Nah. The whole idea of vampires burning in the sunlight is purely an invention of the movies, back in 1922 when Nosferatu was filmed. Before that, any fictional vampire, including Dracula himself did not have this weakness. So, if a writer wants to throw that little bit of lore out the window, then that's their business.
As a side to that, they wouldn't need an amulet or ring or any other item.
Yes (obviously), because it's their classic main characteristic, they're night creatures! The sunlight is a God's creation and supposed to hurt them.
Now, learn it and go read the vampire mythology!
if they sparkle it is making them perfect and reading about truly immortal vampires which are basically impossible to kill is boring. it is much more interesting if they are constantly under the risk of getting killed by the sun.
yes makes em more scary woooooo n yeah i know dats a ghost song lool wat does a vampire do den ggrowllll grrrrr dats a werewolf i dno im ask dis as a question
No vampires shouldn't burn in the sunlight, and no they should so not SPARKLE EITHER. They should be able to walk in the sun or at least have like an amulet or something so they can like the Salvatore brothers.
posted over a year ago
the buffy vampires got a ring.. thats where vampire diaries got the whole "walk in the sun if you have a amulet"
Do I think all vampires should? No. As jadis said, the burning in the sun is a new twist on vampire lore -- only coming around during the 1920s. There's no reason (beyond the whim of the writer) for vampires to burn.
They should be..uncomfrotable in the sun(kinda like the feeling when you walk out of a dark room and that sting you get when the brightness hits you). They definally shouldn't sparkle.
Maybe not burt into flames but blister really easily. They are creatures of the night their should be some incentive to prefer night.
