2004 16:29:53Exactly my point! Sure, you can't prove that they were the same person, but you can't prove that they weren't either. And admitedly, the evidence does lean toward them being different vampires, there is enough leeway that it leaves open an interesting possibility for any ST who wants to use it. At least for those who are still playing V:tM and have chronicles in which characters are even in a position to learn about antediluvians.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
TheElflord - 08/13/2004 16:50:56 - N/Ayou know why the books never directly say that they are two different people? Probaly because the writers felt it wasn't needed. I don't know if they ever definativly said that Ventrue and Lasombra weren't the same person either. Its just something that people felt was too basic to have to be said. Some things are simple enough to be implied after all. Do the books say what direction the sun rises in? If they don't, its still implied its the east. Do the books say the world is round? If they don't its still implied.
There are 13 "clans" and originally 13 founders, the books state that. If Salout and Malkav were the same, what happened to the mystery founder?
There wasn't one and thats that. There is plenty of evidence in the books that they aren't, along with simple common sense that the writers shouldn't have had to directly say it.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 16:55:23That's what Iwas getting at. It's all fine to debate, but you can't prove anything either way in the books; except that it is common belief and it would seem by all records that they are different people. That in oWoD, there is nothing to even suggest they are the same, or even any basis for it that is supported; but there is support and belief the other way.
My main point was however, that if nothing in the books is acceptable, then why bother a debate. There isn't a point if source material, no matter how "true from a certain point of view" it may be isn't accepted on any value.
And Gone: I'm not sure if he is opposed to or just not doing it; but Kinder has not tried to prove his point. Just tell us we have to prove ours. Which would be less frustrating if Kinder didn't regect every book refrence. I would at least appreciate a "OK, so the oWoD believes they are two people, what if it's a conspiracy?" And then debate that to get back to the main point. But instead all we've got so far is "I don't have to prove jack, you're reason isn't good enough - not a first hand account." I get the feeling even a first hand account would be dismissed as "possibly misleading" or "part of a conspiracy". I doubt you'd really take it that far Kinder....I know what you really want is like canon either way; but it doesn't exist.
Kinder: If you promise to throw me a bone and either set up legitamite rules for debate acceptance, be more reasonable "accepting" what little is printed, or engage in trying to prove your point as well - I'll throw you a couple bones that you could use to debate for more validity for your point... although by no means can it prove anything either way. I t will give you more food for thought though. I just won't engage further in a pointless debate (Which this has become if only one side has to prove a point and no printed material is good enough).
Let me know what you decide.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Copy Monkey - 08/13/2004 17:01:47 - N/AI’m not sure if this helps, but I’ll give it a try. There are two problems with this line of reasoning.
1. The initial post said there is “ample evidence” that Saulot and Malkav are the same, yet it offered nothing of the sort.
* We know something about Saulot’s sire, but nothing of Malkav’s. This is not evidence of anything. Absence of information is, in fact, absence of evidence.
* Saulot has childer with characteristics different from the mainline clan. This is possibly very weak evidence that Saulot could be the progenitor of more than one clan. However, I think Saulot only sired one Baali, and that all subsequent Baali are decendents of that childe of Saulot. Thus, it is more likely that the Baali are a bloodline descended from Shaitan or whoever, and that the Malkavians are a Clan descended from Malkav-who-is-not-Saulot. Moreover, if Saulot can sire more than one Clan, there’s no reason to think the second Clan would be Malkavian and not, say, Nosferatu. In any case, the second point is extremely weak evidence, at best.
* That Saulot was easily enraged is evidence that he’s a vampire with a Beast – not that he is Malkav. The fact that at other times he is inhumanly calm is evidence that he is an ancient and experienced vampire – not that he is Malkav. The fact that he is sometimes angry and sometimes calm is evidence that he is a person (sort of) – not that he is insane or has a split personality.
Incidently, Kinder says the information about Saulot's temper was "alluded to" somewhere. Yet, when others offer similar arguments, Kinder calls them "not independently verifiable." But more on that later.
“Only Saulot could calm Malkav's madness -- which would make sense if Saulot WAS Malkav.” Well, I guess anything makes sense if you twist it hard enough. What makes more sense is that Saulot WAS NOT Malkav, but was a spiritual healer.
* We have very little information on 4th Generation members of either Clan, which the poster concedes is “a weak argument.”
Actually, it’s not an argument at all. It’s just a fact of no apparent relevance.
I certainly agree that it is an interesting idea that two or more legendary characters might be really the same person. But I haven’t seen any “ample evidence” that this is the case with Saulot and Malkav. I could say it’s interesting to say that Hitler and Attila the Hun were the same person, but I wouldn’t chide anyone for failing to prove they are not.
2. Which brings me to my second point. It is practically impossible to prove a negative.
I could say that Jim Morrison was the first vampire. After all, he was creepy and had an inflated sense of self-importance, just like vampires.
See, Morrison became a vampire – who knows how? It’s magic. Then he used a time machine (a magic one) to go back to the dawn of the world and pretend that he was God cursing Caine, when in fact he was just Embracing Caine.
Kinder used some variation of “it’s magic” at least four times to support his speculation. He used some variation of “Not an independently verifiable fact” a couple times to rebut counterarguments. I claim the same prerogative. I think it’s “possible” that a time-traveling Jim Morrison was really the first vampire, and I defy any of you to prove that he wasn’t.
All sarcasm aside, I think it is an interesting premise that Saulot and Malkav were the same person. If all the evidence suggests otherwise, which it does, that just means the mysteries run even deeper. And the game benefits when we try to come up with interesting twists on the back story, so there’s nothing wrong with that.
However, making a totally hypothetical suggestion with practically no evidence and expecting others to disprove it is a little unreasonable. Especially when the response to any counterargument is “that didn’t happen.”
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 18:01:07 ->>but my point is that there IS NO published reference that PROVES that Saulot and Malkav are different people<<
Again, I have 8 quotes but as people have mentioned. I feel no need to post them in a rather pointless debate at this moment.
Ask the question - Are they two seperate beings and I might post them.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN (Still being a pompous bitch) - 08/13/2004 18:03:29Ok, some forumites need to be made aware and educated about a couple of things.
kinder, if you do not believe they are the same individual why contradict everyone making cases that states they aren't?
kinder, you have asked for proof that they are not same vampire, even though you believe otherwise, and yet you do not accept the research put into the topic.
kinder, if you really want to debate about something, then stop asking for proof that they are not the same individual. Bring up something that can be debated without you asking for proof of what you want to debate. Because obvious you are ignorant enough to not want proof that there is supporting evidence.
kinder, about your comment "it never really happened" prove that it the conversation never really happened? We have one source that said the conversation happened, provide a different source that said the conversation did not happen.
the whiterabbit, my lord you know nothing about Clans and Bloodlines. Because every other semi-educated vampire player knows what I typed about Clans and Bloodlines is true.
Now onto the whiterabbits education.
Why do the different lines Saulot created have different weaknesses. Because besides the Salubri the Wu Zao and Baali are bloodlines. The Salubri became a bloodline when their Antediluvian "dies" but more precisely when they lack the suffecient numbers to claim to be a clan.
Dark Ages Vampire and Vampire The Dark Ages has both Malkavian and Salubri as clans out of character. Meaning both Clans of vampires have an Antediluvian.
Storytellers Handbook Revised page 49. I will not waste anymore of this post with you much needed education. But I highly suggest that make yourself familiar with the topic of conversation (clans and bloodlines) before starting one. In case you are misrepresenting the information you do not know and thus lowering your reputation as a source to be valued. This is something I learned early on when posting on the forums almost 4 years ago. I knew when to pipe up and when to keep quiet around certain topics I did not understand. Many times I did pipe up about something I "thought" (admittedly, really did not know) I knew but was proven wrong instantly. Since those great learning lessons I speak up when I am familiar with the point being discussed and thus my value of information is noticed by forumites. Do not believe so, check out page 5 of "is it truly impossible to break the masquerade" thread about 4 pages deep, created by Kuei-jin.
I am also with Mithras and Endwyn. This is futile kinder. You just want to be ignorant about the proof put before you and continue to go on with your own delusion of this debate.
I also agree with Endwyn and others, prove that Saulot and Malkav are the same individual. You are keep shooting down our suggestions that they are the same individual so you must know or think differently. Prove that Saulot and Malkav are the same individual. To quote Justin Achilli "It's time to put up or shut up."
One last thing kinder, where did I type the fallicious of Salubris having a third on upon Embrace? Everytime I have confronted you with a direct question you have backed off from the question. There is something to learn about you kinder. Your a lazy lieing antagonist. You quote forumites for saying things thus antagonizing other forumites. But when you are confronted by someone with an actual backbone you do not put the same effort forward as when you are putting words into other forumites mouth. kinder, where did I type that? Where?
Oh, one last thing kinder. If you do not beleive that Malkav and Saulot are the same individual, why are you so engaged in not agreeing with anyone else who is saying what you believe?
I bet that lazy side comes out again.
For the record, kinder did quote me for saying something I didn't so me calling him out on that is reflecting on his poor forum etiquette. Also pointing out that he cannot back up his own quotes is a sign of his laziness. Not to mention him disagreeing with forumites who hold the same belief as him proves he is not sympathizing but being antagonist. He is all those things and more.
This evenings proof that Malkav and Saulot are not the same individual comes from two books. I will include page numbers for those too lazy to look them up.
These are out of character and not in story at all.
House Tremere page 26 under "the next depravity" mentions that Tremere diablerized Saulot. It also mentions that Saulot is the father of the Salubri. Transylvania Chronicles 1 Dark Tides Rising page 28 under "story background" mentions that Saulot fell to Tremere's bloodlust. TC1 page 102 "The Transylvanian Timeline" 1133 Tremere diablerizes Saulot. Clanbook Salubri page 32 "Relations with Others", *clanbooks never cover their own clan they cover other clans. Players Guide to High Clans pg 130, it mentions Tremere diablerized Saulot. Transylvania Chronicles 4 page 44, mentions that Tremere chose to diablerize Saulot the founder of the Salubri and Saulots diablerie in 1122. Nights of Prophecy, pg 22 "The Strange Case of the Tremere Antitribu" mentions Saulots diablerie, Saulot will wrestling with Tremere's. It also mentions Saulot's victory. Lair of the Hidden pg 94, Saulot's bio.
None of these mention Malkav being diablerized. Or Malkav winning the body tug a war with Tremere. Or Malkav being in Hundeoara. It mentions Saulot. Now if Malkav and Saulot were the same individual then Saulot's bio in LotH would have stated as such.
If you want to disagree with the printed text kinder either A)find me the book that proves FoBC page 32 is wrong or B) tell us that we can start using hyperbole to argue our cases against your hyperbole
*If Malkavians and Salubri were from the same Antediluvian they would be apart of the same clan and not have views of other clans.
Perhaps I should just ignore kinders post as he ignores mine and just arguing his points which i do not read as he is arguing mine.
Great post copy monkey!
kinder, I will attack your variant of "it's magic" tomorrow night.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
AnubisXy - 08/13/2004 18:09:22 - N/AGee, how funny. I always had a sneaky suspicion that Saulot and Cappadocius were the same individual.
Rumors say both of them traveled extensively in the East. Both of them are given credit for discovering Golconda. Each of their clans are very similar in terms of disciplines (each one has Fortitude and Auspex. The Salubri have Valern which encompasses the power of life, Cappadocians have Mortis which encompasses the power of death). Both clan founders end up destroyed within the same time frame. At the end, before thei deaths, both end up turning and embracing Christinanity...
Yeah, it's probably just a coincidence but... you never know!
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_"look at me, I can state the obvious"_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 18:22:26 - N/AThats funny!
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
grimfangtheghosthand - 08/13/2004 18:22:53Just laughs at Copy monkey's post* Lovely,that was just brilliant. I was going to make a post about a vampire with temporis 10 just diablerizing everyone but yours is soooo much better.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Kinder - 08/13/2004 18:25:39>>2. Which brings me to my second point. It is practically impossible to prove a negative.<<
Very true. Someone else mentioned that, which is a good point. I personally think it would be funny if Santa was a vampire, but, alas, there's no proof.
>>Kinder used some variation of “it’s magic” at least four times to support his speculation. He used some variation of “Not an independently verifiable fact” a couple times to rebut counterarguments.<<
Then again, it is magic. People don't understand it; that's the point. It's not a positive argument. Not trying to claim that it is. I'm trying to say you cannot prove that it IS true (I'm not saying my argument is true -- merely that yours is not).
>>However, making a totally hypothetical suggestion with practically no evidence and expecting others to disprove it is a little unreasonable.<<
Not really. That's what most of life is -- acting with too little information, hoping that we go the right way. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't.
>>Just laughs at Copy monkey's post* Lovelythat was just brilliant i was goign to make a post about a vamp with temporis 10 just diablerizing everyone but yours is soooo much better.<<
I asked a question about that before, and I got a reasonable answer... I wasn't aware that Temporis doesn't allow literal time travel, someone (MrGone?) pointed that out.
>>Rumors say both of them traveled extensively in the East. Both of them are given credit for discovering Golconda. Each of their clans are very similar in terms of disciplines (each one has Fortitude and Auspex. The Salubri have Valern which encompasses the power of life, Cappadocians have Mortis which encompasses the power of death). Both clan founders end up destroyed within the same time frame. At the end, before thei deaths, both end up turning and embracing Christinanity...<<
Is it so impossibly terrible that such a thing could be the case?
>>One last thing kinder, where did I type the fallicious of Salubris having a third on upon Embrace?<<
I never said you said that. I said upon "attaining some mastery" (ie, 2nd level). And I said that, not you.
>>Your a lazy lieing antagonist.<<
And you are an impolite fool.
>>Oh, one last thing kinder. If you do not beleive that Malkav and Saulot are the same individual, why are you so engaged in not agreeing with anyone else who is saying what you believe?<<
Have you ever heard of a Devil's Advocate? They're basically people that make others think. Nifty thing, that, thinking. Try it some time.
>>For the record, kinder did quote me for saying something I didn't so me calling him out on that is reflecting on his poor forum etiquette.<<
Again, you're wrong. I did not quote you -- I said that, not you.
>>Also pointing out that he cannot back up his own quotes is a sign of his laziness.<<
Or current inability. If this forum was as important to me as it seems to be to you (how old are you?), I could go home, pour over my books and find exact quotes. I don't, because I have a job that takes up quite a bit of my time (ironically, all of it off the clock, which really sucks). I don't feel the need to defend myself with such ferocity, because I recognize that all of this is theoretical, and, moreover, the entire World of Darkness is fictional. If you can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality, maybe you shouldnt play the game.
>>Not to mention him disagreeing with forumites who hold the same belief as him proves he is not sympathizing but being antagonist.<<
See above.
>>House Tremere page 26 under "the next depravity" mentions that Tremere diablerized Saulot. It also mentions that Saulot is the father of the Salubri.<<
Yet it says nothing about the Malkavians -- which does not mean that he was NOT the sire of the Malkavians, merely that they dont know/mention it.
>>Transylvania Chronicles 1 Dark Tides Rising page 28 under "story background" mentions that Saulot fell to Tremere's bloodlust. TC1 page 102 "The Transylvanian Timeline" 1133 Tremere diablerizes Saulot. Clanbook Salubri page 32 "Relations with Others", *clanbooks never cover their own clan they cover other clans. Players Guide to High Clans pg 130, it mentions Tremere diablerized Saulot. Transylvania Chronicles 4 page 44, mentions that Tremere chose to diablerize Saulot the founder of the Salubri and Saulots diablerie in 1122. Nights of Prophecy, pg 22 "The Strange Case of the Tremere Antitribu" mentions Saulots diablerie, Saulot will wrestling with Tremere's. It also mentions Saulot's victory. Lair of the Hidden pg 94, Saulot's bio.<<
Ditto.
>>None of these mention Malkav being diablerized. Or Malkav winning the body tug a war with Tremere. Or Malkav being in Hundeoara. It mentions Saulot. Now if Malkav and Saulot were the same individual then Saulot's bio in LotH would have stated as such.<<
It would have? Because the writers always tell all their secrets? Right...
>>If you want to disagree with the printed text kinder either A)find me the book that proves FoBC page 32 is wrong or B) tell us that we can start using hyperbole to argue our cases against your hyperbole<<
As someone mentioned, you can't prove a negative... We seem to be having the same argument that religious people and atheists have had for generations...strange.
>>*If Malkavians and Salubri were from the same Antediluvian they would be apart of the same clan and not have views of other clans.<<
What makes you say that?
>>Perhaps I should just ignore kinders post as he ignores mine and just arguing his points which i do not read as he is arguing mine.<<
Actually, I'm tired of being insulted, so I think I might let others speak on this line as they will. Hopefully whiterabbit might stick around and make some sense, maybe convince others that just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you should make (a) ad hominem attacks and (b) ... well, no, I better not say that, because then I would be guilty of one. :0)
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 18:34:02If I hadn't had a reason to ignore this pointless thread, I do now.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
MrGonev5 - 08/13/2004 18:39:10 - N/A>>There are 13 "clans" and originally 13 founders, the books state that.<<
Exactally!
>>And Gone: I'm not sure if he is opposed to or just not doing it; but Kinder has not tried to prove his point. Just tell us we have to prove ours. Which would be less frustrating if Kinder didn't regect every book refrence. I would at least appreciate a "OK, so the oWoD believes they are two people, what if it's a conspiracy?" And then debate that to get back to the main point. But instead all we've got so far is "I don't have to prove jack, you're reason isn't good enough - not a first hand account." I get the feeling even a first hand account would be dismissed as "possibly misleading" or "part of a conspiracy". I doubt you'd really take it that far Kinder....I know what you really want is like canon either way; but it doesn't exist.<<
Ahh...so its one of those thing that matter the evidence, hes not gonna belive it. I gotcha...
>>Just laughs at Copy monkey's post* Lovelythat was just brilliant i was goign to make a post about a vamp with temporis 10 just diablerizing everyone but yours is soooo much better.
>>I asked a question about that before, and I got a reasonable answer... I wasn't aware that Temporis doesn't allow literal time travel, someone (MrGone?) pointed that out.<<<<
It is mentioned in the Gehenna book, in one of the possible scenerios, that possibly the Brujah Antedulivan could use Temporis 10 to travel in time(he used it to fling himself forward in time). But only the antedulivan would have this power, no one else with temporis could achive this, short of being an antedulivan.
So, Temporis doesnt allow time travel, unless you have it at 10. And even then, theres no mechanics for that, just a reference in a book that cant be considered canon. Wink
MrGone
Vicissitude Infected Malkavian of the True Black Hand™
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
the whiterabbit - 08/13/2004 18:40:22>>the whiterabbit, my lord you know nothing about Clans and Bloodlines. Because every other semi-educated vampire player knows what I typed about Clans and Bloodlines is true.<<
You have no idea what I know. You have these ideas that you assume are hard facts because why, other people in the forum support them? A clan MUST have a 3rd generation founder--and so through diablarie, a bloodline can elevate itself to the status of a clan. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody has gone around independantly verifying each clan's claim to have a 3rd generation founder, have they? Why couldn't everyone be convinced that a bloodline is actually a clan, even though they don't actually have a 3rd generation founder. Look at the Giovonni--Cappadocius's soul was never consumed, so clearly the diablarie was incomplete. Does that mean that the Giovanni are not a clan? No, because everyone believes that they are.
>>Why do the different lines Saulot created have different weaknesses. Because besides the Salubri the Wu Zao and Baali are bloodlines. The Salubri became a bloodline when their Antediluvian "dies" but more precisely when they lack the suffecient numbers to claim to be a clan.<<
So then, what IS the exact definition of a clan? Is a clan is a group of vampires, related by blood, that can trace their lineage back to a third generation founder who is still extant? Apparently with the additional requirement that they have a certain minimum number of members.
Take the Brujah, for example. They're a clan because everyone believes they're a clan. Again, if you read the Gehenna sourcebook (depending which scenario is used) they may not actually have a 3rd generation founder, but a 4th generation founder--so they should be a bloodline. Except everyone considers them to be a clan, so they are.
>>Dark Ages Vampire and Vampire The Dark Ages has both Malkavian and Salubri as clans out of character. Meaning both Clans of vampires have an Antediluvian.<<
First, what's the difference between Dark Ages Vampire and Vampire The Dark Ages? Secondly, I've postulated ways in which both the Malkavians and Salubri could be clans and yet have one founder who is either very machavellian or simply very insane, with madness that goes so deep his very soul has split. And finally, I've shown you ways a clan can be considered to be a clan, yet have no Antediluvian founder. And while you're stuck on the word Antediluvian, think about this--neither Tremere nor Giovanni are antediluvians--3rd generation, MAYBE. But certainly not from before the flood.
>>Storytellers Handbook Revised page 49. I will not waste anymore of this post with you much needed education.<<
Don't provide a page number without a quote, and if you aren't going to waste anymore of this post, why do you continue it?
>>But I highly suggest that make yourself familiar with the topic of conversation (clans and bloodlines) before starting one. In case you are misrepresenting the information you do not know and thus lowering your reputation as a source to be valued. This is something I learned early on when posting on the forums almost 4 years ago. I knew when to pipe up and when to keep quiet around certain topics I did not understand. Many times I did pipe up about something I "thought" (admittedly, really did not know) I knew but was proven wrong instantly. Since those great learning lessons I speak up when I am familiar with the point being discussed and thus my value of information is noticed by forumites. Do not believe so, check out page 5 of "is it truly impossible to break the masquerade" thread about 4 pages deep, created by Kuei-jin.<<
I know more than you think. In the past, these forums were legendary for the foolishness that has taken place on them and the low quality of posting. So telling me you were here four years ago does nothing but make me more suspect of what you have to say.
You and those others blindly attacking Kinder and I are like old vampires--set in your ways and unable to cope with anything different. I don't know Kinder, but I can recoginze someone who is willing to be reasonable. He is, and most of the rest of the people posting in this thread aren't. They're simiply being closed-minded and refusing to see anything but what they KNOW is the truth--when what they KNOW is nothing more than compiled bits of rumor and hints.
Have you even been reading our posts? Neither of us is arguing that Saulot and Malkav ARE the same person. Not at all--neither of us believes that this is the case. What we were asking is, "would it be possible?" In other words, is there PROOF to the contrary? A lot of people SAY there is proof, and then post information given in books that's in character. That's not proof! People say that the books say there are 13 clan founders, and that's proof--No, it isn't! Name me the 13 clan founders, then. And again, look at some of the Gehenna scenerios--some of them involve more than 13 antediluvians, with suggestions that some bloodlines were actually clans all along, because they were in fact founded by a 13th generation founder.
No, White Wolf left things as open as they could because this is exactly the sort of thing they encourage storytellers to do--to USE THEIR IMAGINATION to tell an interesting story. So far, most of the people posting on this thread are simply proving how closed minded they are.
>>I am also with Mithras and Endwyn. This is futile kinder. You just want to be ignorant about the proof put before you and continue to go on with your own delusion of this debate.<<
If it's futile, why do you keep continuing it? I was willing to let it drop until you attacked my "education." A debate takes two sides--if you and others would stop, there would be no more debate.
>>I also agree with Endwyn and others, prove that Saulot and Malkav are the same individual. You are keep shooting down our suggestions that they are the same individual so you must know or think differently. Prove that Saulot and Malkav are the same individual. To quote Justin Achilli "It's time to put up or shut up."<<
Oh boy, you can quote the developer of Vampire. I'm sure he's thrilled. We don't need to put up or shut up, because we weren't postulating that Saulot and Malkav ARE the same individual. What we WERE postulating was that 1) there are things that could be interpreted as hints that Malkav and Saulot might be one individual (however vague). 2) There is nothing that proves that Saulot and Malkav are two different individual.
>>Your a lazy lieing antagonist.<<
I'll let kinder defend himself, but ad-hominem attacks will get you nowhere. And it should be "you're," not "your." I know, I know, everyone makes grammatical errors but it's a pet peeve of mine.
>>House Tremere page 26 under "the next depravity" mentions that Tremere diablerized Saulot. It also mentions that Saulot is the father of the Salubri. Transylvania Chronicles 1 Dark Tides Rising page 28 under "story background" mentions that Saulot fell to Tremere's bloodlust. TC1 page 102 "The Transylvanian Timeline" 1133 Tremere diablerizes Saulot. Clanbook Salubri page 32 "Relations with Others", *clanbooks never cover their own clan they cover other clans. Players Guide to High Clans pg 130, it mentions Tremere diablerized Saulot. Transylvania Chronicles 4 page 44, mentions that Tremere chose to diablerize Saulot the founder of the Salubri and Saulots diablerie in 1122. Nights of Prophecy, pg 22 "The Strange Case of the Tremere Antitribu" mentions Saulots diablerie, Saulot will wrestling with Tremere's. It also mentions Saulot's victory. Lair of the Hidden pg 94, Saulot's bio.<<
None of these mention Malkav being diablerized. Or Malkav winning the body tug a war with Tremere. Or Malkav being in Hundeoara. It mentions Saulot. Now if Malkav and Saulot were the same individual then Saulot's bio in LotH would have stated as such.
A lack of mention of something doesn't disprove it. Perhaps by this point in time Malkav's auspex had developed so far that he was a free-roaming soul, possessing bodies as needed. Or perhaps Malkav and Saulot were the same person, but it was a carefully hidden fact by Saulot/Malkav (if they were in fact one person rather than two completely split personalities). Saulot was a very machavellian manipulator--after all, he managed to survive Tremere's diablarie. Who's to say that the fact that he was Malkav wasn't kept hidden?
>>If you want to disagree with the printed text kinder either A)find me the book that proves FoBC page 32 is wrong or B) tell us that we can start using hyperbole to argue our cases against your hyperbole<<
Nobody is disagreeing with the printed text. I'm simply suggesting ways in which it would be possible for Saulot and Malkav to have been one individual that goes along with the printed information.
>>*If Malkavians and Salubri were from the same Antediluvian they would be apart of the same clan and not have views of other clans.<<
This is just plain wrong. Why do antitribu have different views of other clans than the main clan? Or are you going to start arguing that antitribu are bloodlines, not a part of the clan?
Anyway, I have (hopefully) made my points. At least if people aren't going to be willfully closed minded. And if they are going to be willfully closed minded, then there's nothing I can do to convince them otherwise.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 18:54:41>>I'm simply suggesting ways in which it would be possible for Saulot and Malkav to have been one individual that goes along with the printed information.<<
Shoot then.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Dyado_Vesco - 08/13/2004 18:58:39 - N/AOk Im coming from a nuetral point, I have read all these books withing the last 2 years, played sparingly but am deeply commited to Vampire in all its incarnations and have studied indepthly. In that time, I have yet to see any connection that Malkav and Saluot are the same person other then to tell me that Malkav is crazy and has multiple personalities, and Saulot is strange and so in fact might be crazy and might be Malkav. I am willing to open myself to a new notion, but what I would need is some hints, rumors or possibly blurbs that state that this possibility could even exist. I'll listen.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 19:09:48kinder, did you not type?
>>There seems, at least to me, to be ample evidence that Saulot and Malkav were one and the same.<<
kinder, unlike you I can admit when I am wrong. You did not quote me saying anything about the third eye. Take your moment and understand what I typed.
kinder, please look up the definition of devil's advocate. A position has to be stated in order for someone to take an opposing view just to argue and thus becoming a devil's advocate. No one started off the position that Saulot and Malkav are different individuals. Thus there cannot be an arguement against it. You started the discussion by saying that there is enough evidence that they are the same. So you cannot play devils advocate. Unless you arguing with a paragraph in a book that states they are different individuals and you are playing devils advocate in which case you have proven to yourself that they are different individuals. Otherwise you would not have taken that position.
Here is a link to the definition.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=devils%20advocate
kinder, you calling me an impolite fool is completely fair. Let's make a deal, I will accept that I am an impolite fool if you accept my opinion of you. We can either accept each others idea of the other and move on knowing how childish this has been or we can attempt to put whatever stabs we have taken at each other and leave that behind us. Either way you choose I will gladly follow.
the whiterabbit, should I have gone into the length I wanted to about educating you about vampire my time on the forum would not be spent doing something fun but a relentless chore. Now you are correct that I do not know what you know about vampire. But from your comments I beleive I know enough about what you know of vampire to make that comment. Such as your question about the system of using blood as a reflexive.
About the comment of Giovanni becoming a clan I refer you to page 16 in Storytellers Handbook Revised lower right hand corner cover the difference between bloodline and clan. Out of game the Giovanni are called a clan and states their active Antediluvian.
Yes, a piece of Cappadocius moved into the Shadowlands after his Final Death in 1444. But page 16 is out of game and states that Giovanni have an active Antediluvian.
Now do not get me wrong the whiterabbit. You will educate me about a lot of things in the future. And which I will endeavour to be the busy student. I look forward to learning things from your posts.
kinder and the whiterabbit, I am with Mithras.
>>I'm simply suggesting ways in which it would be possible for Saulot and Malkav to have been one individual that goes along with the printed information.<<
Shoot then. Let's start seeing page numbers from printed material. We have provided page numbers for our case, let's see the same due respect returned.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 19:11:00>>Let's start seeing page numbers from printed material.<<
Yep, lets see them.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
ELISA_THALAMAN - 08/13/2004 19:42:06oh, more thing kinder. Your comment in your opening post uses the statement "at least to me."
There is something very important I want to share with you. Your perception is your reality. And because it is your perception you cannot be wrong with how you perceived something. The reason you cannot be wrong how you perceived something is because only you perceived it and you have the right alone to decide if it is right or wrong. We cannot argue how you perceive something because we are not you. It would be incorrect for us to tell you how you perceived something.
So your comment is completely true and without fallacy as long as you keep your own council on that perception. But the moment that perception is shared with whoever it becomes a statement that can either a) be challanged, which many did b) be accepted, which the underdog lovers ran with or c) be ignored, which most of us should have done.
I know if I would have chose to ignore the silly (my perception) statement I would not have been in a discussion with someone holding semi bi-polar view points on the topic they brought up.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Endwyn - 08/13/2004 20:49:17 - N/AAt least a debate about Lasombra and Ventrue being intertwined in some "out of published material" context would have more debate room. Not a whole lot, but definatly more.
So why not -
ELISA: I'm playing DEVIL's ADVOCATE, I think that published material supports the idea that Ventrue and Lasombra are the same person. But I can't tell you why or give you refrence numbers.
(8 Posts Latter)
Ok, MY theory, which has to be right, because the DEVIL'S ADVOCATE is ALWAYS right is this: Ventrue was all about power: politcal power, social power, and physical power. Well, what does power do - it corrupts. What does absolute power do, corrupts absolutely. So by using a non-White Wolf statement I have breached the two together.
(6 Posts Latter)
No, no Elisa - YOU don't get it! You see, once absolute power corrupted Ventrue he embraced that dark power. He became Lasombra. That explains why Ventue is AWOL and Lasombra was still around.
(6 more Posts Latter)
Damn it Elisa, this isn't about whether or not someone killed Lasombra or not! It's about whether or not Lasombra and Ventrue WERE / ARE the same person. I refuse to acknowledge that if Lasombra and Ventrue were the same person and fell to a neonate that my theory is shot. REFUSE. It's speculation and hearsay......you weren't there for it!
(10 Posts Latter)
It has happened before, I can prove it can happen in where Ventrue could fall and get corrupted by his own power! It happened to Luke. He wanted to study the dark side, not to use it; but to better understand the enemy and thereby destroy them. He was corrupted and paid the price - he fell into darkness. And it happened to Vader. And Obi-Wan said Luke's fater and Vader were different people, that becoming that dark was like killing the good man he was. SO THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(3 Posts Latter)
So what Elisa if both Vader and Luke were redeamed and brought back to the light, not everyone is readmed! So what if it is from a different gameing company and they weren't ancient vampires? I don't see the difference! Besides, maybe Lasombra didn't die - -Maybe he WAS redeamed. Perhaps the book just said he died because he became all good again, and it would be like the good him (Ventrue) killing all the bad (Lasombra) in him. See, it does work - so there you ignorant, lame, non-knowlegeable idiot!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH, I WON!!!!
(2 Posts Latter)
What do you mean Elisa, by "Then what happened to Ventrue after he was redeamed?"
Elisa - you are dumb - he became one with the force and went to Dagobah. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sorry, but I have to speed this debate up.....I have better things to do...............
Elisa-
Sorry for calling you a - Quote:
>>ignorant, lame, non-knowlegeable idiot!<<I went too far; I know your not lame.
Subject: Is Saulot Malkav?
Mithras - 08/13/2004 20:49:41That was great!
We need more super quick arguments!
Threads cannot exceed 75 posts. Please start a new thread.
White Wolf - Use Terms - Online Catalog
