I'm probably way late to give my own opinions on this. HAHA. But here it is...Imperious wrote:Well... Aye.Seraphin Murmur wrote:You think it should be separated from the psychic attacks category?
As someone who practices malefic magic, I always consider psychic vampirism a very different thing; it's not part of my grimoire. It is technically a psychic attack, but the reason I don't consider it a hex or curse, similar to the other examples in that section, is because there are (in my experience) three discrete groupings:
So, you see, depending on what's actually going on, your response to it should really be quite different. If you're under unwarranted and unwanted attack, then a requirement for defence is universal, but that doesn't treat where the intent lies.
- 1) Unintentional psychic vampirism: The vampire doesn't know they're doing it, and wouldn't choose to if they became aware. This isn't malevolent, but still needs addressing - there are technically two victims.
2) Intentional psychic vampirism (consent): The vampire deliberately does it, but only with "donors" (Michelle Belanger, et al). This shouldn't need any attention at all, and is considered morally acceptable.
3) Intentional psychic vampirism (non-consent): Deliberate, and without the consent of a donor - a predatory practice. This is where you need legitimate defence, as you're a legitimate victim of this grouping.
Sadly, a conventional psychic defence isn't enough when you're dealing with the most powerful of these creatures... Be they intentional, or not.
The way I view Vampyres is the same way I view magick. If a witch or pagan curses/hexes another individual; is magick now considered a psychic attack? No, just that spell in this particular situation is considered a psychic attack assuming if the witch/pagan only had bad intentions. My belief is that both Vampyres and magick can't be absolutely evil or absolutely good. Its about what our intentions are behind what it is that we are trying to accomplish.