Killing for fun without alienating the reader

I was writing a story about vampires from the vampires' point of view. There's a part in the story where the vampire and her sire attack and kill a group of about two dozen just for fun. It's a character establishing point; she's a young vampire who's barely killed two people and her sire is introducing her to the thrill of the hunt.

Thing is, what's the trick to writing it without just making it look like pointless violence an gore? They're vampires so it's in character for them to rip people limb from limb for laughs, but it seems unnecessary when written. On the other hand the scene needs to happen in order for her character to be truly fleshed out. There's also the issue of kinda introducing people only to be killed. In that, in the heat of the battle, I had one person stand up and try to save the others. As a result, the vampires kill her first. Is that kind of character bad writing?

Other question regarding same story. The story takes place in a fantasy universe with several "typical" fantasy races like elves, dwarves, centaurs, satyrs, etc. However, in the battle I introduce a nymph. I could change her to a different race and tweak it a little, but is introducing another race that is a background race that won't be elaborated on in story also bad writing? (she's the "hero" that dies almost immediately)

edited 12th Jan '14 7:22:15 PM by Washington213

To be honest I don't think you'll find many people who are willing to sympathize with someone who murders for fun. Hard to care for a character with 'they killed several people' hanging over your head.

edited 12th Jan '14 7:41:12 PM by Collen

Maybe have it mainly centered on the vampire's point of view while switching to a slayer type character so you have the duel storylines, the Villain Protagonist who kills For the Lulz and The Hero who is trying to stop them from killing anyone else. That would create drama and someone (else) for the reader to root for, either the vampire who gets off on killing these puny humans or The Hero.

It's quite doable, but pay close attention to your heroic sociopath tropes.

edited 12th Jan '14 9:58:35 PM by Night

This exact thing happened twice in Dark Shadows, which was one of the worst movies I've ever seen, and in no small part because of that. The protagonist murders about 20 innocent people, wangsts about it as if he was the victim because he can't control his Horror Hunger, then gets on with his life of luxury as if nothing happened. I hated him so much that almost two years later, just thinking about it is making me hyperventilate.

So yeah. Don't do that.

It might even work to your benefit to intentionally make the protagonist into a Base Breaker so you can explain the complicated nature of morality. But unless she's a Villain Protagonist, then if you're character's going to kill those people, she'd better do some serious fucking atoning. And yes, give the victims full introductions and humanize them as much as possible, so it'll be disturbing when they get killed off.

If you don't want to go that hard, then you might just want to skip the massacre altogether, possibly end with a Gory Discretion Shot, and leave it up to the reader exactly what happened.

But keep in mind that A Million Is a Statistic is a nasty and dangerous trope, especially since it leaks into Real Life; think of how serial killers are glorified but their victims are completely forgotten. Don't do that.

edited 13th Jan '14 1:15:30 AM by Wheezy

Personally, I'm alienated a lot more by Protagonist-Centered Morality then by people who are meant to be evil doing evil things. So I'm not sure I really see the problem here, since this character sounds like she's meant as a Villain Protagonist. You will probably drive away certain readers, and you might be a little constrained in the kind of stories you can tell, but I don't think it's necessary to make a protagonist sympathetic to make them interesting.

Interesting points.

Hmm, well I was gonna leave it as a short story, but putting in The Hero turns it into a novel easily. I already have a knight character that hunts my Villain Protagonist. But she'd be a Karma Houdini since the entire point of the story is that she goes somewhere that anti-vampire laws don't exist, a good ending for a short story but seems sketchy for a novel.

The plot is basically about a normal woman who goes to the wrong bar, gets turned and has descent into an inhuman monster until the knight catches up and she decides to leave. IDK, any thoughts?

edited 13th Jan '14 5:24:50 AM by Washington213

This is very interesting actually. One of the tropes I don't really like is Friendly Neighborhood Vampire. As much as I am a die hard fan of Anne Rice's vampire books , one of my pet peeves is the insistence on feeding on evil people alone; it feels like sort of a cop out. I like your idea, as your vampire seem to being doing what I feel they should—feeding on the innocent and guilty alike without a care in the world.

edited 13th Jan '14 6:18:36 AM by Swordofknowledge

Since the vampire's a Villain Protagonist, disregard most of what I said.

I have a story where the protagonist is a Blood Knight Anti-Hero who fights and robs bandits for fun and gold. But the bandits are established to be generally cruel, murderous people themselves, so it's designed to be a case of Pay Evil unto Evil in order to avoid this very problem. The protagonist kills bandits for the excitement and action, but unlike the bandits, he never kills innocent people. You can avoid having your vampires alienate the reader by making their "victims" even worse; perhaps the people that the vampires are killing are mass-murderers themselves.

And even if you do this, you can still avoid making them the Friendly Neighborhood Vampire if you really want to. Simply change their excuse a little to be more a case of Pragmatic Villainy. They don't limit their targets to bad guys because they have a moral code against killing innocents; they do it because people are (marginally) less likely to form angry mobs and start coming after them if they limit their victims to serial killers, bandits, and evil gangs who won't be missed anyway.

edited 13th Jan '14 8:05:32 PM by Lennik

The thing here is, you can either have a Heroic Sociopath main character in a setting where the villains are almost all worse than he is, or you can have a Heroic Sociopath supporting character. The first works because you establish the protagonist as the lesser of two evils, and the second works because side characters don't receive the focus, and therefore criticism that the main character (the one we're most supposed to empathize with) does.

You can't have an MC who's a sociopathic dickwad to relatively benevolent and nice people for no adequately explained reason. Your audience will not sympathize.

EDIT: Why was that trope removed?

edited 13th Jan '14 8:50:51 PM by KSPAM

It's been separated into two tropes now. Heroic Comedic Sociopath is the trope Played for Laughs. Sociopathic Hero is the trope played straight.

It turns out that you can... I'm not entirely sure why it works, and I say that as a fan of the series, but it does. Actually, I can think of at least one more, too. I think part of it is that the protagonist has to be more than just a violent murderer, and do more than just massacre innocents. Also, not generally letting the audience get to know the innocents.

For vampires, maybe that means playing with their food?

This, essentially.

edited 20th Jan '14 6:01:38 PM by Noaqiyeum

Don't portray her as a two-dimensional character who's love for killing is her primary character trait, for one thing. Especially if you decide to go for a novel-length story.