Alright I am in several vampire role plays and we were discussing what kind of vampires do you think should be the all around idea of vampires. The same for werewolves. I didnt see a debate on this subject so Im making this one.

VAMPIRES

SIDE A

Twilight version. Glittery in sunlight. Good all around

SIDE B

Old timey version. Turn into bats and eat people

or do you have another idea of vampires? Tell us here.


WEREWOLVES

SIDE A

Protect people from vampires. Generally nice. nonpainful change only during full moon


SIDE B

Hunt humans. Shunned live alone. Change at will.

please lets make this a friendly debate and try to see what we agree on. Give us your reasons for your opinions and so on.

The thing about the general idea of vampires and werewolves is that they are fantasies or fairytales and aren't really one thing or another. People can make up whatever stories about them that they want, just like fairys, princesses, etc. If you really want a "true" version of either, I suppose you should go to the historical background of each. The history channel is doing documentaries on each this week for Halloween.

We know that there are people who are covered in hair like an animal and have longer teeth. It is a medical condition and the idea of werewolves were started when one person like that started killing people (or that is the general idea I got from the history channel).

As for vampires, I have heard two different ideas from history. One was of course the story of Vlad Dracula, who was so cruel people thought he drank blood or something like that. The other think I heard was that it was based on people who had a certain disease (maybe the black plague or something like that) in the middle ages. The disease made people lose a lot of blood, so other people thought maybe they would try to take it from others and it also made them really pale because of the blood loss. Also, they were sensitive to light because of the disease.

Despite all the "hollywood" version of vampires, I think the historical ones are more scary because they have a real life aspect to them. I mean, they could happen. People like Dracula do exist or Bloody Mary who bathed in the blood of young women. I don't think I would ever be afraid of a story of someone who turned into a bat or whatever because it would seem too unreal and I would never believe it would happen in real life.

Twilight is a fiction story. That is all. The old movies that depict werewolves and vampires for your Side B were just as much fiction stories as Twilight. In fact, if you go back and watch them, they are usually even more cheesy than Twilight.

The one version of a vampire I have ever seen that ever really scared me is the ones based on the old version of Dracula books. In this book, vampires are able to go out in the sun, they just aren't as powerful. They don't turn into bats, but are able to move so fast at some times it looked like they were teleporting. As for werewolves, I've never really found them scary. There are bears and other wild beasts that already exist. I'm not scared of them, so I wouldn't be scared of werewolves.

I must say I love the way you put that. I put this debate here not to credit them as real for they are fictional creatures but to get peoples opinions on what type is better to them.

I suppose I should have mentioned that.

If you wanted to go with the general view of Vampires, then they are old corpses that where derived from when the dead where uncovered back in ancient times. You see hair and nails continue to grow after you are dead, that fact added to the fear of the unknown created the thought of vampires. The original Dracula was a nasty old man creature who wasn't nearly as "pretty" as they are now.

however, they are made up, so anyone can make them how they want to. The same with fairies, mermaids and dragons.

I suppose it depends on what the purpose for them is. Side A is for making these "monsters" more likable, while Side B is for being scary. I mean, there is no question that Side B is more scary than Side A, but a lot of people nowadays want to be a part of that world and to befriend these monsters. Side A lends itself to a story where humans become involved with these creatures more than just being their victims.

I personally go for scary vamps and non-scary werewolves, but that is my personal preference. I like vamps to be scary enough to make you faint and werewolves strong, but against vampires.

Like Goldenlici said, both creatures were created from fables and were made perhaps for the enjoyment of a scary tale. Personally I like the "old old" version of Vampires because if you get into the Dracula theme, then there is a lot of physiological aspect that would go on behind the creature (if played out). They would also be more scary and less "catlike" as I view most of those vampires played in roleplays today. =)

As for werewolves... I think of them as giant teddy bears injected with rabies. =D Shoot 'em dead or leave 'em be. =/

I think that there is a good medium for the two sides of each, because if it is a human that has changed they could still have their human nature, and have doubt or love. So It really depends on who the person is that is changing. I mean a man that kills people as a human changes then yeah he is going to go animal rabies crazy when he transforms, but a good person who is super intouch with their good side may refrain and do everything in their power not to hurt anyone. So I like I guess a little variety in the character concepts. >.<

With both, I like the idea that the character, Vampire OR Werewolf, is meant to be tragic. Yes, they are powerful, but the power comes with a price. Even Dracula from the classic novel was tragic. He was unable to love, only to posses.

With a Vampire, the price is their humanity, the price is the ability to live, love and die as a human does. The price is their mortality.. living forever can't be a pleasent thing, even if you have ambitions of ruleing the world. I have a hard time dealing with 2009 because I'm almost 30 and still into No Doubt and I miss the old Transformers cartoon, the new ones suck. Imagine being 300 years old and having to deal with the invention of the car, legalized voting for women and the end of slavery? Imagine having to wake up to the Internet and I Pods and PDAs. It can't be fun.

And all of this is why I don't like the type A vampires. How is it tragic that they sparkle? How is it tragic that they can still have children? And that they get to go to high school? I'm sorry if someone else disagrees with me, but I have a hard time enjoying something like that. They've taken out the personality of the vampire, the very essence of it. The sadness, the deviousness, the need to be secritive and manipulative. And the nightly fight to reclaim some ounce of humanity.

Edward could very easily go out in daylight as his glittery self in the right atmosphere. San Fransisco? New York? Where people can look strange and never be questioned about it. He is able to live a normal life, his maker (father) is able to be a doctor and have a family, he isn't hiding himself, he has a family. He even lives in a house full of windows. He isn't scared of the sunlight because it doesn't hurts him. Being a dead creature and doomed to darkness forever is part of what makes a Vampire tragic. They can't enjoy life as it once was, and they are denied the pleasure of even a simple sunrise, something that they likely took for granted as a human, but now, it serves as a reminder of what they have lost. But Edward and his kind are normal people in every aspect, except for missing a heartbeat and sparkling. I see no "vampire" in him or any of the other sparklies.

When thinking of Werewolves, I don't like the murdering loner monster type, but I can see it being plausable. A wolf is a pack animal, but one being removed from the pack can cause problems with it's own kind. Killing pups and trying to kill the pack leader to take back the mantel of Leader. With the right story and situation, Type A and Type B could both exist in the same story. A pack, a family group with a higherarcy and rules, and the murdering pack-less outsider, angry and resentful, and willing to kill for their right to belong. And seeing as these creatures would be part human, that could have a huge effect on it's role as well. Humans can be monsters, too.

As for when they change? I don't know about this one, either one seems plausible (in a fictional sense) but I do like the idea of changing only during the 3 days of the full moon, meaning the werewolf is story driven to hide his secret and protect those he cares for during those 3 days. It adds more tragedy to the character. Being able to change at will seems like a childish way to go about it. It's all power without consequence. It doesn't make a good story, and in the end, that's what I want. A good story with a situation that brings new emotions to the table, things I would never be able to experience myself as a normal human. That's why these characters need to be as far from human as possible.

My favorite representation of werewolves is as the guardians of nature, i.e. White wolf Games' Werewolf: The Apocalypse game. It combines environmentalism, my love of wolves, and my love of freedom.

I've always thought vampires seemed like leeches. And they're often portrayed as undead, which means they're a corpse. Also, acording to old tradition they can't enter your house unless you invite them in. XD

I did my senior paper for English class on the link between cultural perceptions and the representation of werewolves. For example, farmer's fear of wolves because of their livestock, also fear of the moon's effects (origin of the word LUNAcy), biblical symbols of the righteous as lambs and wolves being their natural enemies. I then looked through to werewolves being used just as forces of fear in the modern world, possibly representing fear of our instincts or fear of the uncontrollable side of ourselves. Finally I looked at modern views of wolves as necessary for the ecosystem and the environmentalism movement forming the representation of werewolves as defenders of th natural world.

both side a. But I'm for werewolf over vampires. GO TEAM JACOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@smilee010 - and see, this is why anyone who read Twilight is now just embarrassed.

As far as the idea goes for all around vampires and werewolves - they're fictitious creatures so they should be portrayed anyway the person wants them to be portrayed.

However, I would admit that I would be a bit irritated if I went into a role-play about vampires and was told that yes, these vampires sparkle in the sun. That's no longer an original idea, therefore the role-play should be classified as a Twilight role play. But if it was vampire role play where, yeah they burn in the sun and all the other legends, I would be more content with it just being called a vampire role play. And if someone made a role play with a new spin on vampires, I'd probably be impressed the most because they took the time to come up with something different but still adheres to the blood drinker concept.

Oh, and this may be a spoiler but -
Twilight's werewolves weren't even werewolves. They're shape shifters - you find this out at the end of Breaking Dawn. I believe Meyer's real werewolves were actually violent, but she didn't really elaborate on it - just sorta threw it in there.
End Spoiler