I'm not in favor of forming a consensus that vampirism (and other similar monstrous forms) is reversible. Yes, this is an oddly worded sentence. By it I mean this: the question of whether or not it can (theoretically) be done isn't important to me. What is important is that choosing to make it possible trivializes the condition in the first place. A game-reality in which vampires can be (and are) "cured" is less interesting that one in which they struggle to be cured but fall short. Once the first vampire finds a way to revert his vampirism, vampirism becomes a club, rather than a condition.
Not belittling you: You never played White Wolf's Vampire : The Masquerade or Requiem, have you?
If becoming mortal again is flatly impossible, there is no reason to struggle for it. If your Meta-premise for the character can never be realized, there is much less reason to really work at it, it becomes a side thing, that hobby the character pursues. The character won't ever really sacrifice for it, because the player knows it's impossible.*
If it's possible, but horribly impractical and expensive, it becomes something worth fighting for.
Look at it like this: If there were no way to stop a conversion to becoming an RCV there would never be any RCVInfected characters, or if there were they would the Guy With The Terminal Disease, a PC who is around for a few sessions and then blazes out before succumbing to his curse. There is no struggle except to hold out as long as possible. However since the Infected can hold out seemingly forever, they are instead more complex and more conflicted about their natures. Sure, you can still play it as a Terminal Patient mindset, nothing stopping you, but you've got options.
Same with the BCV. If a players loved one gets converted to get at him (Or Renfielded), telling the player "She's Dead Jim", means the player has only the two choices of Destroy My Love The Monster and Go Crazy And Join Her. If the player thinks they're saveable, they have a third option, Fight To Save Them.
One of the reasons I'm really liking FATE is it's "Never Say No" attitude.
*Yes, I'm speaking in generalities, yes I know, every Player is different and some certianly will fight even if it is flatly impossible.
It's from Blood Rites - when Harry is prepping for the "raid the Black Court Hideout" part.
Thanks, I just re-read that section.
Did you bother to read the second sentence? Seriously, what's the difference between turning a Vampire (an unliving thing) to a human if it works when you turn a human to unliving stone and back again?
Seriously? Cost.
The discussion (not our slapfest) was on how and how much cost. Deciding "Sure, if it's possible it's as easy as killing someone" isn't really moving the discussion forward. It's dismissing it.
Regardless, so if you think it's as easy as turning someone to stone and back, what would you consider to be necessary to Unstone someone? Keeping in mind they've now been killed by becoming stone...
Saying nothing of the "Dark magics" the BCV are supposedly filled and animated with.
All possibilities available to him and coming at a cost he would be willing to pay.
Exactly. We are told "It's impossible" by characters who likely have no reason to question Tradition. Or, whom have but haven't discovered a method (the case of Bob discussing Renfeilds).
I always question Tradition because it is so often inaccurate. Even if there are good reasons to not do something, simply calling it impossible is erroneous to my way of thinking.
@ Richard_Chilton: I consider there to be a vast difference between "impossible" and "incalculably/prohibitively expensive". On Cannot Be Done, the other Should Not Be Done.
