Topic: The naked chick that got sacrificed at the beginning of RoB

[Super Waffle]

Do you think we'll ever learn more about her complex backstory?

[zangetsu468]

No probably not. Doesn't the subtext/ manual's text read something like that every 100 years the evil in the hearts of men flared/ grew, then he [Dracula] was resurrected?

I was thinking about this scene years ago. Potentially centennial resurrections still require a sacrifice, since ROB was a CR. Where as Non-CR's although varied most definitely require a host body or come about in other ways (HoD, CoD, Simon's Quest, SoTN, etc.)

[theplottwist]

She was a perfect opportunity to expand the plot (in any way). Now she's just another nameless sacrifice victim.

Also, there is no pre-requisite for the sacrifice to bring Dracula back, apparently. No requirement is ever mentioned, and we've seen both a woman and at least two men, in wildly different ages, being sacrificed for this objective. So yeah. Dracula is pretty eclectic with who is sacrificed for him

Also, in DXC intro, have you guys noticed how the body of the woman is suddenly gone from the coffin's lid just before it explodes open? We can see it there but if you pause at the correct moment, you can see the body suddenly disappear xD

EDIT: Well, now watching again, it doesn't "disappear". It looks like the body, the lid, the swords and the blanket are all SUCKED inside the coffin just before the lights explode out of it o_O

Watch the video in 0.25 speed to see it:



Suddenly this intro has become much scarier than I thought 

[Dracula9]

It has Spanish Dracula. Of course it's scary.

[theplottwist]

It has Spanish Dracula. Of course it's scary.

But he's nothing near Mexican Dracula.

Oh man I hope I'm not offending someone with this.

[zangetsu468]

Actually plottwist has a good point. There is no pre-requisite for a sacrifice, but the source of Dracula's power is Chaos, and chaos flares/augments in the hearts of men every 100 years.

Sacrificing a virgin (or 'child' who would also equate to a virgin) to appease 'the gods' has its origins rooted in paganism. This was then transferred to other practices as centuries passed. (Similarly, with animals, paganism where the whole "sacrificing animals"/ "Lamb of God" share their impetus with that of the virgins).

What I'm saying is in theory if the sacrifice isn't needed, those men performing it are acting (under the effects of chaos' augmentation? - if interpreted in this way) which means they're offering Dracula a sacrifice, just like the pagans did with their gods/ deities.

The reason I placed the "?" there is because some will say Chaos =/= Evil, because it's the opposite of "order" (not the opposite of "good"). Maybe this is so, if we go down this route there just seems me to be more of an innate predisposition to men committing evil deeds in the first place. Unless there is an external physical or metaphysical/ spiritual influence such as HoD's Maxim being influenced by Dracula's remains and SOTN's Richter being influenced by Shaft's spirit, respectively.

[X]

Also, in DXC intro, have you guys noticed how the body of the woman is suddenly gone from the coffin's lid just before it explodes open?

Yeah. Actually that was also the case with Rondos' opening scene. There was a body, then there was none. I hate it when little details like that are overlooked.

Also, there is no pre-requisite for the sacrifice to bring Dracula back, apparently. No requirement is ever mentioned, and we've seen both a woman and at least two men, in wildly different ages, being sacrificed for this objective. So yeah. Dracula is pretty eclectic with who is sacrificed for him

Pretty much. In fact there are many ways to call fourth Dracula back to the living. A dark ritual, a sacrifice of some sort, etc. In Rondo (DXC) it was a woman. In Chronicles a dark priest poured blood over the coffin. And in CV64/LoD it was a simple matter of sacrificing the lives of a hundred children, as Actress blatantly stated.

[zangetsu468]

In Chronicles a dark priest poured blood over the coffin.

I'm still betting that was Virgin Blood, known for it's purity and spiritual power. Common occult knowledge would say so.

And in CV64/LoD it was a simple matter of sacrificing the lives of a hundred children, as Actress blatantly stated.

True and again Virgin Blood, but the 64 games are removed from the official canon. In the alternate timeline where they exist the sacrifice only either revives The Guardian to Dracula's sleeping spirit, or it revives all of Dracula with only that Guardian manifesting.

[Dracula9]

But he's nothing near Mexican Dracula.

Oh man I hope I'm not offending someone with this.

You still got where I was going with it. I can't stand the DXC design, dude genuinely looks Latin American or Spanish.

[theplottwist]

I'm still betting that was Virgin Blood, known for it's purity and spiritual power. Common occult knowledge would say so.

True and again Virgin Blood, but the 64 games are removed from the official canon. In the alternate timeline where they exist the sacrifice only either revives The Guardian to Dracula's sleeping spirit, or it revives all of Dracula with only that Guardian manifesting.

I was going to mention virgin blood BUT we have cases like Shaft or Barlowe being sacrifices. I doubt these two were either pure or virgin or both at the same time.

[Dracula9]

Maybe virgin blood makes him look prettier when he wakes up

'Cause I mean compared to the long-white-hair-kinda-grizzled-and-grumpy-looking-but-still-halfway-dashing incarnations, DXC and Rondo Dracs are both all young and slick and pretty and whatnot

Yeah that's it

The purer the blood the prettier Drac is

[theplottwist]

Maybe virgin blood makes him look prettier when he wakes up

'Cause I mean compared to the long-white-hair-kinda-grizzled-and-grumpy-looking-but-still-halfway-dashing incarnations, DXC and Rondo Dracs are both all young and slick and pretty and whatnot

Yeah that's it

The purer the blood the prettier Drac is

This actually makes more sense than the 100 years hypothesis (the earlier Dracula is revived, the more decrepit he appears to be).

[zangetsu468]

I was going to mention virgin blood BUT we have cases like Shaft or Barlowe being sacrifices. I doubt these two were either pure or virgin or both at the same time.

Well Shaft was a priest, I'm not saying he didn't do anything perverse but certain priests are known for keeping themselves "chaste" specifically for their Lord (Catholic priests for example) as is it sacrificing their general pleasures of the flesh. Doesn't mean they're not fucked up though.

As for Barlowe, it's implied and mentioned (with Shanoa at least) that he raised Shanoa and Albus as his own. I'm of the opinion all of Barlowe's - and subsequently Ecclesia's - research was all for the purposes of resurrecting Dracula, albeit prior to the centenary which would have been the Bram Stoker novel in the far latter half (c.1894).

Some have disagreed with me on this in the past but I stick by the fact that Barlowe knew exactly what he was doing (as does Castlevania Wiki), and Ecclesia was a front to actually resurrect Dracula. The same idea was later used in LOS.

Back to my original point, Barlowe may have had female suitors, he may have, he may not. Isaac Newton was a well learned man who died a virgin, the notion isn't impossible.

Isaac from CoD on the other hand looks trisexual, pretty sure he'd stick his sick in just about anything. ;p The difference is I don't believe either Shaft or Barlowe were "host bodies" the way Isaac was. We see Isaac's body manifest after Dracula's defeat, which we don't see with Barlowe or shaft. Shaft's body died in RoB/DXC and entered Richter's body at it's most vulnerable after his (and Maria's) fight with Dracula - refer to Iga's timeline. Dracula in SOTN's resurrection was made complete by his remains (relics) being gathered by Alucard imo. (The final room can't be entered without them.

Barlowe sacrificed himself to break the seal on the vessel holding Dracula's soul because Shanoa didn't want to use Dominus to do it. He was not a host body as Dracula's throne room was still beyond "The gates of Hell" meaning he didn't materialise with any sort of host body.

Anyway, Virgin blood or not doesn't mean something will or won't work, it's just preferable I guess.

[theplottwist]

Some have disagreed with me on this in the past but I stick by the fact that Barlowe knew exactly what he was doing (as does Castlevania Wiki), and Ecclesia was a front to actually resurrect Dracula. The same idea was later used in LOS.

Well, I have proven the Castlevania Wiki wrong in the past. I'll not discuss this point, but there is a whole lot of unfiltered opinion on the articles and I'd say you'd fare better not taking everything is written there as evidence (unless a source is provided, of course).

Shaft's body died in RoB/DXC and entered Richter's body at it's most vulnerable after his (and Maria's) fight with Dracula - refer to Iga's timeline. Dracula in SOTN's resurrection was made complete by his remains (relics) being gathered by Alucard imo. (The final room can't be entered without them.)

I disagree with three things here.

1. Dracula X Chronicles shows precisely the moment where Shaft got control over Richter's body. And it's WAY before Richter got to fight Dracula. It's before even he got to battle Shaft himself. Jump to 5:40 and watch from there:

EDIT: This shadow is not Shaft - it is Death. The shadow keeps appearing until you defeat Death. Redoing the stage after Death is defeated causes the shadow to not appear anymore.

https://youtu.be/mp6gNFnPXuA


2. Given the above point, I believe Richter never got to face the real Shaft at all. The point above can be evidence for the fact that Richter was battling nothing more than a simple illusion, being already under the effects of Shaft's influence even before he got to the room where Shaft was. EDIT: The above point has been debunked.

At the end of SotN, Shaft's body can be seen inside the giant orb at the end, while an illusion of him talks to Alucard outside the orb. That scene is pretty damn good evidence he's able to create at least one astral-projection clone of himself that looks pretty much like him. This could mean that Richter might not have fought the real Shaft at all, but only an illusion of him.

3. I disagree in part with how Dracula got revived in SotN. While I think the remains had something to do with this, I also think Shaft sacrificed himself to revive Dracula. I say this because his plan was to sacrifice Alucard's human side:




This comes from the SotN retranslation from the japanese script. And if it's not enough:



This comes from the PSP SotN port. Here Shaft says that Alucard's soul is as frail as Richter's, and he even implies Richter was the one to be sacrificed for Dracula's return.

He was not a host body as Dracula's throne room was still beyond "The gates of Hell" meaning he didn't materialise with any sort of host body.

I sort of agree more or less with this. I don't believe Barlowe worked as Dracula's vessel, too. But do you mean that you think Shanoa battled Dracula in spirit form? Because, if so, I don't think this is the case since what was inside the vessel was his remains:

(click to show/hide)

Albus: They used [Dracula], Shanoa. [Dominus] is made from his remains. That's
HIS power. Nothing less.

Granted, there are also mentions of Dracula's soul being trapped in there:

(click to show/hide)

Shanoa: ...Seal? You told me that was the vessel of Dracula's soul!

As per the DXC intro, you need both a sacrifice AND Dracula's body/remains to bring him back. So, while his soul is mentioned to be sealed there, his bodily remains also are. This could mean he has indeed revived with a body of himself. But if your point was simply about Barlowe working as a vessel, then disregard this point.

[zangetsu468]

@plottwist I'lll keep it short because I haven't played DXC and I'm uncertain if Iga's timeline was released before it, but I believe it was due to be bundled with POR. This is the timeline giving the explanation I made about Shaft entering Richter. If DXC does in fact trump ROB then please disregard.

I'm not saying CV wiki has to be 100% accurate, I'm only saying it agrees with me to give myself more credibility as per OOE's script, which previously I had a few people query. Personally I still believe Barlowe was fully aware of his intentions, and I don't believe he was just influenced by Dracula/ the remains per se (as Maxim was). If this was the case, Dracula would have manifested into a wraith or something else, but in OOE he has actually taken his throne.

About the fact OOE Dracula is fought in hell, I'm not saying he doesn't have a physical body, I'm saying the realm he's fought in is still not technically the "physical realm" being our world, it's beyond the gates to hell. However, there is nothing to indicate that what lies in the Castle beyond the realm of Hell's Gates (The Cerberus gates) isn't real, or hasn't manifested into something physical/ material/ organic or otherwise. I'm saying I simply don't believe that Barlowe's sacrifice was necessarily to become a host body/ or if it did that the intention was to become the host body, it was intended to break the seal on the vessel of Dracula's soul first and foremost. Otherwise if Dracula took Barlowe as the host after he self destructed, his body would have materialised infront of Shanoa? Maybe not? I could be wrong in these assertions.

What I am not wrong about is where Dracula manifests in OOE, beyond the gates of hell, at his throne. Compare this to CoD where Isaac's body is used as the host and Dracula manifests there and then, relinquishing Isaac's body once done with it. Something similar happens to Maxim once Dracula Wraith has been defeated. This does not happen in OOE with Barlowe's
body after Dracula's defeat. Again, Barlowe sacrificed himself to relinquish the seal to the vessel of Dracula's soul, not as his host body as it were. If Shanoa had used Doninus on the vessel, Barlowe's plans would have been complete as he wanted to execute and bare witness to his ultimate goal; Dracula's resurrection. I will also say that after Barlowe's self destruction, there was no physical body left to act as a host, he literally used all of his remaining power and blew himself up to try and crack the seal. Hence I tend to believe Dracula's body is real but I don't believe it's from Barlowe's body as his host.

As for DXC (which is a CR) other posters have mentioned and argued well that the sacrifice/ host body is not required and the girl/ woman disappears prior to the ritual being over. This follows the original ROB's bit intention via its prologue/ manual's text of "100 years and he [Dracula] was resurrected".

Edit: "I'll keep it short"... My ass you will Zangetsu ...