What is the average destruction rate for vampires (of any causes) for each age group? It is OK to give a range, and to distinguish different rates between sects and clans.
I am very interested in hearing everyone's opinions as I think a lot can be justified given people's assumptions about the setting.
Fledglings: I think this is quite high. Not every person is cut out to be a vampire and can make the transition. I think a high number of these are destroyed by their sires before they are even released (and if so, they don't count against the Prince permitting them to embrace, they get to do it again to find a childe who can hack it). Others end up destroying themselves by walking into the sun, or fall prey to hunters or supernatural predators. I think perhaps anywhere from 20-50%. Higher rate of destruction in the Sabbat than Camarilla. Varies wildly between clans.
Neonates: These guys have made it to being released which means they are able to live as vampires. Unfortunately, now they need to survive against other vampires, as well as other creatures, on their own. They also have to survive a lot longer than Fledglings to "age out" of this group. 100 years is a long time. I think after all the causes are out there, it's at least 50% destruction rate. Again, much higher in the Sabbat than Camarilla. Anarchs are also destroyed at a much higher rate. Not as much variation between clans at this point, but there are probably two general tiers of differing survival rates.
Ancillae: These guys are the survivors. Unfortunately for them, they're also generally responsible for carrying out the elders' wishes, and still need to be on the frontlines of things. Still, I think they have much better survival rates over all than the younger folks. It just seems higher because ancillae are almost always recognized by name, so when they fall it is noticed. The vast majority of fledglings and neonates don't get noticed when they're destroyed. Maybe 25% in the 200-300 years it takes to age out. I don't think there is much variation between clans at this point. But the Sabbat are supposed to have very little ancilla. I think that's mostly because few neonates make it this far.
Elders are a special category because they can be so for so long. I think in any given century, the survival rate is quite good. Maybe only 5-10% destroyed. The problem is that elders can exist theoretically forever, so they keep getting dwindled. After a thousand years, that 95% success rate means less than 60% of elders have made it. After two thousand years, it's around 35%. After 4000 years it's around 12%. If it is 90% survival every century, those numbers fall to 35%, 13%, and less than 2%.
I think the numbers for elders get skewed though, because many elders fall into voluntarily torpor at some point. So they drop out of vampire society and are effectively "dead", but who knows when they'll wake up?
I am very interested in hearing everyone's opinions as I think a lot can be justified given people's assumptions about the setting.
Fledglings: I think this is quite high. Not every person is cut out to be a vampire and can make the transition. I think a high number of these are destroyed by their sires before they are even released (and if so, they don't count against the Prince permitting them to embrace, they get to do it again to find a childe who can hack it). Others end up destroying themselves by walking into the sun, or fall prey to hunters or supernatural predators. I think perhaps anywhere from 20-50%. Higher rate of destruction in the Sabbat than Camarilla. Varies wildly between clans.
Neonates: These guys have made it to being released which means they are able to live as vampires. Unfortunately, now they need to survive against other vampires, as well as other creatures, on their own. They also have to survive a lot longer than Fledglings to "age out" of this group. 100 years is a long time. I think after all the causes are out there, it's at least 50% destruction rate. Again, much higher in the Sabbat than Camarilla. Anarchs are also destroyed at a much higher rate. Not as much variation between clans at this point, but there are probably two general tiers of differing survival rates.
Ancillae: These guys are the survivors. Unfortunately for them, they're also generally responsible for carrying out the elders' wishes, and still need to be on the frontlines of things. Still, I think they have much better survival rates over all than the younger folks. It just seems higher because ancillae are almost always recognized by name, so when they fall it is noticed. The vast majority of fledglings and neonates don't get noticed when they're destroyed. Maybe 25% in the 200-300 years it takes to age out. I don't think there is much variation between clans at this point. But the Sabbat are supposed to have very little ancilla. I think that's mostly because few neonates make it this far.
Elders are a special category because they can be so for so long. I think in any given century, the survival rate is quite good. Maybe only 5-10% destroyed. The problem is that elders can exist theoretically forever, so they keep getting dwindled. After a thousand years, that 95% success rate means less than 60% of elders have made it. After two thousand years, it's around 35%. After 4000 years it's around 12%. If it is 90% survival every century, those numbers fall to 35%, 13%, and less than 2%.
I think the numbers for elders get skewed though, because many elders fall into voluntarily torpor at some point. So they drop out of vampire society and are effectively "dead", but who knows when they'll wake up?
Comment