Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How many mortals does a vampire kill in a year?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How many mortals does a vampire kill in a year?

    I'm working on something on how violent the world of darkness is portrayed as being and I'm curious what the number of mortals a vampire would likely kill in a year from feeding would be? I recall one book made mention of it being something like two a year from succumbing to the Beast and sucking someone dry but can neither place it nor confirm it.

  • #2
    Is it a Leap Year?

    Comment


    • #3
      No hard numbers because it depends on the vampire. Someone with high Humanity and good Willpower is probably going to be as careful as possible not to kill while feeding, including avoiding frenzy. A Gangrel might avoid feeding on humans altogether and stick to animals. Etc etc.

      Comment


      • #4
        It depends on what tone you want to set as the ST! In the end you must decide for yourself how gritty and dark your setting is in that regard. If you assume that the average lick tries to avoid killing people for both moral and practical reasons but sometimes fails to resist the beast then, 1-2 a year is probably not the worst estimation. If you want to be less dark maybe its only one in five years or if you want it more violent maybe its five a year. Regardless of what the average is you will of course have outliers as Drac described, in both directions.


        My Mage 2e Homebrew

        Comment


        • #5
          state of grace has a 163 year old vampire who killed 422 (you do the math, cause I'm tired -_-' )

          note that the score is pretty low, since that guy is the 'I don't want to kill people' type,
          the average vampire will have a higher score


          -

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Draconis View Post
            No hard numbers because it depends on the vampire. Someone with high Humanity and good Willpower is probably going to be as careful as possible not to kill while feeding, including avoiding frenzy. A Gangrel might avoid feeding on humans altogether and stick to animals. Etc etc.
            Yup. Just looking for an average. Although the idea of vampires having some sort of "mortal killing" quota would be interesting.

            Comment


            • #7
              As others said, the numbers will likely vary wildly. The biggest factors will be Humanity/Willpower, feeding method and stress.
              Humanity and Willpower determine how much the vampire cares and how much they have themself under control.
              Feeding method determines how risky your hunts become. Baggers and vegans don't come into contact with humans all that much, but of course, they also drink icky low quality blood that might have them on edge for something more exquisite. Osiris and Sirens with proper herds are relatively safe. Alleycats who actually stalk and overwhelm their prey far less so.
              Finally, stress influences how much blood the vampire actually needs. If they're living a relatively relaxed unlife, they need barely more than the vitae to rise in the evening. On the other hand side, in times of an active conflict, they may both require lots of blood and lack the time to hunt safely.

              In the end, I'd say that under optimum conditions (high humanity/WP, safe feeding method, low stress) the number is close to zero. On a bad couple of nights, it can be one person per night, though that will require either a completely suborned police/coroner system or a massive cleanup effort if it goes on for too long.

              Comment


              • #8
                Anyone from 0 to LOTS.

                In pure hunger terms, I don't think a vampire kills a person a year but almost all kill 5-7 in their starting years before they get control over themselves.

                Then the murders they commit are mostly voluntary.


                Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                Comment


                • #9
                  A surviving vampire will work out how to feed without killing because it's inconvenient, even for low humanity.

                  The problem is hunger frenzies when low on blood, because taste of blood is a trigger.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There will likely be a major difference depending on which sect or independent clan the vampire belongs to. A Camarilla vampire will produce fewer victims than a Sabbat vampire.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think accidental deaths happen, regardless of how much Kindred try to avoid it.

                      Sometimes, a vampire who otherwise doesn't kill will over-indulge while feeding. In the rapture of blood consumption, it can be tempting to get lost in it until the vampire realizes they've taken too much. I suspect that happens regardless of age. Even experienced vampires - who generally have a better sense of how much they take - can forget themselves from time to time. Indeed, the belief in one's infallible skill at feeding can lead to making errors from overconfidence.

                      It's probable that many Elders use their Resources and other advantages to get vessels to come to them, in order to feed at a time and place where they have maximum control. If for no other reason than because they know that no amount of personal expertise or care will fully eliminate the possibility of ending up with a dead body. Aside from the Jyhad-related reasons why a vampire would "order in" their meals, it's just safer overall to have a vessel in a secluded place the vampire controls, so they can better dispose of any corpses.


                      EDIT: Also, while we in Player-Storyteller Land make assumptions about vessels according to generic stat blocks, that say adult humans have seven health levels and 10 blood points, individual humans are much more varied and harder to pin down in practice. Even a human that seems healthy enough to survive losing 2 or 3 blood points might not be so in reality. Health issues - even ones the human herself isn't aware of - could complicate matters, leading to unexpected results when subjected to the physical ordeal that is being fed upon.

                      Any number of corpses could have been left behind - sometimes without the vampire knowing - because the body didn't react well to being bled. Complications arising from unknown or environmental factors. Vampires also generally don't stick around that long for feedings (unless it's with their Herd), for the purposes of avoiding any entanglements or witnesses. They might not know how many victims have perished after being fed upon.
                      Last edited by Bluecho; 07-02-2019, 05:43 PM.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Pleiades View Post
                        state of grace has a 163 year old vampire who killed 422 (you do the math, cause I'm tired -_-' )

                        note that the score is pretty low, since that guy is the 'I don't want to kill people' type,
                        the average vampire will have a higher score
                        He's doing a shitty job then. If this one guy has killed nearly half a thousand people in under 2 centuries and the average vampire has a higher score, then humanity should have either been wiped out in a thousand years or at the very least civilization should know about the undead as common knowledge by now.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by The Dreamweaver View Post

                          He's doing a shitty job then. If this one guy has killed nearly half a thousand people in under 2 centuries and the average vampire has a higher score, then humanity should have either been wiped out in a thousand years or at the very least civilization should know about the undead as common knowledge by now.
                          Comes out to 2.59 persons per year.

                          Cheers!


                          If you don't use an Oxford comma, I feel bad for you, son,
                          'Cuz I got ninety-nine problems, but clarity ain't one.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by nothing View Post

                            Comes out to 2.59 persons per year.

                            Cheers!
                            So for every century, he and those like him will kill roughly 250 people each. A mere 10 Kindred operating this way will have killed 2500 people in a single century. Now factor in the vamps that don't care or are Sabbat loons. How many vampires are there supposed to be again?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by The Dreamweaver View Post

                              So for every century, he and those like him will kill roughly 250 people each. A mere 10 Kindred operating this way will have killed 2500 people in a single century. Now factor in the vamps that don't care or are Sabbat loons. How many vampires are there supposed to be again?
                              40k...60k if we count the kuei-jin


                              He's doing a shitty job then. If this one guy has killed nearly half a thousand people in under 2 centuries and the average vampire has a higher score, then humanity should have either been wiped out in a thousand years or at the very least civilization should know about the undead as common knowledge by now.
                              well, his sire is the one that claims that his score is exceptionally low

                              humanity has been through alot,
                              I doubt vampires would wipe it out

                              however, society definitely wouldn't be the same as we know it


                              -

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X