Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [ID] Topic: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."  (Read 5443 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lumi Kløvstad

  • Specialist in Revolutions, Smuggling, Gunrunning, Bootlegging, and Orgies
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1880
  • Simon is finally coming to goddamn Smash
  • Awards Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania 64 (N64)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #30 on: February 12, 2017, 06:56:22 PM »
0
He doesn't reincarnate as Dracula, is all I'm saying, only to disprove this:

It's not a problem for Dracula's residual power to be a-floatin' about so much as who's got it. Shitty Russian Beatle Reject, Poser In Desperate Need Of A Chill Pill, and Definitely Not Joel Osteen had some, but they were shits so they were a problem. Soma had the Whopper™ Value™ Meal™ Combo™ but wasn't a problem unless he went nuts and turned into a shit.

Sending Big D and eviction notice was a complete success, as the methods therein stopped him from coming back as himself, not that it just divided his entire power by zero and made it go blip.

See, on that I think we agree completely.

But I was originally addressing whether or not Dracula had an exterior source of his powers at all. Do his powers exist without human evil (or an evil fireball-spitting series of MC Escher Impressionist Paintings in the American localization) or not? I'm inclined to believe the latter is likely true based on how it's been related throughout the series -- Dracula's powers probably exist divorced from external factors, although external factors definitely have been shown to affect his power by lessening or increasing it depending on what they are.

For instance, if he were to be resurrected into a world in which everyone was a Peace & The Power of Love and Friendship hippie commune, his powers would be PRESENT, but far weaker than what's usually on display, hence why his powers seem to be at their strongest at points where the human race are shittier than usual: he's not dependent on those conditions to possess his power, but he certainly is able to make use of them, much like a plant grows best in soil with a favorable nutrient balance but will still attempt to grow in whatever soil you put it in regardless.

[EDIT] I am glad we ran through our little Magical Mystery Tour of narrative though.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2017, 08:12:50 PM by The Bloody Aperture »
How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

Offline Dracula9

  • That One Guy
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2406
  • Gender: Male
  • Blargh
  • Awards 2015-01-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-12-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-11-November FinalBoss Sprite Contest 2nd Place Winner A great musician and composer of various melodies both original and game-based. 2018-06 Sprite Contest First Place
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #31 on: February 12, 2017, 08:59:06 PM »
0
Dracula's power is Dark Lord. That power is the ability to command the demonic legions, and nothing more. Any human can become Dark Lord if they're willing and able to control those forces. Alucard even confirms this in Dawn by essentially calling the Candidate thing a bunch of crap. Julius also says in Aria that he sealed the whip on the castle to "weaken Dracula's spirit," which obviously can't be referring to the soul inside Soma since that wasn't sealed. Ergo, "Dracula" and "Mathias" are two different entities. If Mat feels sleepy and doesn't wanna get outta bed that day, Big D takes over, and true to the name "Big D" proceeds to try and fuck everything (up).

The writers didn't need to outright state that Dracula's identity and his power are two different things--there're more than enough heavy hints at it in the series. IGA himself even clarified back in SotN's days that Dracula has an "evil spirit" take the reigns when he doesn't feel like waking up.

Everything else of his is just magic. Fireballs, meteors, teleporting, rawr giant monster, it's all just regular old dark magic. Highly powerful dark magic, but still abilities that theoretically anyone can learn. Graham's "miracles" and charismatic powers of seduction of the masses could be done by anyone with magical inclination--Succubae have powers of mass seduction and any sorcerer can produce "miracles" depending on who/what defines a miracle. Dario's possessed by a flame demon, and Dmitrii has powers of imitation--much like a Doppleganger or Mimic. Nobody in the series has inherently unique or special abilities, except Dracula's long-time ownership of Dominance.

Dominance is the only unique ability, and is what defines the mantle of Dark Lord. In theory, any regular old human could've taken that title from Dracula, if he or she had a lust for death and power that surpassed Dracula's. But he's a pretty hateful dude, so that's a rather tall order.

A world without evil or conflict just means he's not Dark Lord. Everything else of his not directly correlated to that power is still on the table. It would be just as your plant analogy suggests. It isn't ideal, but he could work his way back up to it if given enough time.

Basically, the canon explains more than you give it credit for. It's not as if we're writing philosophy here, which is meant to be open-ended. It (OG Dracula's arc) is a narrative plot, one with a beginning (Lament) and an ending (1999). Dracula's role and power and how it all connects is explained in the canon in every way but outright "boom, here it is" statements. It is not the fault of the writers or IGA if someone cannot connect their dots for whatever particular reason, and to suggest that somehow the canon or official writing is "wrong" because one doesn't like it is, barring certain circumstances that I will say are NOT the case here, is both an insult to the writers and a bit of narcissism on the part of the accuser.

It doesn't matter what you come up with. It doesn't matter what I or even Plot comes up with. It'll never be canonized and legitimized unless IGA/Konami declare it so (yes, I know he's not officially able to touch CV anymore and honestly I don't give a shit about the parts of the fanbase with an unreasonable butthurt hatred of the man and literally anything to do with him--IGA is to CV lore as Tolkien is to Middle-Earth's, and just for comparison's sake J.R.R. doesn't hold the rights to his work anymore either, it's his kid, so both guys in my comparison wrote a bunch of shit and don't officially own it anymore). The only thing we as fans can do to write legitimately faithful stories is to rely on what canon we have as well and with as much scrutiny for details as we can. Some disregard more or less of the canon than others, and that's completely fine. But the more one disregards, the less truly faithful their work is--even if they consider their work more accurate or faithful to, say, a given character's mindset or motivations. If their work doesn't line up at least somewhat neatly with what's officially canon, then it's objectively inaccurate and unfaithful as far as those two areas are concerned.

You don't have to like the canon or parts that you can't wrap your head around or just don't make sense. Nobody does. But the canon is still true regardless. It's the word of god whether we like and want it to be or not. There is no debating this. It's not a matter of opinion. We're not talking about the Bible and its hundreds and hundreds of official derivatives. It's a game series with (in one universe anyway) one timeline and most of the same writers' involvement (directly or indirectly, as IGA collaborated with previous writers to ensure his additions fit). There IS no room for argument over whether a detail is canon beyond the simple question of "is the source it's from retconned or not?".

And just for the record on this particular thing:

Accepting that canon is fact and true whether I want it to be or not != Showing absolute unwavering loyalty to it. It is the Alpha and it is the Omega, and nothing your or I or anyone comes up with will change that unless we start working for Konami.

There's shit in the canon I don't like myself. But my opinion doesn't matter as to whether those things remain true or not.

Also, I too have enjoyed the Tour. But you said "ran through." "Ran."

Silly Aperture, have you forgotten?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2017, 09:08:12 PM by Dracula9 »


Trøllabundin eri eg, inn í hjartarót.

Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #32 on: February 12, 2017, 11:05:16 PM »
0
But I was originally addressing whether or not Dracula had an exterior source of his powers at all. Do his powers exist without human evil

What about the case of Maxim. He wasn't evil in principle but he was envious of Juste. Dracula's remains influenced him otherwise. Again, this is not Dracula's actual "power" it's his remains. Since this thread is about Barlowe, I will say that I don't believe Barlowe necessarily went "crazy" in OOE prior to the Shanoa fight, but he was in possession of Dracula's remains for a very long period of time. Maybe he wanted Dracula resurrected from the start, maybe not, either way the remains influenced him.

My point with all this is that the effect Dracula's remains had on these two is basically how I see Chaos' effect on humanity, albeit at a more macro scale. When this happens, Chaos (energy) as a whole is augmented, wheels are put into motion and "chaotic" individuals/ circumstances cause Dracula to resurrect.

Chaos, in AoS is not the entirety of the world's "evil energy". This is obvious because there are still Dark Lord cults in DoS and the rest of it. What I understood about "Chaos" in AoS is that the creature Chaos is both the link and "fuel tank" between this energy (call it 'Chaos Energy') and Dracula's soul.

Call me a minimalist, but I believe when things are translated into English that certain concepts are often "simplified". Chaos would be one example, Mathias becoming "King of the Night"/ "Lord of Darkness" as opposed to the Japanese translation would
be another. It's almost as if in the English version they don't believe we'll understand the concepts or semantics that the Japanese do. Then again, some translations, particularly with manuals have been contradictory or embellished.

Julius also says in Aria that he sealed the whip on the castle to "weaken Dracula's spirit," which obviously can't be referring to the soul inside Soma since that wasn't sealed.

That's interesting, I thought it was to weaken the Castle itself.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2017, 11:10:38 PM by zangetsu468 »
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Offline theplottwist

  • Canon Literalist
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • プロットツイスト君
  • Awards 2018-06 Sprite Contest First Place 2017-07-Sprite Contest 2nd PLace 2016-09-Sprite Contest First Place 2015 - Christmas Award First Place 2015 - Halloween Sprite Contest - Second Place
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania Adventure Rebirth (Wii)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #33 on: February 12, 2017, 11:16:15 PM »
0
Quote
That's interesting, I thought it was to weaken the Castle itself.

To weaken "Dracula's magic" AND his spirit, actually.

You see, some people here think "we know little" about 1999. But I've done research, and I can tell you quite a lot of the juicy bits about 1999 are actually readily available. This is one of them.

The entire Arikado > Julius > Soma > Mina dynamic explains in scary detail (for a story that doesn't exist) how Dracula was finally defeated. One of these details is that [Dracula] is a composite of two entities, and these entities were severed away from each other in 1999. One has found reincarnation, the other became trapped within the castle by the Vampire Killer. One made a pact for power, and the other has the burden to use it.

And no, I'm not talking about Chaos. Chaos is one third entity altogether.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2017, 11:27:38 PM by theplottwist »
The mastermind behind the "Umbra of Sorrow" project. But not the only one.


Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #34 on: February 12, 2017, 11:43:15 PM »
0
To weaken "Dracula's magic" AND his spirit, actually.

You see, some people here think "we know little" about 1999. But I've done research, and I can tell you quite a lot of the juicy bits about 1999 are actually readily available. This is one of them.

The entire Arikado > Julius > Soma > Mina dynamic explains in scary detail (for a story that doesn't exist) how Dracula was finally defeated. One of these details is that [Dracula] is a composite of two entities, and these entities were severed away from each other in 1999. One has found reincarnation, the other became trapped within the castle by the Vampire Killer. One made a pact for power, and the other has the burden to use it.

And no, I'm not talking about Chaos. Chaos is one third entity altogether.

That's fine, I'll have to re-check this quote. Mind you I did recall it in English, not Japanese, not sure if this makes any difference.

I understand the 2 entities and realise you are not talking about Chaos, but thank you for clarifying.
I myself have inferred a lot simply from Julius' memory loss in 1999.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Offline Lumi Kløvstad

  • Specialist in Revolutions, Smuggling, Gunrunning, Bootlegging, and Orgies
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1880
  • Simon is finally coming to goddamn Smash
  • Awards Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania 64 (N64)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #35 on: February 13, 2017, 12:56:55 AM »
0
That's fine, I'll have to re-check this quote. Mind you I did recall it in English, not Japanese, not sure if this makes any difference.

It sort of does. The translation causes enough differences to snowball that in essence canon is one way in Japan and another way in America (one of my big issues with invoking canon in this series).

And I don't think I've ever typed "canon" or variations thereof as many times I have tonight as I have in the rest of my life put together. Damn.
How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

Offline Dracula9

  • That One Guy
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2406
  • Gender: Male
  • Blargh
  • Awards 2015-01-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-12-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-11-November FinalBoss Sprite Contest 2nd Place Winner A great musician and composer of various melodies both original and game-based. 2018-06 Sprite Contest First Place
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #36 on: February 13, 2017, 02:10:52 AM »
0
It sort of does. The translation causes enough differences to snowball that in essence canon is one way in Japan and another way in America (one of my big issues with invoking canon in this series).

This is why it's crucial to remember that canon literalists like a certain two of us here tend to rely on the original writings rather than any localizations.


Trøllabundin eri eg, inn í hjartarót.

Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #37 on: February 13, 2017, 04:11:59 AM »
0
This is why it's crucial to remember that canon literalists like a certain two of us here tend to rely on the original writings rather than any localizations.

This is precisely why I tended to only theorise about CV's timeline in the past. I can't keep up with the differences in localisation and even if the English version is not the holy-grail-localisation, it still tells a good tale.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Offline Lumi Kløvstad

  • Specialist in Revolutions, Smuggling, Gunrunning, Bootlegging, and Orgies
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1880
  • Simon is finally coming to goddamn Smash
  • Awards Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania 64 (N64)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #38 on: February 13, 2017, 03:59:01 PM »
0
This is precisely why I tended to only theorise about CV's timeline in the past. I can't keep up with the differences in localisation and even if the English version is not the holy-grail-localisation, it still tells a good tale.



One thing I prefer in the localized version of Aria, for instance, is that Soma's described as a transfer student. His surname suddenly doesn't stick out as much in Japan because OF COURSE IT DOES. He's a foreigner! Granted, this dredges up some minor issues (like how Mina can be his childhood friend if he's a foreigner) but these are fairly easy for me to find a lore-friendly excuse for.

Just an example.

Now, making the titanic effort to shift this back to Barlowe, I think the Japanese text is probably the better story here. I've written essay length theories before on the various kind of resurrections that Dracula has used in the past to return, and possession-style resurrections have happened. That being said, this is a case where the story as written is so plausible that alternate theories just seem outlandish. Barlowe is a fallen hero. In his zeal to destroy evil, he became the sort of person he despised. That's downright classical lit 101 right there.

I've seen the argument made, even, that resurrecting Dracula was ALWAYS Barlowe's plan, and I gotta get this out of the way and say that's horseshit for a number of reasons: it doesn't jibe with anything Barlowe says prior to his boss fight, or even with anything other characters say about him (story reason), that plotline is cliche, too easily predictable, and trite (meta reason), and because the Japanese version of this story deals with a powerful message of "he who fights monsters must take care to never become one himself", which is about as time-honored a moral as morals get.

That being said, I thought it WAS fairly clear that while he hadn't always planned on reviving Dracula, he HAD planned on sacrificing Shanoa to accomplish his goals all along (goes with the Fallen Hero territory, I guess).
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 06:06:48 PM by The Bloody Aperture »
How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #39 on: February 13, 2017, 06:21:17 PM »
0
I've seen the argument made, even, that resurrecting Dracula was ALWAYS Barlowe's plan....

That being said, I thought it WAS fairly clear that while he hadn't always planned on reviving Dracula, he HAD planned on sacrificing Shanoa to accomplish his goals all along (goes with the Fallen Hero territory, I guess).

The reason I don't believe that is, Barlowe wanted Shanoa to use Dominus, Albus wanted to protect Shanoa so he stopped that from happening, cool. What nearly happens at the start of the game (Shanoa absorbing and using Dominus) is what Albus prevents by stealing it etc. However, if Shanoa had used Dominus either at point a) Start of the game, or point b) Instead of fighting Barlowe, she would have cracked the seal to the vessel containing Dracula's remains... Then what?

Was it supposed to destroy Dracula's remains or was it Barlowe's plan to crack the seal all along? I haven't played it for a long while, I can't recall all the details. However, Barlowe cracks the seal himself and what does that do? Frees a bunch of spiritual energy and Dracula resurrects. Barlowe wanted Shanoa to do this so he wouldn't have to sacrifice himself. But, if he was adamant about Shanoa doing this to "destroy" those remains to which she then says "No.." why does an insane Barlowe fight Shanoa on this? Furthermore, if insane Barlowe wants Shanoa to use Dominus to "crack open the vessel" - what he eventually did - rather than using his own life, it therefore means that using Dominus will indeed only crack open the vessel only and not destroy Dracula's remains. Insane Barlowe still persists on Shanoa using Dominus, because he knows what it will do, it will free Dracula, not destroy him. Sane Barlowe can't actually believe that Dominus will destroy the remains, because insane Barlowe reinforces the opposite, that Dracula will be resurrected. That whole altercation doesn't make sense otherwise.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Offline Lumi Kløvstad

  • Specialist in Revolutions, Smuggling, Gunrunning, Bootlegging, and Orgies
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1880
  • Simon is finally coming to goddamn Smash
  • Awards Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania 64 (N64)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #40 on: February 13, 2017, 06:58:11 PM »
0
The reason I don't believe that is, Barlowe wanted Shanoa to use Dominus, Albus wanted to protect Shanoa so he stopped that from happening, cool. What nearly happens at the start of the game (Shanoa absorbing and using Dominus) is what Albus prevents by stealing it etc. However, if Shanoa had used Dominus either at point a) Start of the game, or point b) Instead of fighting Barlowe, she would have cracked the seal to the vessel containing Dracula's remains... Then what?

Was it supposed to destroy Dracula's remains or was it Barlowe's plan to crack the seal all along? I haven't played it for a long while, I can't recall all the details. However, Barlowe cracks the seal himself and what does that do? Frees a bunch of spiritual energy and Dracula resurrects. Barlowe wanted Shanoa to do this so he wouldn't have to sacrifice himself. But, if he was adamant about Shanoa doing this to "destroy" those remains to which she then says "No.." why does an insane Barlowe fight Shanoa on this? Furthermore, if insane Barlowe wants Shanoa to use Dominus to "crack open the vessel" - what he eventually did - rather than using his own life, it therefore means that using Dominus will indeed only crack open the vessel only and not destroy Dracula's remains. Insane Barlowe still persists on Shanoa using Dominus, because he knows what it will do, it will free Dracula, not destroy him. Sane Barlowe can't actually believe that Dominus will destroy the remains, because insane Barlowe reinforces the opposite, that Dracula will be resurrected. That whole altercation doesn't make sense otherwise.

Honestly, I think the writing is confused because, like me, the writers got confused about how to accurately relate what they meant to say.

Now, there is a bit of me that suspects that Barlow may have been infected by close proximity to Dracula's Remains the way Maxim was, which might explain a lot. I don't know for certain, but that seems as likely an explanation for his madness as anything else might be.

One thing the game isn't clear on is exactly what Dominus would have done if it had been used when Mad!Barlowe wanted it to be. The guy's an expert in his field and may have developed a way to channel Dominus' power back into Dracula to bring him back at his full power, but all we know for certain is that when Dominus actually WAS used (under different circumstances) it did in fact destroy Dracula, at least until World War 1 rolls around. Or Bram Stoker's Dracula happens, if you believe early 90's promotional material. One or the other.
How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #41 on: February 13, 2017, 08:45:56 PM »
0
Now, there is a bit of me that suspects that Barlow may have been infected by close proximity to Dracula's Remains the way Maxim was, which might explain a lot. I don't know for certain, but that seems as likely an explanation for his madness as anything else might be.

One thing the game isn't clear on is exactly what Dominus would have done if it had been used when Mad!Barlowe wanted it to be. The guy's an expert in his field and may have developed a way to channel Dominus' power back into Dracula to bring him back at his full power, but all we know for certain is that when Dominus actually WAS used (under different circumstances) it did in fact destroy Dracula, at least until World War 1 rolls around. Or Bram Stoker's Dracula happens, if you believe early 90's promotional material. One or the other.

Being "influenced" by remains or Dracula, what have you I agree with in the sense that nothing disproves it, and Barlowe seems "possessed" but in the sense that his actions have been calculated and he knows his end game. This is exactly why he rushes to the vessel and self destructs in a last ditch effort. This means he did need Shanoa's life (using Dominus) to open that vessel, but in failing he tried doing it himself. If not, there'd have been no need to fight Shanoa, but he obviously thought he would win and therefore be able to take her life. it's unclear as to "how"(logistics) it would have worked if Shanoa had resisted, but it could have obviously happened, otherwise Barlowe wouldn't have tried to beat Shanoa into submission.

Either way sane or insane, the outcome of Shanoa using Dominus in sacrifice is the same. Therefore it's not unreasonable to say that Barlowe (both Barlowes) had that same agenda.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Offline Dracula9

  • That One Guy
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2406
  • Gender: Male
  • Blargh
  • Awards 2015-01-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-12-Music Contest Gold Prize 2014-11-November FinalBoss Sprite Contest 2nd Place Winner A great musician and composer of various melodies both original and game-based. 2018-06 Sprite Contest First Place
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #42 on: February 13, 2017, 11:13:17 PM »
0
Barlowe wanted to kill Shanoa because she didn't want to absorb his other Glyph.

He didn't handle the rejection well, to say the least. And Dracula's got all them monster girls hanging around...


Trøllabundin eri eg, inn í hjartarót.

Offline X

  • Xenocide
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8699
  • Gender: Male
  • Awards SuperOld Dungeonite: Members who have been around since the oldOLD days. The Unfazed: Never loses his/her calm, even in the most heated arguments. The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #43 on: February 14, 2017, 12:16:05 AM »
0
Quote
Barlowe wanted to kill Shanoa because she didn't want to absorb his other Glyph.

By that time in the game Shanoa already had absorbed all three Glyphs. But knowing what Albus had said about using Dominius Shanoa chose not to go through with it, and then explained to Barlowe why that was the case. It was then that he lost his s**t and we know the rest.
"Spirituality is God's gift to humanity...
Religion is Man's flawed interpretation of Spirituality given back to humanity..."

Offline zangetsu468

  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2889
  • He just nice, he just slice - like a ginsu
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia (NDS)
  • Likes:
Re: No, Barlowe isn't "Dracula's vessel."
« Reply #44 on: February 14, 2017, 12:20:19 AM »
0
Barlowe wanted to kill Shanoa because she didn't want to absorb his other Glyph.


Yes but there was still a purpose to him wanting Shanoa to absorb it, is what I'm saying.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<[Judgement]>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                              
                **<<<<<SuperCVIV>COTM<<<<<<<<+
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^
                                 ^      l   v  ^    +<<<<<<<BE
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v                 ^  
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     BE>>> VK<**   
                                 ^      l   v  ^    v     ^          ^   
            +<<<<<Legends>HC>OOS>LOD>64        ^
            v                           l              ^                ^
            v                           l     BE>> * <<<BE     RE
            v                           l      ^               ^       ^
LOI>CVIII>COD>AR>BR>CVC>CVII>HOD>ROB>SOTN>OOE>BL>POR>AOS>DOS
                                                                          v
                                                                          BE>*
BE=Bad Ending
RE=Richter Ending

Tags:
 

anything