VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:50:10 09/19/02 Thu
Author: monkey
Subject: Re: : ) Wrong, eh? Well. maybe....Not! : )
In reply to: 3Strikes/One more question-Riddle ; ) 's message, ": ) Wrong, eh? Well. maybe....Not! : )" on 06:34:59 09/17/02 Tue

>16)3 of a kind. Third shall he be. But third, third
>and third ? We shall see.

Most of this is too mysterious to me for me to be able to make much headway. I certainly can't answer the questions point by point. But after reading the above thread, and especially this clue, I've come up with the following crazy speculation:

Talking about 3 of a kind calls up the Angel episode (I've only heard it described) in which they are buying a book that is supposed to be one of a kind -- and then the shopkeeper comes out of the back with three of them. And apparently a specific comparison is made to the book being unique like a vampire with a soul.

We now have two vampires with a soul, and of course the question arises, whether there will be a third -- as the above scene certainly suggests -- and if so, who it would be.

Now, what your cryptic speculation suggests to me is that maybe Xander will deliberately get himself vamped, and then go get a soul, in order to become a vampire with a soul. He would do so out of misguided heroism -- perhaps he hears about the prophecy about the vampire with a soul being important in the big upcoming battle. Maybe it's during the period of time when Angel has turned into Angelus, and maybe Spike is doing something or other at that time that makes Xander think that he (Spike) is not likely to be on the side of the good.

So maybe Xander concludes again that he knows more than he does, or has a better idea than he really has, and decides that if a good vampire with a soul is needed, he should try to become one. (Your question about whether Lurky was the only purveyor of afterlife is what suggested to me the idea that Xander might not only get vamped, but do so deliberately if he thought he could then get a soul and somehow be useful in the end days).

Of course, that still wouldn't explain what "but third, third, and third, we shall see" means, or much of anything else in your game. But I'm trying, I really am.

Win lose or draw, I'm also willing to bet that WtP's question about "who's your sire" is referring to vampire sire, not king. And I also think that in the prophecy "He who is sired by the vampire with a soul shall kill Sahjahn", it is probable that it is not biological siring and Connor who is being referred to, but somebody who is sired, in the vampire sense, by one of the vampires with a soul. It could even be Spike, if you're willing to buy Joss's warped explanation of how Angel could be called his sire even though it was Dru, not Angel, who actually bit him.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.