Yes, especially adolf isran.

Actually a good portion don't care, they are just following Harkon's orders.




Daedra are neither good nor bad, the concept of evil and good doesn't apply to them since its a mortal concept and they live in a higher plane of existence, also Boethiah isn't really evil if it weren't for him the Dunmer wouldn't have the house system and ebony wouldn't have been made into armor or weapon thus not giving Morrowind its financial power in trading minerals like ebony and glass.

Now back to the real question, I'd say yes and no. The vampires are just trying to survive and most really have no choice in the matter of being a vampire but the problem is there are vampires who embrace the gift too much and go mad with bloodlust and will attack anything they see or enthrall them while the Dawnguard just want to protect their own races but I think that persecuting all Vampires unless they help the dawnguard and later cure themselves is kind of stupid.

They want to eradicate an entire race just for doing what comes naturally to them.

That is like killing every wolf in the world for killing deer.

Your thoughts?

Actually a good portion don't care, they are just following Harkon's orders.




Daedra are neither good nor bad, the concept of evil and good doesn't apply to them since its a mortal concept and they live in a higher plane of existence, also Boethiah isn't really evil if it weren't for him the Dunmer wouldn't have the house system and ebony wouldn't have been made into armor or weapon thus not giving Morrowind its financial power in trading minerals like ebony and glass.

Now back to the real question, I'd say yes and no. The vampires are just trying to survive and most really have no choice in the matter of being a vampire but the problem is there are vampires who embrace the gift too much and go mad with bloodlust and will attack anything they see or enthrall them while the Dawnguard just want to protect their own races but I think that persecuting all Vampires unless they help the dawnguard and later cure themselves is kind of stupid.

Unfortunately, most vampires are not Count Hasildors, Seranas, or Sybille Stentors; vampires that use their dark gifts as a means to do (relative) good in the long run. They generally are monsters that feast on the living and enjoy doing so.

They want to eradicate an entire group of people who prey on the innocent and go on city raids in broad daylight. I'd say they're justified. I know you're playing Devil's Advocate here, but the Dawnguard are removing a threat, not pretending one exists to justify their own morals and dogma.

Humans are arrogant, everything's natural till it involves humans dying then it's somehow a crime against nature. Personally I think the whole human race is a crime against nature, but lets not get off topic. They see the Vamps as non human thus killing them is as easy as putting down a dog. But the dehumanisation of Vampires is prevalent wherever you go, it's not JUST a bad quality of the Dawnguard. Personally I see Vampirism as a gift, though I can see how others would see it as a curse. In which case are many vampires not victims? I see Molag Bal as the TRUE villain in all of this. But then again? Does he not need souls to maintain his power? What is a daedric Prince without power, but prey for the rest of them. Meruhnes Dagon for instance would take pride in crushing him in an instant if he could. Good and evil are always subjective. Harkon never saw his plan to blot out the sun as evil, he saw it as saving his race. Similarly Isran sees eradicating the Vampire Menace as saving his. It's up to you to decide which is better. It's really all relative

Pretty much. It sounds like cool guy conspiracy Keanu to say, "But from the perspective of Bella and Edward, the Dawnguard are murderers." It's an act of self defense. Can TES vampires live off of animal blood?? Even if they could, it's impossible to distinguish that minority from the rest (and they're very charming, persuasive liars). I liken it to putting down a zombie (that can still reason). In some cases, they did not choose vampirism, but you have to defend. Vampires are the aggressors. Vampire hunters are the responding defenders. For the record, I like/trust Serana. So, I'm possibly a manipulated cow.

Now back to the real question, I'd say yes and no. The vampires are just trying to survive and most really have no choice in the matter of being a vampire but the problem is there are vampires who embrace the gift too much and go mad with bloodlust and will attack anything they see or enthrall them while the Dawnguard just want to protect their own races but I think that persecuting all Vampires unless they help the dawnguard and later cure themselves is kind of stupid.

Isran is another Three Dog / Nasir. Just having that voice actor pits my dislike for the Dawnguard to start with. That and the character is a torturing extremist fanatic. So, yes...they are all evil, for one reason or another.

But this is like all other observations on the subject...it's opinionated.

It is debatable whether Sybille is truly good, sure she looked after the high king when he was young but that does not excuse her going down to the dungeons to kill the prisoners who could have only been in there just for stealing a sweet roll.

What i wonder, is that does she need to kill prisoners to feed? Because in dawnguard, if you join the vampire faction, you would notice they have human "cattle", and said humans can be feed upon without dying, it is even mentioned by a NPC in there that you can feed on the cattle but shouldn't kill them.

So if the vampires in that castle can feed on humans without killing/infecting them, could the same be said of Sybille?

actually Harkon sacrificed 1000 souls to become a pure-blood.

They want to eradicate an entire race just for doing what comes naturally to them.

That is like killing every wolf in the world for killing deer.

Your thoughts?

Vampires do not need to kill to feed but sybille seems to kill as someone says that being executed by the headsman is not the worst death you can have. when you ask about this he says to stay out of the dungeon when Sybille has had a bad day or something to those words.

Maybe she somtimes feeds without killing and other times kills them while feeding, after all, its not very smart for her to always keep killing prisoners when she has to feed. It would raise red flags for people who do not know her nature.

Though its possible she only kills them, not really because she has to feed, but she doesn't want more people to know she is a vampire (im sure a few already do), after all, if she fed on a prisoner and kept him alive, and if he was released, he could try to alert others that she is a vampire.

Agreed with everything until that point. The vampire has only a few options: prove they won't be a threat (I have no idea how they could do that), accept a cure, or die. I wouldn't consider that persecution. Those are options. The second is best for humans, obviously. The first is great, if they can. I wouldn't trust a vampire who said no to becoming human again. I wouldn't trust them to not harm humans. And they're given an out.. so they don't really have the excuse that it wasn't their choice anymore.

Anyone know if TES vampires can live off of animals (other than humans, I mean)?

....I guess I'm counting cats and lizards as "humans"

The Lore says deceased blood, animal blood, vampire blood and werewolf blood is poison to a vampire.

Not at all. Vampires were created by Molag Bal, the Daedric Lord of domination, [censored] and other kinds of horrible things. It's curse, not a gift and should be removed from existence. Dawnguard are doing the right thing.

The only evil thing the vampires are doing in my opinion is attacking towns. I wish they would feed on bandits or animals. They also don't have to feed, I don't understand why they just can't stay in all day. In summary no I don't think the Dawnguard are evil they are trying to take care of the vampires because they are attacking the towns.