Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: theplottwist on July 02, 2015, 08:37:39 PM
-
Some time ago I was reading a discussion about this, and someone said "Dracula was defeated at his full power by Trevor Belmont." This happened again in the CV Facebook page recently, and I thought "Wait... Where is it ever said that?" and decided to track down the source. I found nothing.
I assumed that this was the case because Dracula hadn't died before Trevor kicked his ass, therefore there was no need for him to "recover" his power. It was never lost, in first place.
HOWEVER it also ocurred to me that Dracula was not the Dark Lord before CVIII. It was Lisa's death that made him into the incarnation of evil. Before this he was simply a dude defying god by living forever and trying to get his shit together with his wife and son. So this would mean that "full power" here means "full power as the Dark Lord", perhaps?
So I went on to look for an evidence, and found this dialogue from Castlevania Judgment:
Dracula: Ah, my long-lost boy. Well met, my son.
Alucard: This will mark the first time I face you at your full strength.
Dracula: Yes, you were with that wretched Belmont, and I had not reached my
full power.
Alucard: In truth, I may have been frightened... scared to confront my own
father.
Dracula: You're as soft as ever, boy. You truly hope to challenge me?
Alucard: This time, I will not hesitate. This time, the son will surpass the
father!
Dracula: Very well, child. Come.
Yes, it comes from Castlevania Jugment, the canon-paradox wonder. However, the game is constructed upon information supposed to be true to the source. Even Cornell's story is "canon" to his world.
So... This lead me to question if anyone has ever fought Dracula at his full power ever. What do you guys think? Can we find when he was at his full power or not?
Also, about this CVIII info, can someone provide me with any details contradicting Judgment? It'd really come in handy.
-
Hmm. Legacy of Darkness, perhaps? I mean, Dracula Ultimate was the final boss, wasn't he? Just a guess. :P
-
Hmm. Legacy of Darkness, perhaps? I mean, Dracula Ultimate was the final boss, wasn't he? Just a guess. :P
Well, Legacy of Darkness is not canon to IGA's timeline (where Trevor and team exists) so I don't really know how we can seek evidence for this, as there is no mention of him being "underpowered" sometime in the past or in another ressurrection.
BUT since I didn't mention what canon I was talking about, anything goes. Since the sacrifice was a success, and he had YEARS to develop safe from vampire hunters, I believe he was fully powered in LoD indeed.
-
The original Castlevania, I guess. Makes sense for the most famous Belmont to have brought down Drac in his prime. The Adventure too, maybe.
-
I'd say either SOTN or Castlevania 3.
-
I would guess the canon games that had Dracula prematurely resurrected feature a sub-par Count; Where he doesn't have all of his dark power. This would mean the other canon titles feature a fully powered Dracula. HoD I would exclude since Dracula never made an appearance, but was instead Maxim's evil twin utilizing the remains for 'its' own purposes. In terms of The Adventure and Belmont's Revenge, Dracula would have been at full power however he was defeated the first time round; not killed. The original Castlevania would also have a fully-powered Dracula. Strong enough to enact a horrible curse on one as strong in both body and spirit as Simon. And definitely in Castlevania III where it took the combined powers and efforts of all those who were involved. SotN features another premature resurrection for Dracula and thus I believe he was not at his full strength. But definitely in Rondo do we see a fully-powered Dracula as he threw everything he had at Richter (3 powerful forms from the DXC version), and ultimately failed.
-
Seems like that quote would bring some salt to a Castlevania forum, especially since we have a couple of members here with a Belmont bias. :)
If that's what said in the game I see no reason to doubt it myself since Judgment is a reliable source even though some people might not like that. I'm not sure why Dracula wouldn't be at full power myself, but it's probably a better idea to just ask IGA why he made that decision instead of just straight up denying it. Presumably, Dracula is at full power every 100 years. It might have something to do with the "power of Christ" being weak at that time.
edit: To expand on that "ask IGA" bit in my comment, why not do exactly that? Since Bloodstained IGA has been a lot more open to answering fan questions. So maybe plottwist or somebody else could try contacting Ben Judd and maybe ask if he could get IGA to asnwer a couple of lore questions. Obviously, we couldn't ask anything about 1999 and so on, but I'm sure he would be able to answer "when was Dracula at full power"-type questions. :)
-
The only thing i can think its that he say he wasnt in his full power because he lose that fight so he lie, It is an excuse.
-
I would guess the canon games that had Dracula prematurely resurrected feature a sub-par Count; Where he doesn't have all of his dark power.
Indeedly! PoR confirms this:
Eric: This power! Has Dracula been revived?!
Jonathan: Afraid so.
Charlotte: Brauner was sealing Dracula away, so when we destroyed
him...
Eric: Strange Even Brauner's seals would be easily Broken by
Dracula's power, and yet--
Charlotte: !! Perhaps Dracula still hasn't revived completely!
Eric: Perhaps.
Jonathan: Either way, our only choice is to defeat him. And I'd
prefer the easiest way to do that.
Charlotte: Alright, let's go.
Eric: This is your final battle. Don't do anything foolish
and get killed, you hear?
Jonathan: ... Let's go!
-
I'd say 1999, I'm pretty sure it's stated somewhere that he was at his strongest there.
-
I'd say 1999, I'm pretty sure it's stated somewhere that he was at his strongest there.
Yep, this was also confirmed in PoR, right after beating Dracula:
Jonathan: Too bad pal. As long as were here, you won't be revived.
Charlotte: Still, that was an impressive display of impromptu
teamwork.
Dracula: Say what you will. But I can see it... One day, my power
will be fully revived!
Jonathan: Fully or not, you're never, ever going to win.
Dracula: I look forward to seeing who will have the last laugh
EDIT: It's kinda weird to see PoR really set up 1999, and then follow it up with OoE, which in turn tried to bridge the gap between SotN and Bloodlines, even though we already knew Richter gave the Vampire Killer to the Morris family and run off with his wife, leaving just a disparate group of extended family members in Romania. I certainly don't regret OoE whatsoever, but it's still slightly odd in retrospect. But back in 2007, I thought the next 2D game was certainly going to be a Lament sequel only because of Leon's 2D sprite in the Greatest Five.
Oh to be young and dumb(er) again...
-
Let's break this down by game, then.
Lament:
Not Dracula yet at all. This is where the connection with Chaos starts, though....
Legends:
Not "The Dark Lord" yet. Only kinda starting. Just a Vamp pissed off at the world for killing his SECOND loving wife (poor guy can't catch a break).
CVIII:
Risen as "The Dark Lord" due to Necromancy and other dark arts. Truly at Full Power. However, was fought by a team of Four, not just one (though gameplay-wise you only fight him with two). <----here's one instance, methinks.
Curse of Darkness:
Not at all Full Power. Recently resurrected when Isaac does his thing and Trevor does his thing with the blood and the stuff.
Adventure:
Possibly at Full Power. Fakes his own death.
Belmonts' Revenge:
Possibly at Full Power. More power than in Adventure, unless defeat at the hands of Christopher left him weak and regenerating.
Order of Shadows:
Not at all at full Power.
Castlevania:
At full Power. Enough power to put a curse on Simon upon dying. <----here's one instance
Simon's Quest:
No power at all. Barely a regenerating Skeleton. Simon whips his ass.
Harmony of Dissonance:
Not even with a body yet. You fight a ghost, and then an amalgamation of parts before they have a chance to unify and do anything.
Rondo of Blood:
Possible candidate for "Full Power", given the blood ritual... but the kidnapping of maidens suggests that he's still recovering. I think this one might be a candidate for it, though <----here's another possible time.
Symphony of the Night:
Recently defeated. Only a few years after Rondo. You fight Dracula in an ethereal Castle that's not of this world, not unlike in Harmony.
Circle of the Moon:
He states he's not at full power and requires a ritual of the moon and Morris Baldwin's sacrifice.
Order of Ecclesia:
Not at full Power (unless you count the Bad Ending as such). Barlowe is a poor sacrifice for this ritual.
Legacy of Darkness:
Not at full Power. However, the ending suggests that, in time, and using the power that Cornell relinquished in order to save Ada, will help him become stronger in time.
Castlevania64:
Possibly at Full Power, given the events of LoD, the 8-year gap, and the countless children Actrise has sacrificed to Dracula. It's possible that Gilles DeRais's perversions have also helped the Count be at full power.
Only problem is, he's been revived in the body of a child. But gameplay-wise, he has enough power to make you fight an impostor, then make you fight his human form, and then make you fight his Dragon form... and what a form THAT is.
It's possible that Reinhardt and Carrie fought Drac together... but since the game is not Canon, it is unclear how they went about it, as there are no references to these heroes at all later.
Dracula (the Book):
Dracula is purchasing property and is able to travel and he's able to use all of his powers. It takes quite a lot of work for Van Helsing and company to take him down. This nullifies Bloodlines and PoR from being candidates for "Full Power Drac", in my opinion... since Drac dies in the book.
Bloodlines: Because of Dracula (the book), and because of Drolta's schemes, and Elizabeth Bartley/Bathory's plot to use the blood of maidens, etc. to resurrect the Count, we know that he's not at Full Power in this battle.
PoR: Same reasons as per Dracula (the book) and due to the events of Bloodlines. On top of this, you fight Drac and he requires Death's assistance. He's also sealed within the magic of Brauner's paintings for some time. Obviously weak...
...but the deaths of many during World War II may be why he's so young-looking. Interesting.. hm...
1999: At the strongest, but this is only referenced later. We do not know the extent of Drac's power, but we know it took an army, the Church, and other secret organizations, combined with magical rituals from both religious and secular groups, to defeat Dracula and move his realm to a place where he couldn't attack anymore and his connection to Chaos is severed. Dracula has been linked to Chaos (a demonic entity... possibly the biggest demonic entity... perhaps even bigger than Lucifer... just the embodiment of Entropy and Disarray... we're talking Eldrich Abomination, here) since Lament and the Crimson Stone.
AoS: lose to Chaos and 'technically' you're Drac on his prime. Not the canon ending, though.
DoS: lose your mind and 'technically' you're Drac reborn, resurrected, and on your strongest prime. It will take a team of three (Grant's representative got snubbed) to take care of Somacula. <----here's another candidate for "Full Power" but not a canon instance.
-
Most likely either Castlevania 3 (he had not yet been defeated unless you count Legends as canon... which you shouldn't) or 1999, because... well, duh.
-
Lament:
Not Dracula yet at all. This is where the connection with Chaos starts, though....
CVIII:
Risen as "The Dark Lord" due to Necromancy and other dark arts. Truly at Full Power. However, was fought by a team of Four, not just one (though gameplay-wise you only fight him with two). <----here's one instance, methinks.
Here is another thing I have qualms about: When did Dracula become connected to Chaos?
I thought that the Crimson Stone only made him into a vampire (this is literally the only description given to it), but no such connection had been established yet.
Then, in CVIII he goes batshit insane and actually connects with Chaos (explaining how he's suddenly gaining power to wage his war, feeding from the chaos he's causing himself).
Oh well.
Right now I agree that Simon, Richter and Julius fought a fully powered Dracula (even though I can also find nothing on the matter relating to Julius, but the scale of the event makes it look like it). But Dracula's line on Judgment is really the only answer there is about his power in CVIII, and here I'll agree with Nagumo. Judgment does contain reliable information pertaining the canon (it's where the whole blood-ties connection of the Lecardes with the Belmonts came from).
As for Trevor needing three more allies to do it, I thought up the following possibilities:
-Trevor is the weakest Belmont to fight Dracula if we consider that each Belmont is stronger than the last. This would explain how he wasn't able to do it alone and how the others after him were.
-Maybe he WAS able to do it alone, but the allies decided to help anyway to ensure victory, as they also had their beef with the Count.
-Maybe Dracula was not fully powered BUT was strong as hell anyway, and rising to fully powered status, requiring four people to put him down. Almost fully powered, perhaps?
Dunno, it seems weird that IGA would put this line concerning a big plot-point in a game he made for no reason at all. Seems AWFULLY unconsiderate for someone whose CVIII is the favorite game. But then again, Maria is obsessed with boobs and Grant looks like a ninja-mummy.
-
So if Full Power is basically:
CVIII
CVA/BR/AR
CV/ Super CVIV
Rondo/ XX
CV64 (not canon to IGA timeline)
1999
If full power is approximately every 100 years, this could make sense.
However the 64 games aren't counted, so wouldn't there need to be another instance of Full Power...
Is this possibly why they made OOE? Shanoa talks about the real keep of the Castle being in Hell itself. So if Dracula has completely resurrected and claimed his throne (which I believe he has in OOE; as per his sitting on the throne in the intro) then I don't see why he's not at full power. With no Morris or Belmonts around to fight, it had to be Shanoa using Dracula's own power, again i understand the Belmonts can defeat Dracula, but Shanoa had to use his own power against him which was embued with the strength of the Belmonts. If he wasn't at full power she wouldn't have needed that, Hector defeated a prematurely resurrected Dracula only with his Devil Forgemaster abilities.
Additionally, the entire point of the Order was Dracula's resurrection, why would Barlowe sacrifice himself if he knew this couldn't be achieved.
DoS: lose your mind and 'technically' you're Drac reborn, resurrected, and on your strongest prime. It will take a team of three (Grant's representative got snubbed) to take care of Somacula.
Wasn't Hammer originally playable and able to climb walls/ throw knives originally in AoS? This would make him Grant's representative. However, they left the playable side out and he just became the merchant instead.
-
I thought that the Crimson Stone only made him into a vampire (this is literally the only description given to it), but no such connection had been established yet.
I thought the Crimson Stone was a way to make a pact with Chaos... but that's just my Headcanon.
Then, in CVIII he goes batshit insane and actually connects with Chaos (explaining how he's suddenly gaining power to wage his war, feeding from the chaos he's causing himself).
Oh well.
Sometime after LoI but before Legends (in my headcanon they're all canon :P ), when Lisa, Drac's 2nd wife dies (the first being Elisabetha... it's possible that he sees something in Lisa that reminds him of her not unlike how in the Dracula novel/movie, he sees something in Mina Harker that reminds him of his first wife), that's when he loses it. At first he was just defying God because his first wife took ill. Now he's gone mad with rage seeing as his 2nd was taken from him from filthy ignorant Humans. Alucard's rage is severely supressed, by contrast, since it seems he was there when she was about to be executed, but did not go and save her since she told him not to hate humans.
I imagine he could've just shredded through them with his Half-Vamp abilities, but didn't because Lisa taught him not to act with the Rage his father had.
Right now I agree that Simon, Richter and Julius fought a fully powered Dracula (even though I can also find nothing on the matter relating to Julius, but the scale of the event makes it look like it). But Dracula's line on Judgment is really the only answer there is about his power in CVIII, and here I'll agree with Nagumo. Judgment does contain reliable information pertaining the canon (it's where the whole blood-ties connection of the Lecardes with the Belmonts came from).
If you notice, the way Drac is resurrected by people in the 100 year cycle seems to involve a blood sacrifice. This sacrifice is seen in-game in three games:
-Castlevania 1's "Castlevania Chronicles"/X68000 remake
-Rondo of Blood
-Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness.
In all of these three games, a person is sacrificed upon a font, the blood ritual brings Dracula to life.
It is possible that the so-called "100-year cycle" is just people-created... people get fed up with things and, by pure happenstance, 100 years is when they just say "Tired of this shit, let's wipe the world Clean with the searing flames of Chaos" or something.
As for Trevor needing three more allies to do it, I thought up the following possibilities:
-Trevor is the weakest Belmont to fight Dracula if we consider that each Belmont is stronger than the last. This would explain how he wasn't able to do it alone and how the others after him were.
Can we stop with this already? This was just some stupid line in the SotN Instruction booklet. It's silly and makes no real sense from any sort of way.
-Maybe he WAS able to do it alone, but the allies decided to help anyway to ensure victory, as they also had their beef with the Count.
Now this I agree with. It's possible that it's an "Avengers" kind of situation... maybe he's strong, but there are other things other than strength that would help.
-Maybe Dracula was not fully powered BUT was strong as hell anyway, and rising to fully powered status, requiring four people to put him down. Almost fully powered, perhaps?
Perhaps? I don't see why this wouldn't work.
-
I thought about it myself and I agree with Jorge. That line from the SotN manual might not be in the original Japanese text at all. This was still back when the localizations were a bit shoddy. I will try and check if I can find a readable scan of the manual. I'm going to say something bold here and say that Trevor is possibly stronger than Richter as Richter could theoretically be defeated by Alucard in SotN, and Trevor could defeat Alucard in that test battle.
-
I thought about it myself and I agree with Jorge. That line from the SotN manual might not be in the original Japanese text at all. This was still back when the localizations were a bit shoddy. I will try and check if I can find a readable scan of the manual. I'm going to say something bold here and say that Trevor is possibly stronger than Richter as Richter could theoretically be defeated by Alucard in SotN, and Trevor could defeat Alucard in that test battle.
True, as it explicitly says that Maria is not blood-related to the Belmonts, when we know she is.
Would this be the one?
http://www.castlevaniacrypt.com/games/sotn/images/manual/jap/4.jpg (http://www.castlevaniacrypt.com/games/sotn/images/manual/jap/4.jpg)
If it is, could you please tell us what all three bios here say?
Here are all the pages:
http://www.castlevaniacrypt.com/games/sotn/manual-jap.htm (http://www.castlevaniacrypt.com/games/sotn/manual-jap.htm)
But If I'm not mistaken this is mentioned in yet another manual that escapes my memory right now. I'll post it if I remember it.
I'm going to say something bold here and say that Trevor is possibly stronger than Richter as Richter could theoretically be defeated by Alucard in SotN, and Trevor could defeat Alucard in that test battle.
I don't agree with this. If we go by what actually happened, Alucard didn't have to lay a single finger on Richter, only evade him time enough to destroy the apparition controlling his mind. He says in the end that "Belmont's power is supreme among vampire hunters. None could defeat him." Sure, he may have referred to other vampire hunters facing Richter, and not precisely anyone else. But even so, he did not fight Richter head-on.
(Note: In Japanese Alucard says that "the power of the Belmonts can possibly be matched, but can never be surpassed", if the SotN retranslation can be trusted. I tested it myself with japanese text from this site (http://www.geocities.jp/clearfeathers/) and all the tests have shown that the translation can be trusted)
EDIT: If this scan (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/Manuals/esotn-man3.jpg) is a better translation from japanese to french, then indeed, it says nothing about Belmonts being stronget than the last. It even confirms Maria's ties with the Belmonts.
-
Indeed, when I play Symphony of the Night, I play that battle such that Richter never gets attacked, and Alucard takes minimal damage.
I aim straight for that stupid Shaft-Orb. It doesn't take long for it to shatter...
It seems that Belmonts are very strong of body and mind, but I don't think they get stronger of mind/body as they go down the descendants. Perhaps they just learn new skills and have a more expansive pool of information/techniques with time?
-
Can we stop with this already? This was just some stupid line in the SotN Instruction booklet. It's silly and makes no real sense from any sort of way.
To be fair, it was mentioned again in Julius's bestiary description in AoS, which described him the strongest of all Belmonts.
-
Well, it's all a bit hard to make out but the first sentence mentions "vampire hunters", "Count Dracula", the verb "tsuzukeru" (continue) and "Belmont". The second sentence says he defeated Count Dracula 5 years ago but disappeared one year ago. The third sentence mentions something about the whip (muchi). The last sentence has the words "seigikangatsuyoku blabla", it says he has a strong sense of justice and something else. I don't think it mentions anything about him being the strongest Belmont ever.
I don't agree with this. If we go by what actually happened, Alucard didn't have to lay a single finger on Richter, only evade him time enough to destroy the apparition controlling his mind. He says in the end that "Belmont's power is supreme among vampire hunters. None could defeat him." Sure, he may have referred to other vampire hunters facing Richter, and not precisely anyone else. But even so, he did not fight Richter head-on.
(Note: In Japanese Alucard says that "the power of the Belmonts can possibly be matched, but can never be surpassed", if the SotN retranslation can be trusted. I tested it myself with japanese text from this site (http://www.geocities.jp/clearfeathers/) and all the tests have shown that the translation can be trusted)
EDIT: If this scan (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/Manuals/esotn-man3.jpg) is a better translation from japanese to french, then indeed, it says nothing about Belmonts being stronget than the last. It even confirms Maria's ties with the Belmonts.
Alucard does just avoid Richter if the path to the good ending is being followed, but in the bad ending Alucard just straight up defeats him. Of course, this is not "what actually happend", but I do consider the bad ending something that theoretically could have occured. It's not like the dog ending from Silent Hill 2 or something like that.
Something else which contributes to why I believe this to be the case is that IGA mentioned that idea he had about Alucard actually being the one who defeated Dracula in 1897 instead of Quincy Morris. If it's true that Dracula would be at his full power at that time, it means Alucard is a very strong character. And of course, in Judgment he demonstrates he can handle a full powered Dracula as well.
Lastly, he also hold his own pretty well against Maria, and it has been confirmed (in Judgment lol) that her power exceeds that of the Belmont family (although she is still technically a Belmont). So this evidence has led me to believe some people underestimate how powerful Alucard actually is. I'm not a particular fan of him by the way, so I'm not saying this because I'm biased. :P
-
Something else which contributes to why I believe this to be the case is that IGA mentioned that idea he had about Alucard actually being the one who defeated Dracula in 1897 instead of Quincy Morris. If it's true that Dracula would be at his full power at that time, it means Alucard is a very strong character. And of course, in Judgment he demonstrates he can handle a full powered Dracula as well.
This is one of IGA's ideas that I can never get behind. It just doesn't work. Quincy delivered the fatal blow whilst being fatally wounded in the process. And since Quincy was made into a Belmont descendant in the CV Bloodlines backstory it stands to reason that he was the one to put Dracula back into the grave because only he could. Alucard was never there which is were IGA's idea fails to work. And I'm glad that it was was never officially implemented.
In terms of which Belmont is stronger I'd have to argue that all Belmonts are strong in their respective times. Trevor was the strongest in his time that no other person could match. Followed by the next Belmont whom is yet stronger, so-on and so-fourth. Think of it as like Olympic athletes. Many decades ago they set the records for their achievements in sports and they were the best of their time that no-other could match. Yet now we have athletes who're breaking those records and if anyone from the past were to see that they would think our athletes were super human on some level. As generations go people get stronger with each generation. This is a genetic fact. Do the Belmonts get stronger with each passing generation? Yes, I believe so. And since Dracula becomes ever stronger with each reincarnation it would make sense to have a counterbalance to this. Dracula gets stronger and therefore an equally strong Belmont comes along to face him.
-
Here's my translation of Richter's bio from the Japanese SOTN manual:
A descendant of the Belmont clan whose been battling Dracula continuously for generations. 5 years ago, he defeated Dracula in a battle but since a year ago, he has gone missing . His weapon is the ancestral holy whip. His sense of justice is strong and he is a hot blooded man that hates getting corrupted.
Nope nothing here says anything about being the strongest.
Should I still need to translate Alucard and Maria's description?
-
Here's my translation of Richter's bio from the Japanese SOTN manual:
A descendant of the Belmont clan whose been battling Dracula continuously for generations. 5 years ago, he defeated Dracula in a battle but since a year ago, he has gone missing . His weapon is the ancestral holy whip. His sense of justice is strong and he is a hot blooded man that hates getting corrupted.
Nope nothing here says anything about being the strongest.
Should I still need to translate Alucard and Maria's description?
Comparing it to the european (french) version, it says the exact same thing, so BY ME there is no need as the french version is trustworthy.
Thank you Shiroi Koumori and Nagumo chan for confirming these things \(^0^)/
-
Interesting how that "each generation of Belmonts gets stronger" bit turned out to be false since it's something that has been brought up quite a lot in discussions here if I recall correctly. I'm not sure why they felt the need to add that unless the translator really liked Richter or something. Oh well.
This is one of IGA's ideas that I can never get behind. It just doesn't work. Quincy delivered the fatal blow whilst being fatally wounded in the process. And since Quincy was made into a Belmont descendant in the CV Bloodlines backstory it stands to reason that he was the one to put Dracula back into the grave because only he could. Alucard was never there which is were IGA's idea fails to work. And I'm glad that it was was never officially implemented.
That part about Quincy delivering the fatal blow and dying is something the American manual added, though. I'm not even sure when exactly he died. Jonathan does mention in PoR that he died before he was born, though. It's still a straight up retcon of course, but I suppose it was meant to go against the expectations of the player. It makes me wonder if that cancelled PS3/Xbox with Alucard was supposed to be set in 1897.
-
Thing is, Quincy does help deliver the final blow if one reads the Dracula novel.
He uses a dagger.
-
That part about Quincy delivering the fatal blow and dying is something the American manual added, though. I'm not even sure when exactly he died.
It was probably a correction since both the novel and the movie has Quincy dying after stabbing the count with his bowie knife. Granted it was an attack caused by Dracula's Gypsies the fatally wounded Quincy, but he still got in close and sealed the Count's fate.
Dammit Jorge you beat me to the post by mere-seconds! :(
-
But your usage of "Bowie Knife" is more accurate than my "Dagger"!
So you get accuracy whilst I get speed.
-
It stands to reason the events that transpired in the CV universe deviates from the ones in the book or movie, though.
-
Hmm... not so sure about that.
Remember, unless an event outright states that something happened a certain way, it cannot be assumed that it happened a different way.
So, since the Bloodlines manual (and Iga?) state that Quincy Morris is a Belmont and helped deliver the final blow, we have to take that as canon.
Since nothing else says otherwise, it cannot be assumed that there was too much of a difference between the Dracula novel and the Bloodlines events. IGA and others have tried to wrangle and entwine these two storylines, so we have to accept that some events are either similar enough to be the same event, or linked close enough that they can work together, and create your own headcanon by filling in the blanks.
-
Hmm... not so sure about that.
Remember, unless an event outright states that something happened a certain way, it cannot be assumed that it happened a different way.
So, since the Bloodlines manual (and Iga?) state that Quincy Morris is a Belmont and helped deliver the final blow, we have to take that as canon.
Since nothing else says otherwise, it cannot be assumed that there was too much of a difference between the Dracula novel and the Bloodlines events. IGA and others have tried to wrangle and entwine these two storylines, so we have to accept that some events are either similar enough to be the same event, or linked close enough that they can work together, and create your own headcanon by filling in the blanks.
The mere presence of the whip is already too much of a deviation from the original story, and you can draw some conclusions from that. If Quincy used a whip, then there must've been a Lecarde to unlock it. Therefore, the whip is probably the cause of Quincy's death. This is already a BIG deviation from the Bram Stoker account.
IGA said that Quincy was lifted from Bram Stoker's Dracula, but this doesn't necessarily mean that "sans the differences" the whole thing is the same. If we try to fit that story in the canon, too many conflicts arise for it to be feasible without a major overhaul, I believe.
And now there is the thing that young Eric and young John witnessed these events unfold. I'm almost 100% that his bit doesn't exist in the japanese manual, so here we go again:
Character bios from the japanese version:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual9.jpg (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual9.jpg)
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual10.jpg (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual10.jpg)
Story:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual2.jpg (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/packaging/vkill-manual2.jpg)
The story has been translated here:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/documents/CVBJ.txt (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/documents/CVBJ.txt)
Can someone confirm if their presence there is mentioned?
-
BTW, I'm loving all of this Detective Work we're doing.
-
The mere presence of the whip is already too much of a deviation from the original story, and you can draw some conclusions from that. If Quincy used a whip, then there must've been a Lecarde to unlock it. Therefore, the whip is probably the cause of Quincy's death. This is already a BIG deviation from the Bram Stoker account.
Not really since it is never mentioned. And thankfully too as it helps to avoid a possible plothole. The translations you've given use says nothing about Quincy using the whip. If he did have it chances are he might have known about the "only the main family line can use it without incident" bit, and thus not used it when he confronted Dracula. Also poR never outright mentions that Quincy used the whip either. And since he died while his son was only 2 years old he never got the chance to warn him about the whip's detrimental effects if used by anyone outside of the main family line. Sadly he and Eric learned this lesson a bit too late as the story mentions it.
And now there is the thing that young Eric and young John witnessed these events unfold. I'm almost 100% that his bit doesn't exist in the japanese manual
I believe it was either Nagumo or Claimh Solais mentioning that both Jon and Eric were not at the final battle in the Japanese manual. It was a NA localization thing.
-
I noticed John's bio is pretty much the same as it is in the European manual. (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/game-castlevaniabl.htm (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cvbl/game-castlevaniabl.htm)) The last sentence is slightly different, though:
Young man descendant of the Belmont family. Uses the "Vampire Killer" from the Morris family, the enchanted whip (and something about "vampire hunters" and "playing an active role" (katsuyakushiteiru).
They seem to have taken some liberities with Eric's bio however. The part about his girlfriend being turned by Elizabeth and wanting to take revenge with the Alucard Spear are in there, but the part about being a sculptor and the mysterious old man are false. It does say he was "a youth who loved art" (keijuuwoaisuruseinendeatta).