FANDOM


Titular Villain?

Balthus Dire, by that logic, you're saying that Joker (DC Animated Universe), Joker (Video Games), and others should not be under Titular Villains, because one game/show is not enough to be Titular.--DragonDude83 (talk) 18:14, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

Dracula =/= Satan.

He is not Satan, and does not qualify under the category, even without the reboot.

  1. He is not the source of all evil, especially seeing how they referenced Christ, whom BTW was supposed to be the guy who defeated Satan and evil. "Source of all evil" implies that evil DIDN'T EVEN EXIST prior to said source arriving. In order for Dracula to qualify for the category, he'd need to have been around since the dawn of creation.
  1. Circle of the Moon had a boss called "Devil" which is another name for Satan. Not to mention, Death was implied to be serving the stone Dracula was using, not Dracula himself, in the first chronological game of the series. At best, that stone qualifies under the Satan category more than Dracula himself.

Oh, and another thing, God HAS NO OPPOSITE. Even Satan is completely inferior to God himself. In fact, that's the reason why he rebelled against God. Someone's opposite would imply they have the exact same power level and abilities, but used them for completely different ends and means.

We're keeping Dracula off the "Satan" category, and that's final. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 15:23, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

This pointless edit war is getting really old

Your reasoning is not wrong per se, but based on strictly biblical arguments. However, the Castlevania games are set in a fictional universe that takes some liberty with the Holy Bible. Besides, the Holy Bible itself states that Jesus Christ's purpose was to die for mankind's sins, and that He has yet to defeat Satan and Evil; this is said to happen during His Second Coming when the End of Times would come.

  1. It is true that Dracula himself is not the source of all Evil, but he is the physical embodiment of Chaos who IS the Source of All Evil as old as the world itself. Chaos and Dracula has been described respectively as Evil and Evil Incarnate, meaning that Chaos is the Idea of Evil and Dracula is its incarnation; making them one and the same or at the very least two aspect of the same thing. Also Chaos is much less prominent in the games, and it is Dracula not Chaos who is described as the ruler of Evil in the games.
  2. Anyone who has played a Castlevania game knows that Dracula is repeatedly described as Evil Incarnate and the Lord of Darkness, among other titles that clearly explain that he is the absolute ruler of Evil, monsters AND demons. Thus fitting the "Darkness and corruption incarnate" and "highest authority over Hell" points mentioned in the definition of the Satan category. I know that some western translation of the manuals do sometimes describe him as "second only to the Devil himself" but that's precisely that; an adaptative translation.
  3. I know full well that there is a recurring foe called Devil but this is pointless. It is not the name that matters but the role. The aforementioned Devil has no relevance whatsoever in the games' plot and is just one of Dracula's mooks. Heck, most of the time it is not even a boss and more often than not, it is not even the mightiest kind of Demon Type regular enemies.
  4. I know full well that God has no opposite IN THE REAL-WORLD BIBLICAL LORE. But as I said this is about a FICTIONAL universe and in this universe God HAS an opposite. In the Dawn of Sorrow game, Celia Fortner repeatedly states that Dracula/the Lord of Darkness is the Evil Counterpart of God needed in the cosmic balance. A view that Dracula's son Alucard states to be true in the good ending.
  5. A for the idea of Death being closer to Satan, I am sorry but this is downright absurd. Sure he is as old as the world but he is a Death God, not a God of Evil and rules Limbo, not Hell. Sure he is often harder to defeat than Dracula in-game but the story makes clear that despite this he is less powerful and influent, and that he is "only" Dracula's second-in-command. Balthus Dire (talk) 17:29, July 28, 2013 (UTC)


About the role the character plays, this explains why you took Cthulhu out of Castlevania Villains, doesn't it? --DragonDude83 (talk) 18:15, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

Precisely. Characters inspired by another one are very different from the original. The common enemy Malachi looks like Chtulhu indeed but nothing more. A for the common enemy named Cthulhu in Symphony of the Night, this is merely an adaptation from the western translators. In the original Japanese version, it numbers among the enemies called "Devil". Moreover, even though both monsters a powerful and dangerous enemies they are not even close to the Eldritch Abomination from H.P. Lovecraft's works and the Father of all Lies of Christian Religion. Balthus Dire (talk) 18:50, July 28, 2013 (UTC)


When I said "Jesus defeated Satan," I was in fact referring to his dying on the cross and rising from the dead. Just because Satan didn't die as a result doesn't mean that he wasn't defeated. At least, that's what my church taught (Catholic Church).

And considering how both Celia Fortner and Alucard implied that the term "Dark Lord" was more of an inheritable position (the whole Sora debacle as well as the Dark Lord Candidates that made up the plot), I'm not sure the Satan category still qualifies (I doubt someone in a Satan category would simply have its position taken over even if dead). We've already got Dracula in the Dark Lord category, anyways, so that's good enough.

And regarding Death, the game where Dracula came to be strongly implied that he was only loyal to the one who wielded the crimson stone, so his master is actually that, not Dracula himself. If Dracula lost that stone, more likely than not Death would have no real reason to follow him. Besides, Death also technically went against Dracula in both Sorrow games (don't forget, Sora was Dracula's reincarnation), and while it could be justified in the first game that he was serving Chaos, its not the case with the second game, when the Dark Lord candidate hadn't even officially stepped up to the plate (Dmitri needed to sacrifice Celia Fortner to get that power fully, and... well, it backfired on him). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:57, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

You are right, the title of Dark Lord/King of the Night is an inheritable position. More specifically it becomes an inheritable position after 1999 after Dracula has been truly destroyed. But the ending of Dawn of Sorrow makes clear that only Dracula's reincarnation, be it Soma or the following one, can truly inherit it. Something that Alucard knows but that Celia does not. The Julius Mode makes clear that Dark Lord Soma is Dracula in everything but the name; meaning that only Dracula can inherit his own throne.

The game does indeed speaks of a Dark Lord but there are difference in scale between Dark Lords:Lord Voldemort and Sauron are both Dark Lords but no doubt that the former is leagues below the latter. Plus, it seems mostly to be a problem of translation given that other games come with titles like Evil Incarnate, Lord of Darkness, and King of the Night; closer to Dracula's description as the Darkest of all Dark Lords/Ruler of all Evil. Also, Dracula/whoverer succeeds him is the personnification of the in-universe Source of All Evil. Chaos merely fulfills a Cosmic Role and has little to no personality, and it and the entire universe needs Dracula to fulfill the role of Satan.

Keep in mind that in fiction, many Satan-figure focus more on the "Ruler of Demons and everything evil" aspect, and that some are presented as the current Source of all Evil. The Archdemon for instance became the Satan of the Mana universe after killing the previous one. Fiction cannot correspond word for word to the Biblical Lore, especially fiction made in countries where Christianity is only a foreign religion.

As for Death, it is true that Lament of Innocence states that he obeys the wielder of the Crimson Stone, but games released prior AND after insist that he is loyal to Dracula and Dracula alone. And they make him quite adamant about his loyalty to the point that he was outraged by Brauner's ambition. Perhaps the Crimson Stone was essential to make Matthias the King of the Night, whom Death awaits? It is said in one game that he wants revenge against God for being cursed into reaping souls; and in another that the Master of Death and the King of the Night are natural allies. It is widely speculated that Death attacks Soma in Aria and Dawn because he wants to release Dracula's soul or kill a reincarnation who is unlikely to take the mantle. We will never know for sure. Balthus Dire (talk) 21:17, July 28, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.