Terastas wrote:Incidentally, this pretty much forms the crux of all the hostility between vampires and werewolves in the Inhuman setting. The two sides are not mortal enemies -- on the contrary, they are both very much committed to trying to coexist and work cooperatively. The problem is that, when you ask which side is the greater liability to their anonymity, both sides would argue that it is the other.
Pro: Resemble uninfected humans 24/7. At worst, they look like goth types.
Con: Very specific, unconventional needs that are extremely difficult to meet without compromising their morals in one way or another.
Pro: Adaptable, self-sufficient and low maintenance.
Con: Very clearly recognizable as not being human at certain times.
Further straining relations is the fact that their survival strategies have placed them at opposite ends of the spectrum, both culturally, economically, and politically.
I would disagree with this part;
Terastas wrote:Vampires are communist, all working in companies owned collectively by the coven and donating large portions of their wages back into it to pay for their sustenance and shelter needs, but also harbor elements akin to huge income disparity on account of the coven having had to (mostly figuratively, but sometimes quite literally) sell their immortality to wealthy elites whenever times got tough, not all of whom are doing anything to help the image of vampires. Politically, vampires lean on the side of authoritarianism and surveillance, mostly on account of them all being dependent upon the same network that could easily be compromised if even so much as one vampire screws up in one way or another.
Werewolves, in contrast, do not require such an elaborate network, but have also never had any incentive / opportunity to build up some impressive financial reserves and instead survive through isolation and anonymity -- by living quiet, low-key lives and by only staying in touch with a small portion of the werewolf population overall. While vampires are entirely dependent upon a network which they will go to any means to protect, the werewolf survival strategy is to never become so dependent upon anything -- to never have any assets that they cannot immediately abandon should they become compromised, and to ensure that any missteps do not concern anyone but the werewolf that made it. So while vampires are communal capitalist authoritarians, werewolves are isolationist liberal libertarians.
In the traditional sense, Vampires are in a sense a Feudal, or perhaps a quasi-fascistic order with a very clearly defined, and quite stratified hiarchical order. Traditionally, the head vampire is a creepy feudal aristocrat who lives seemingly alone in a castle, (Hello, Count Dracula) the villagers and pesants that he is landlord over are afraid of him, not only because of his noble status, but because there are strange goings on in their midst. This lord is also the head of a group of vampires that he has himself converted to vampirism. He represents the figure of godhead and creator to those he has created. There is no communism here, the head vampire is an absolute ruler. The role of the head vampire is to create more vampires who either adore him as their creator, or fear and worship him as their creator.
Werewolves on the other hand represent a tribalist clan. A real wolf pack is after all nothing more than a family unit that works togeather under the leadership of mom and dad, and of rescourses permit outsiders that are adopted into the pack. The social order is fairly stable, but anybody who grows tired mom and dad ruling overthem are free to strike off on their own to either form their own family units, or hope to be adopted into another pack. In essence the door to pack membership swings outwards easier that it does inwards to pack membership. Whilst the pack fairly stable, there is social fluidity when members leave the pack, or the mom and dad grow older, in which case the pack dynamics change as members come and go, and/or age or get wounded. -- In a sense, a wolf pack is for the most part a family unit comprised of Mom, Dad, The Kids, plus a few freinds of the family. When social changes come, it becomes a meritocracy based not really on who is the physically toughest, but who is the smartest and in the case of leadership change, who will benefit the collecitve entity and create more pack members.
A werewolf pack may follow the family unit paradigm, but may be a 'tribe of convienience' who are a collection of disparate individuals who've banded togeather in survival mode. This pack, should they have common sense would be a meritocracy much like the ancient Vikings.
Then too, the leader might also be the biggest brute, or excercise a charismatic personality cult. The former two would be indicators of packs that are comprised of weakened or traumatised individuals,and would be a best unhealthy arraingements. The previously mentioned family unit and meritocracy would represent examples healthy packs with healthy social dynamics. Wolves, and I would assume also werewolves exist to create not only more of their kind, but to spread autonomous family units of their kind far and wide.
Perhaps an even simpler way putting this would be that Vampires are solitary predators who conceal themselves well, stalk, and catch and kill their prey unaware via ambush. --Much like cats.
Werewollves, OTOH, well, say no more, but like wolves, they are social creatures who are pack hunters that team up to take down their prey as a tightly coordinated team. Given the constraints of human society , they could work well as a group of business associates, or perhaps as a well coordinated military unit, or at worst case, a street gang, or organised crime outfit. -- In short, dogs.
Terastas wrote:Ergo, a typical conversation between a werewolf and a vampire generally involves the former saying "You've put all of your eggs in one basket and entrusted its care to a bunch of shady death cheaters," and the latter saying "You're telling me you're not even slightly concerned to know what kind of crap Packs B, C, D and E could be up to?"
Anyway, when it comes to social acceptance, it's an even spread. Some would sooner accept the vampires, just as many would sooner accept the werewolves, and the majority wouldn't trust either one of them any more than the other.
I would think that if it came down to Werewolves and Vampires having to rely on each other in order to survive as two separate species, it would make for rather strange bedfellows. --It would be like an mutual co-prosperity alliance between the Huns and Rome.
That being said, each species would have to be intimately knowledgeable about the strengths and limitations of the other in order for it to work.
That being said, lets add the teeming hords of humanity to the mix. Humanity would be leery of both, but humanity as a collective whole would probably have fewer issues with werewolves due to the fact that werewolves are still essentially humans with a little something extra added to the mix. They could be anything from the big boisterous Italian family that always packs up and goes to visit their Nonny like clockwork around the full moon. They could also be the group of businessmen that have their lunar business retreats at any of their camps or mountainside chalets. They could be the elite police unit that always schedules their training sessions around the full moon, the college buddies that always go camping around the full moon, or the crank peddling biker gang that always goes on a run, and throws a really wild party out in the desert, --during the full moon.
In short, Werewolves could, and probably would represent a wide cross of humanity.
Vampires OTOH, are undead, immortal creatures. Their primary prey are other humans. They are charming, suave serial killers. Think of either a rich, playboy version of Ted Bundy, or an old school aristocratic, blue blood version of the BTK killer. Bear in mind that they may also have families of vampires with them, each one of them also a serial killer. --Sure they may be hunting to survive, but they would still be cold blooded killers in the eyes of the general populace.
If any conflicts were to arise between any of the three species, vampires will most likely come out of it worse for the wear, hunted by humans. Lycanthropes may choose to defend the Vampires, but I think that they would see an opportunity to side with the humans and hunt down the Vampires as a way of proving that they are at least human as anybody else.