ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Wordmaker on May 03, 2013, 09:41:15 AM

Title: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Wordmaker on May 03, 2013, 09:41:15 AM

Can a Red Court Infected drink blood safely, so long as they don't kill?

If they had the willpower, could they feed on a willing person just enough to ease their hunger? Or could they try and get by on stolen blood packs or runoff from a slaughterhouse?

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Cadd on May 03, 2013, 10:50:03 AM

Based off of how Harry gives Susan a few drops of blood from his cut palm at one point to "revive" her, I'd say yes. It'd probably include physical restraints to avoid holding on and taking too much, but it should be possible.

Personally, I'd not allow runoff or blood packs. Do we even actually know if animal blood does anything for a RCV, btw?

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Wordmaker on May 03, 2013, 10:59:56 AM

I'd forgotten about that scene, thanks!

I can't recall anything from the books where Red Court drink anything other than blood fresh from a human. I suppose it depends what they get from blood that sustains them. Given their connection to the Maya, it's possible they're specifically tied to human sacrifice and animal blood, or blood extracted and kept refrigerated, doesn't do anything for them.

I'm wondering if it's possible, then, for a Red Court Infected, who doesn't have the Tattoos of St Giles, to ever reduce their Hunger Stress by means other than waiting and sunlight? What does that feel like for them? Is it like a White Court Virgin, who can only either try and feed very little, or has to cope with the hunger all the time?

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Haru on May 03, 2013, 12:17:05 PM

I think you found the reason why there are so few longtime red court virgins.  :D

I'm with Cadd, feeding one on your own blood should probably require some sort of restraints at least. And even then, I don't think you could free him, once he got the taste, because that first line has been crossed, and they are only going to want more.

With animal blood, I think, it is kind of like what Harry says about animals and ghosts. Animals just don't have much of a psychic or spiritual imprint, and will not be nearly as satisfying as human blood would be. Then again, it might be enough to sustain you. But again, you already established that you are going to kill a living thing and drink its blood. The rest is only a matter of degree and the human kill is only a matter of time.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: cold_breaker on May 03, 2013, 12:44:36 PM

Yeah, I'm pretty sure there's a caveat that it has to be lifeblood - so no blood packs.

Also, the books say that a white court virgins first feeding is always fatal to the victim. Be careful what you allow for them.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Wordmaker on May 03, 2013, 12:47:09 PM

Excellent point! I'd forgotten that as well.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Taran on May 03, 2013, 01:11:26 PM

Having them drink "a little blood" would be an excellent time to start calling for discipline checks...or even compels.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: LMage on May 05, 2013, 03:48:52 AM

I think it's like with White Court Virgins- they can take in bits and pieces but they don't actually turn until they've killed/finished the deed. Discipline rolls would probably be needed to keep themselves in check, and it should only be done in high risk situations.

On blood packs/animal blood, I would assume that it helps some but not a great deal, and not nearly as much as "fresh" blood, but on the flip side, I wouldn't set the difficult as high as from drinking from a live source.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: toturi on May 05, 2013, 08:02:15 AM

Quote from: LMage on May 05, 2013, 03:48:52 AM

On blood packs/animal blood, I would assume that it helps some but not a great deal, and not nearly as much as "fresh" blood, but on the flip side, I wouldn't set the difficult as high as from drinking from a live source.

I think it would be the BCV/RCV equivalent of going Toe-moss.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Mr. Ghostbuster on May 05, 2013, 10:56:56 AM

Quote from: cold_breaker on May 03, 2013, 12:44:36 PM

Also, the books say that a white court virgins first feeding is always fatal to the victim. Be careful what you allow for them.

Not always, almost always. Read "Bigfoot on Campus", the third installment in the Bigfoot series of short stories for details.

The explanation for those who don't want to read:

(click to show/hide)

In Big Foot on campus, the main character (I forget his name) is the half-human scion of his human mother and Big Foot (who is a powerful supernatural being). He has a girlfriend who is a White Court virgin (neither of them are aware of their supernatural heritage). Long story short, they get freaky but he lives through it and the White Court virgin doesn't become a full White vampire. It is later established that if a being has enough energy (way more than most mortals will ever posses) a White Court virgin can feed on them until "satisfied" without being fully turned.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Mrmdubois on May 08, 2013, 06:13:04 PM

In response to the Bigfoot on Campus thing.

(click to show/hide)

I think she was fully turned, the dude's life force was just so big that she couldn't kill him at it.  The whole point of the short story was to show how wrong the WCV attitude is, that their feeding mandates death.  Which is why her dad turned his power on her in order to prove his worldview was justified.  Might be hard, but if they were more selective about targets they could potentially all end up like the two in that story.  Although, I guess if you mean she didn't lose her innocence that would come from killing your first lover, then yeah she's still a WCVirgin.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: LMage on May 08, 2013, 08:00:58 PM

I'm pretty sure only the first full feeding is fatal. The RPG talks about WCV's being able to feed in low levels, but having to maybe take more full WC Powers/Abilities if they feed and use their powers to often, before becoming a full WCV.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Tedronai on May 09, 2013, 03:23:39 AM

Quote from: LMage on May 08, 2013, 08:00:58 PM

I'm pretty sure only the first full feeding is fatal.

That's a definitional issue.
A 'full' feeding is, by definition, almost universally fatal.  The first instance of such is no exception, but it's also no an exception to the 'almost'.

Only with time, dedication, and practice (typically including at least a few casualties) can a WCV even hope to learn the control it takes to cut short what would otherwise be a 'full' feeding, and many never achieve that (though few probably put in the effort; it's not a popular thing to do).
Some unusual circumstances might greatly assist the WCV, or take the matter entirely out of their hands, however.
As mentioned, a prospective victim might simply possess so much life force that the demon can have its fill without killing.
Alternatively, the act of feeding might simultaneously be the final piece that seals True Love between the WCV and their meal, cutting the meal short at the last possible moment and leaving the succulent morsel on the verge of death's door, but not quite gone.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Mr. Death on May 09, 2013, 07:34:56 PM

Quote from: Mrmdubois on May 08, 2013, 06:13:04 PM

In response to the Bigfoot on Campus thing.

(click to show/hide)

I think she was fully turned, the dude's life force was just so big that she couldn't kill him at it.  The whole point of the short story was to show how wrong the WCV attitude is, that their feeding mandates death.  Which is why her dad turned his power on her in order to prove his worldview was justified.  Might be hard, but if they were more selective about targets they could potentially all end up like the two in that story.  Although, I guess if you mean she didn't lose her innocence that would come from killing your first lover, then yeah she's still a WCVirgin.

Dresden's verse has definitive, qualitative differences between killing and not killing--a Red Court Infected doesn't turn when she has a sufficient amount of blood, she turns when she's killed through feeding. Given what we know, it's probably the death itself that turns a Virgin into a White Court Vampire more than the amount of energy they get by feeding.

I.e., the "turn" condition isn't "eat X amount of lust", it's "kill 1 person".

Quote from: Tedronai on May 09, 2013, 03:23:39 AM

Only with time, dedication, and practice (typically including at least a few casualties) can a WCV even hope to learn the control it takes to cut short what would otherwise be a 'full' feeding, and many never achieve that (though few probably put in the effort; it's not a popular thing to do).

That or having someone nearby with a crowbar to pry off/club the vampire before it goes too far, but yeah.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: ReaderAt2046 on May 14, 2013, 02:16:50 AM

Related question: If you feed without killing, how much Hunger does that remove or how many powers does it give back? Off the top of my head I'd say 1 point of power restored for every feeding exchange, and feeding at all clears your Hunger track, but that's just an eyeball. Is there an official ruling on this?

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Tedronai on May 14, 2013, 02:38:57 AM

Quote from: ReaderAt2046 on May 14, 2013, 02:16:50 AM

Is there an official ruling on this?

There is not.

Your suggested houserules have a few potential problems.  Notably, basing the benefits of the amount of time spent feeding rather than the amount of feeding accomplished in that time punishes characters for being good at what they do.

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: ReaderAt2046 on May 14, 2013, 12:18:41 PM

Quote from: Tedronai on May 14, 2013, 02:38:57 AM

There is not.

Your suggested houserules have a few potential problems.  Notably, basing the benefits of the amount of time spent feeding rather than the amount of feeding accomplished in that time punishes characters for being good at what they do.

Good point. Hmm... Maybe regenerate based on consequences inflicted? (1 for minor, 2 for moderate, etc)

Title: Re: Red Court Infected - Feeding but not killing?
Post by: Mr. Death on May 14, 2013, 04:11:27 PM

Quote from: ReaderAt2046 on May 14, 2013, 12:18:41 PM

Good point. Hmm... Maybe regenerate based on consequences inflicted? (1 for minor, 2 for moderate, etc)

At one point I proposed something like this...I'll see if I can dig out the thread.