Topic: Dracula's vulnerability to sunlight makes no sense

[Lumi Kløvstad]

If Bram Stoker's novel and Castlevania are linked -- and according to 1990's era Konami, they are, via Bloodlines (never mind the numerous plot holes this introduces) -- Dracula's fatal weakness to sunlight suddenly makes no sense. Dracula in the novel did plenty of frolicking around in daylight; he just couldn't shapeshift and had the physical strength of an ordinary man with his sort of build while he did so. But! He still had his control over creatures of the night and a sort of supernatural charm that could make people do what he wanted.

So Portrait's ending where Dracula dies in the sunlight (it's the only canon one I could think of) makes no sense. Dracula could have just swished his cape and gone "MUAHAHAHA! See you next time, Hero Kids!" and raced out of his tower into the sunlight. He couldn't do a badass transformation into a bat or a wolf, but he could have escaped unless something changed in that resurrection.

What I'm saying is that the sun should logically limit Dracula's abilities, but it shouldn't kill him.

So with that in mind, my personal headcanon for Portrait's ending is that the sunlight jammed Dracula's ability to heal his injuries, making the wounds that Jonathan and Charlotte inflicted on him into fatal ones. Being a vampire, he crumbles into dust after he succumbs to those wounds and dies.

So the sunlight didn't kill him -- the player characters did. The sunlight just enabled it at the eleventh hour.

[zangetsu468]

I believe POR, SCIV and XX/VK all have endings which involve sunlight of some fashion.
While in N64 CV (Reinhardt and Carrie's good endings) he is outside in broad daylight in his final form. 

[Lumi Kløvstad]

I believe POR, SCIV and XX/VK all have endings which involve sunlight of some fashion.
While in N64 CV (Reinhardt and Carrie's good endings) he is outside in broad daylight in his final form.

SCIV and Dracula XX are both remakes/retellings and Castlevania 64 is outside the main timeline, hence why I didn't mention them.

I did like the fact that Dracula survived daylight in 64 though. Were it not a gaiden entry, I'd have used it to bolster my claim, but it does raise interesting implications for my Gaidenverse headcanon.

[zangetsu468]

I don't read too far into the sunlight thing aside from when Dracula has been perpetually weakened in battle he can't contain himself when exposed to intense sunlight.

[X]

The whole 'vampire being vulnerable to sunlight' was from the film Nosferatu alone. Prior to that movie, sunlight had no real relevance to inflicting deadly harm on vampires, especially Dracula. Any vampire could walk about during the daylight hours though it was not their natural time. Even in the novel Carmilla, she is walking about during the daylight and nothing deadly is happening to her. That's what I liked about CV64/LoD. It took all the old liberties of vampiric lore prior to Nosferatu and used them instead of all the post Nosferatu stuff.

However, in this case we could look at all the times that Dracula was killed by sunlight and see that it only happens after he is slain by the Belmont in question. By this logic we could assume it is not sunlight finishing him off but God's holy light instead? It does make some sense in that regard.

[theplottwist]

However, in this case we could look at all the times that Dracula was killed by sunlight and see that it only happens after he is slain by the Belmont in question. By this logic we could assume it is not sunlight finishing him off but God's holy light instead? It does make some sense in that regard.

The castle can generate darkness by itself. The time of the day is irrelevant. That's why we see the sunlight come through the window JUST as Dracula is defeated - it's his loss of power causing a massive loss of power on the castle, which in turn loses its power to cover the sun.

I never understood those scenes as Dracula being killed by the sun, but merely being disintegrated by it due to being unable to keep his artifical darkness up anymore, since Belmont just smacked his face into oblivion, depleting his power.

Plus, CV Dracula seems to be much more based on vampire tropes (weakness to holy, weakness to sunlight) than specifically Bram Stoker's Dracula. CV Dracula seems to come from the Hammer films, and not so much from the Stoker book.

[Lumi Kløvstad]

The whole 'vampire being vulnerable to sunlight' was from the film Nosferatu alone. Prior to that movie, sunlight had no real relevance to inflicting deadly harm on vampires, especially Dracula. Any vampire could walk about during the daylight hours though it was not their natural time. Even in the novel Carmilla, she is walking about during the daylight and nothing deadly is happening to her. That's what I liked about CV64/LoD. It took all the old liberties of vampiric lore prior to Nosferatu and used them instead of all the post Nosferatu stuff.

However, in this case we could look at all the times that Dracula was killed by sunlight and see that it only happens after he is slain by the Belmont in question. By this logic we could assume it is not sunlight finishing him off but God's holy light instead? It does make some sense in that regard.

Thank you for bringing that up. I didn't want to stretch my references but you are absolutely right.

I like your conclusion too. It fits pretty well with my own, I think.

[zangetsu468]

Plus, CV Dracula seems to be much more based on vampire tropes (weakness to holy, weakness to sunlight)

Nova Skeleton's damage says YES 

[coinilius]

I never understood those scenes as Dracula being killed by the sun, but merely being disintegrated by it due to being unable to keep his artificial darkness up anymore, since Belmont just smacked his face into oblivion, depleting his power.

I'm with theplottwist on this - it seems more like the sunlight is breaking through because Dracula is defeated, whether it's because his power to impose darkness is gone or just for dramatic effect.

[Claimh Solais]

I always attributed it to sunlight not killing vampires, but weakening them. And since Dracula is beyond weakened after a thorough thrashing from whatever protagonist happens to be playable, the sunlight winds up killing him instead.

Though I think it largely does, indeed, have to do with dramatic effect.

[Shiroi Koumori]

I agree with sunlight as dramatic effect. It's just poetic to see the morning sun vanquish the horrible night kind of thing.

[Donvermicelli]

In a way you could see it as if the sunlight takes away the dark magic holding his form together. Keep in mind that in most of the Castlevania entries Dracula is not really alive just yet.

In the Bram Stoker novel Dracula had not died before hence why the weakening of his magical powers just made him become more human instead of outright killing him. But if he needed his magical powers to keep his form stable en present within our dimension then it would make sense that this weakening would push him back into his own dimension of chaos and darkness.

But I think as was said before that it had more to do with dramatic effect then anything else.

[Shinobi]

I thought Lament of Innocence already explained this, Walter's territory was completely covered in eternal darkness due his powers but when he was already killed the sunlight has returned so it will be the same case as Dracula every time he gets defeated.

[Lumi Kløvstad]

I thought Lament of Innocence already explained this, Walter's territory was completely covered in eternal darkness due his powers but when he was already killed the sunlight has returned so it will be the same case as Dracula every time he gets defeated.

I thought that the game made it abundantly clear that the never-ending night was far more the Ebony Stone's doing than Walter's.

The Sun began "rising" (more likely the magical dome/field/aura over the forest began dissipating) after the Ebony Stone was compromised. Any vampire who possessed the working Ebony Stone would have been allowed the same benefits of invincibility against ordinary weapons and a permanent nightfall following them wherever they went.

As a side note, that it was the Ebony Stone that made Walter immune to attacks from any weapon aside from the Vampire Killer might explain why Dracula can be injured or even felled by regular weaponry (and has been on several occasions): the Crimson Stone is amazingly powerful at what it does, but invulnerability just plain isn't one of those things. If Dracula ever had been able to possess both stones (which may have been Mathias' original intent), he would have been very nearly unstoppable against any but the wielder of the Vampire Killer.

[theplottwist]

I thought that the game made it abundantly clear that the never-ending night was far more the Ebony Stone's doing than Walter's.

The Sun began "rising" (more likely the magical dome/field/aura over the forest began dissipating) after the Ebony Stone was compromised. Any vampire who possessed the working Ebony Stone would have been allowed the same benefits of invincibility against ordinary weapons and a permanent nightfall following them wherever they went.

As a side note, that it was the Ebony Stone that made Walter immune to attacks from any weapon aside from the Vampire Killer might explain why Dracula can be injured or even felled by regular weaponry (and has been on several occasions): the Crimson Stone is amazingly powerful at what it does, but invulnerability just plain isn't one of those things. If Dracula ever had been able to possess both stones (which may have been Mathias' original intent), he would have been very nearly unstoppable against any but the wielder of the Vampire Killer.

Well, I do think Dracula is vulnerable only to the Vampire Killer and some form of his own power, though... Anything else simply does not work.

I may be delving too much in headcanon here, but I believe OoE and PoR established this.