• Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:

    1. You really should register so you can chat with us!

    2. Fourteen thousand people can't be wrong.

    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.

    4. See 1 through 3.

    Come on, register already!

Maloker and Archaeus: ???

The Ferg

Scooby
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
1,354
Location
Omaha, NE
I apologize for making so many S10 threads, but I didn't feel like this fit in the Inside Out forum.

So my question is what is the relationship between Maloker and Archaeus? I thought they made very clear that Maloker was the progenitor of vampires, but then it is revealed that Archaeus is apparently the original demon that sired the Master. How does this work? Is there like a little bit of both demons in the Master's bloodline?

Also, is Archaeus an Old One? Or just a really old demon?
 

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,476
Age
35
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
Maloker >...? > Archaeus > The Master

Maloker is an Old One and the original vampire. Archaeus was converted early on but I can't remember if he was direct from Maloker. Not an Old One. Archaeus sired The Master.
 

The Ferg

Scooby
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
1,354
Location
Omaha, NE
Maloker >...? > Archaeus > The Master
Yea, I suppose this is the best explanation. I still find it strange that Maloker was the Old One that created vampires, and yet Archaeus sired The Master. Maybe it was something like:
Maloker --------------------------------- Archaeus
- | ------------------------------------------------ |
\/ ----------------------------------------------- \/
Vampires, in general -------------------- The Master's line
(humans infected with a demon) ------- (still vampires, but different)

This would explain why vampires descended from The Master tend to be "special." It can only be two things, a) Archaeus is a direct descendant of Maloker, or b) Archaeus is not a direct descendant of Maloker, but can still "infect" humans in the same way. Maybe most Old Ones can just do that.

Maloker is an Old One and the original vampire. Archaeus was converted early on but I can't remember if he was direct from Maloker. Not an Old One. Archaeus sired The Master.
I'm pretty sure it's never directly stated that Archaeus was directly "created" by Maloker.
However, the Buffyverse wikia says that Archaeus is definitely an Old One.
 
K
katmobile
Which is odd because the comic series states he isn't he's a hell lord still pretty powerful but not a god or old one.

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,476
Age
35
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
I'm pretty sure it's never directly stated that Archaeus was directly "created" by Maloker.
However, the Buffyverse wikia says that Archaeus is definitely an Old One.
Turns out I had a very similar question at the time and got this explanation from a very distinguished ex member.

I think that he's only literally an "old one" ( like Kakistos is the worst of the worst and Willow is a tree - it's about the meaning of his name ) not the old one - he's probably just a really old vampire. Sure, Buffy said demon and he does look like one but both The Master and Kakistos had some nonhuman features and in case of Kakistos it was a result of his age:

Giles: Kakistos is Greek, it means the worst of the worst. It's also the name of a vampire so old that his hands and feet are cloven.

You can see that Archaeus has hooves in one panel so maybe that's just the vampires' final form? You know, the older they get, the less human they look.
That works for me but I can't remember if anything has been clarified more in the comics.
 

The Ferg

Scooby
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
1,354
Location
Omaha, NE
Turns out I had a very similar question at the time and got this explanation from a very distinguished ex member.
I recognize that name. Off topic, but what do you mean by distinguished?

That works for me but I can't remember if anything has been clarified more in the comics.
I actually got the feeling that the comics were directly contradicting that by explaining The Master's appearance coming directly from Archaeus. I could be wrong about that, but regardless, I prefer the explanation that the older a vampire gets the more demonic he looks.
Also, unlike Maloker, I don't think Archaeus looks anything like vampires. :confused:
 

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,476
Age
35
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
Also, unlike Maloker, I don't think Archaeus looks anything like vampires.
Yeah I always found that a bit strange. My take is that vampirism is like a virus started by Maloker. Once the host has been infected for long enough it starts to mutate. Most vamps don't seem to last long enough to see what they'd end up as.
I recognize that name. Off topic, but what do you mean by distinguished?
Well he was one of my favourite posters on the board. Great knowledge of the show, he came up with a lot of interesting left field theories and his posts were amusing as well.

Unfortunately he had absolutely no filter and got himself banned :(
 

mnr22

Townie
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
3
Age
22
Maloker >...? > Archaeus > The Master

Maloker is an Old One and the original vampire. Archaeus was converted early on but I can't remember if he was direct from Maloker. Not an Old One. Archaeus sired The Master.
hi! i have a question. so i have watched buffy, i love it and i have watched a bit of the vampire diaries but my sister is a big fan of tvd. so there is a character in tvd and the originals called niklaus, and it is said in the show that him and his family are the original vampires who were turned by their mother but in buffy maloker is the original vampire and buffy was created long before tvd. i'm just confused as to why they say that. i have looked it up but nothing comes up, just wondering has anyone else ever wondered this?
 

Priceless

Scooby
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
8,822
Location
UK
hi! i have a question. so i have watched buffy, i love it and i have watched a bit of the vampire diaries but my sister is a big fan of tvd. so there is a character in tvd and the originals called niklaus, and it is said in the show that him and his family are the original vampires who were turned by their mother but in buffy maloker is the original vampire and buffy was created long before tvd. i'm just confused as to why they say that. i have looked it up but nothing comes up, just wondering has anyone else ever wondered this?
Different vampire shows have different lores. I'm sure both TVD and BtVS have different lores to True Blood. Each show takes place in a different universe, so different mythologies.
 

mnr22

Townie
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
3
Age
22
Different shows have different lore for vampires and any other fictional creatures. I imagine Dracula is the most common origin story.
aw yeah that makes sense lol. thank you! i think my mind just links them altogether instead of realising it's different universes etc.
 

mnr22

Townie
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
3
Age
22
Different vampire shows have different lores. I'm sure both TVD and BtVS have different lores to True Blood. Each show takes place in a different universe, so different mythologies.
that makes sense! thanks for the reply! i have a tendency to just imagine it's all the same history and forget they're different stories. thanks again!
 
Top Bottom