Is The Slayer Stronger Than Vampires?

[Robb Stark]

Plus it just makes sense for the Slayer to be stronger than a vampires, plus we've never seen a vampire beat a slayer fairly.

Boxer Rebellion slayer was killed becasue an explosion distracted her and Kendra was put into hypnosis. The closest is Nikki, but even then it's something that happens when the train goes dark, could have distracted her.

This doesn't really matter. You can say "oh well she got distracted so it isn't clean". That's irrelevant. She did get distracted, Spike didn't, and she lost. Just like how Angelus could have killed Buffy at least four or five times. He didn't though, and he lost. "Could have" or "would have" don't matter. That's combat. Spike beat both Slayers in excellent fights. No need to try and lessen it 🙂.

But then again, like you said, fighting is hardly all about strength. In that area, Buffy looks to be stronger than almost all vampires, with one or two exceptions.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

I like the discussion about Olaf's hammer, and all that crap about Buffy or Spike - Like who is the stronger, does it matter who is the stronger? The answer to that is no.
How do you rip a telephone directory in two? It isn't brute strength it is the technique used.
In martial arts, the fighting aspect, the ability to break wood or block of concrete. It is handy to have the strength but it is the mind set that matters, to be able to use all your strength for that strike.

So is Buffy stronger than most vampires because she wins fights? Who cares about that, being the stronger person doesn't win fights.
Put Angel, Spike and Buffy in a line up. Look at their physical prescence. The chances are that Buffy is going to be the most nimble and Angel is going to be physically stronger, but he is also going to be slower.
If Angel was to land a hard hit on you, you'd know it.
Thing is Buffy could hit you four or five times in the same amount of time, also Buffy could do a back flip and somersault and still hit 4 or 5 times. Her fighting technique and ability to move fast is what makes her win fights.
Lets face it people knowing how to kill vampires isn't rocket science. How long does it take to teach a person how to stick a stake in a vampire, cut its head off, set it on fire. Putting yourself in a situation where you can do any of those without any reprisal... that is technique, the technique of being able to win fights.

 

[Blaze]

The chances are that Buffy is going to be the most nimble and Angel is going to be physically stronger, but he is also going to be slower.
.

I agree with your post, but this little part is inaccurate. Buffy is actually said to be stronger than Angel.

Overall I maintain my position that the slayers are stronger (in strength), but that doesn't always matter.

 

[The Chosen]

I think that the things that constitute Buffy's "strength," as whiteavenger was saying, extend far beyond her actual physical (mystical?) strength. Sure, she can bench a guy benching a guy, but that isn't the reason she can beat down all the baddies. I mean, she has *years* of intense training and field time that, by the later years, have made her the formidable fighter she becomes.

That accounts for why Buffy had a tough time with Luke and Borba in the first season -- she was still a pretty green Slayer, for all intents and purposes. I can't imagine either of them lasting nearly as long as they did if Buffy'd met them in, say, season 5.

As for Kakistos and The Master? Same logic applies. They'd been around forever -- Kakistos since Ancient Greece, according to Go Ask Malice -- and had presumably fought many battles. They'd had time to hone their skills, hence Buffy's difficulty in taking them out. Which, in turn, would explain why we see Buffy slay so many vampires -- they're usually brand new or at most a fraction of the age of the older vamps she's faced.

 

[Lyri]

I think if anyone thinks that any vampire is stronger than a Slayer, the whole mythology of this show falls apart.

The Slayer was created to fight and kill vampires. She is given enhanced strength, speed, healing capabilities, all so that she is actually capable of taking on and defeating vampires.

What the hell is the point of it all if a Slayer ISN'T stronger than vampires? The whole premise of the show is meaningless.

Yes, vampires have killed Slayers in the past - namely Spike - but ALL if them that we've seen - including the vamp in 'Fool For Love' who manages to stab Buffy with her own stake - have managed to get the upper hand in the fight and used that to their advantage.

That's not taking anything away from Spike, before anyone jumps all over me, he found two good fights where he came out the victor by using the Slayer's strengths and weaknesses against them. There's no shame in that and every other vampire who has killed a Slayer has done the same thing.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

This doesn't really matter. You can say "oh well she got distracted so it isn't clean". That's irrelevant. She did get distracted, Spike didn't, and she lost. Just like how Angelus could have killed Buffy at least four or five times. He didn't though, and he lost. "Could have" or "would have" don't matter. That's combat. Spike beat both Slayers in excellent fights. No need to try and lessen it 🙂.

But then again, like you said, fighting is hardly all about strength. In that area, Buffy looks to be stronger than almost all vampires, with one or two exceptions.

How is is irrelevant its exactly my point. There is a difference between better fighters and strength, and Spike didn't beat them by strength he beat them as a better fighter?

---------- Post added at 10:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:24 AM ----------

That's not taking anything away from Spike, before anyone jumps all over me, he found two good fights where he came out the victor by using the Slayer's strengths and weaknesses against them. There's no shame in that and every other vampire who has killed a Slayer has done the same thing.

Actually come to think of it, Spike doesn't even give himself credit for killing them, he thinks they wanted to die to didn't fight as hard. He takes the credit away from himself.

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=8132]sk73[/MENTION]

Doesn't anyone else (except for white avenger) think it actually was surprisingly easy for Buffy to lift that hammer compared to Spike?

No, not really. Buffy hides her powers very well and we don't really see her use them outside of combat often but there are a few scenes when she does and they show just how ridiculously strong she is, like when she jumps over the fence twice her height from standing still (!) or when she slips and does something accidentally - she kicks Riley across the room, breaks the ice cream machine, manages to hurt Xander through a giant padded suit and so on.

 

[sk]

No, not really. Buffy hides her powers very well and we don't really see her use them outside of combat often but there are a few scenes when she does and they show just how ridiculously strong she is, like when she jumps over the fence twice her height from standing still (!) or when she slips and does something accidentally - she kicks Riley across the room, breaks the ice cream machine, manages to hurt Xander through a giant padded suit and so on.

The fence jumping was quite silly... funny but silly.
Besides that I can't say that the other things surprised me much.
Personally I can see a vampire like Spike being able to do similar things. At least close to it.

But I'm sure that there are some other example of her extreme strength that I've forgot about.

/SK

 

[white avenger]

Regarding just how heavy Olaf's hammer actually is, I just went back and watched the sequence where Buffy first lifts it. She lifts it off of a stand made from what looks like concrete blocks and some sort of heavy plate, possibly steel, which would be logical if it were so heavy that only someone with superhuman strength could lift it. On the other hand, those concrete blocks and possibly steel plate are resting on a plain ordinary book shelf. Any tremendous weight would have broken the wooden shelf, regardless of how sturdy the actual stand was.

Also, Buffy carries the hammer across the room and sets it on what appears to be a common ordinary sheet metal file cabinet, which also would have collapsed under any tremendous weight.

That scene indicates to me that the actual physical weight of Olaf's hammer isn't all that great, or it would have crashed through the book shelf and most likely through the floor underneath, ending up eventually on the basement floor.

Therefore, if the actual weight isn't the deciding factor in why Buffy can lift it and Spike can't, there must be another reason. Maybe it's an enchanted hammer, and only the rightful owner, who took it in fair combat from its former owner, can lift and wield it. Since Spike wasn't the aforementioned rightful owner, he might be able to lift it, if only barely, but would not be able to wield id in battle.

Didn't I hear somebody suggest that as a possibility a little bit earlier in this thread?

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Regarding just how heavy Olaf's hammer actually is, I just went back and watched the sequence where Buffy first lifts it. She lifts it off of a stand made from what looks like concrete blocks and some sort of heavy plate, possibly steel, which would be logical if it were so heavy that only someone with superhuman strength could lift it. On the other hand, those concrete blocks and possibly steel plate are resting on a plain ordinary book shelf. Any tremendous weight would have broken the wooden shelf, regardless of how sturdy the actual stand was.

Also, Buffy carries the hammer across the room and sets it on what appears to be a common ordinary sheet metal file cabinet, which also would have collapsed under any tremendous weight.

That scene indicates to me that the actual physical weight of Olaf's hammer isn't all that great, or it would have crashed through the book shelf and most likely through the floor underneath, ending up eventually on the basement floor.

Therefore, if the actual weight isn't the deciding factor in why Buffy can lift it and Spike can't, there must be another reason. Maybe it's an enchanted hammer, and only the rightful owner, who took it in fair combat from its former owner, can lift and wield it. Since Spike wasn't the aforementioned rightful owner, he might be able to lift it, if only barely, but would not be able to wield id in battle.

Didn't I hear somebody suggest that as a possibility a little bit earlier in this thread?

Then why would it have smashed the glass counter top in Triangle when Buffy put it on it?

And once again, Spike can lift it, he lifts it off the shelf it's on but can't hold it up.

 

[white avenger]

Then why would it have smashed the glass counter top in Triangle when Buffy put it on it?

And once again, Spike can lift it, he lifts it off the shelf it's on but can't hold it up.

Glass is more fragile than wood because it is more rigid. Wood has more "give" to it, so will actually bend ane even stretch slightly before breaking.

And "Since Spike wasn't the aforementioned rightful owner, he might be able to lift it, if only barely, but would not be able to wield it in battle" means that he would be able to lift the hammer, even if only for a few seconds, but would not be able to handle it properly (wield) it in battle. It's not a question of being able to lift the weight, its a question of being able to hold the hammer and use use it as a weapon.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Glass is more fragile than wood because it is more rigid. Wood has more "give" to it, so will actually bend ane even stretch slightly before breaking.

I can't believe we're debating this just cuz you don't want to think of Spike as weaker then Buffy.
if you hear hoofbeats don't look for zebras, and thats exactly what your doing, the hammer was to heavy for Spike. So the hammer is to heavy for glass, but not heavy enough for wood, and it's not that it's to heavy for Spike it's that he can't wield it, but he can move it.
Maybe Giles magically enchanted his furniture after realizing the hammer was too heavy for his counter?

And "Since Spike wasn't the aforementioned rightful owner, he might be able to lift it, if only barely, but would not be able to wield it in battle" means that he would be able to lift the hammer, even if only for a few seconds, but would not be able to handle it properly (wield) it in battle. It's not a question of being able to lift the weight, its a question of being able to hold the hammer and use use it as a weapon.

But your reference for this was the other mythical weapon from other stories, where as far as I can remember those weapons wont budge but for the rightful owner, so your saying the hammer was like that, expect it could be moved cuz it wasn't one of those even though there's no hint of that in the show?

If we're just allowed to wildly throw in other show/movie ideas, In Harry Potter if you disarm a wizard you can use their wand, Willow is a witch she disarmed the mythical weapon from Olaf, shouldn't she be the rightful owner, plus she was the one who defeated olaf by sending him to another dimension, Buffy merely incapacitated him momentarily.

Also in True Blood Vampires dont have souls, they can just be good or evil, so what if Spike is one of those vampires, since there isn't really a difference between souled and unsouled him, that would make him 100% accountable for the attempted rape...

 

[white avenger]

This has absolutely nothing to do with Spike, other than that he was the other person who tried to pick the hammer up and failed. It could have been Angel, Faith, or Connor with the same basic results if my theory is correct, and I believe that I have presented reasonable evidence to at least consider the fact that the hammer's actual weight wasn't the deciding factor in why Buffy was the only one capable of lifting and using it.

When I first suggested that there might be another reason than sheer physical strength that Buffy would be the only one able to lift the hammer, you complain because there's nothing to suggest such a thing. Now when I give you what should be, if not absolute proof, at least enough evidence to consider that I might be right, suddenly you "can't believe" that we're discussing it.

Maybe I'm not the only one in this thread who has an overly rigid mind set.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

I love the age of Twitter!

 

[white avenger]

I love the age of Twitter!

So, she's admitting that she hasn't seen the episode in question lately?

 

[Black Eye Guy]

No she (she being, one of the main writers involved with the show, who wrote the episode Triangle, where Olaf first appeared and still writes for the series) that as far as she remembers It's cuz Buffy's stronger.

We already know nothing in the show suggested it's a magic hammer that can only be wielded by the person who defeats the owner, so it doesn't matter if she hasn't seen it.

Hammer aside, the fact that to her recollection Buffy can lift it cuz she's stronger, would imply that Espenson believes Buffy is stronger generally also. Which I would count as another point in the Slayer is stronger then Vampire column

 

[white avenger]

I love the age of Twitter!

Once more, I was presenting evidence that I believe substantiates my original suggestion that something like this COULD HAVE been a valid alternative reason why Buffy was the only one who could actually use the hammer. Basically, I was defending my reason for suggesting it to someone who pretty much said that I was full of crap for even thinking of such a thing, and that the only reason that I was doing so was to defend a particular character.

I never said that I had discovered the deep, dark, hidden meaning behind the Mystery Of Olaf's Hammer. I was merely attempting to explain why I suggested it in the first place.

 

[The Chosen]

We really have run out of things to discuss, haven't we? 😛

I like whiteavenger's theory. I don't subscribe to it, but I think it's neat. Maybe I'm reading this all wrong -- tone is, as we all know, difficult to convey via the Internet, after all -- but this seems way too heated...whiteavenger's just proposing an idea he had -- he's not trying to force it down anyone's throat or anything.

However, I do believe that Buffy is stronger than Spike.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Once more, I was presenting evidence that I believe substantiates my original suggestion that something like this COULD HAVE been a valid alternative reason why Buffy was the only one who could actually use the hammer. Basically, I was defending my reason for suggesting it to someone who pretty much said that I was full of crap for even thinking of such a thing, and that the only reason that I was doing so was to defend a particular character.

I never said that I had discovered the deep, dark, hidden meaning behind the Mystery Of Olaf's Hammer. I was merely attempting to explain why I suggested it in the first place.

Yes but your explanation was to explain a point of view that slayers weren't stronger then vampires, all I was doing was arguing the opposite and there was pretty much no evidence to back up your view.

Also in the same post when replying to Kean about Spike not being able to defeat Doc, you said "in defense of Spike", Kean wasn't being personal when she said it, she used the example of Spike being a Vampire and not being able to fight Doc, and Buffy just pushing him aside, you felt the need to defend Spike on that point, not Vampires just Spike, thats when the debate became a little more personal to a character.

But like I said in my post above, Hammer aside, the fact Jane believes it was becasue Buffy was stronger implies she believes Buffy to be stronger, and since Spike is one of the stronger Vampires that would seem to back up the idea of Slayers being stronger then vampires.

 

[The Chosen]

How is it neat if it's not backed up by anything in the show other then the case it stands on?

Well, BEG, that's the beauty of interpretation! 😀 And, to be totally technical, there isn't anything in the show backing up the idea that it's specifically because of Buffy's strength that she can wield the hammer for an extended period of time and Spike can't -- other than the fact that Spike picked it up briefly and then dropped it, something that whiteavenger's theory accounts for. I think you're examining this issue too rigidly -- it's just an idea, it's a theory, it's fun.

And keep in mind that Jane Espenson, as closely as she worked on the show and the episode in question, is but one person offering her own interpretation as to why Buffy could lift the hammer.

The cool thing about art (which I believe Buffy to be) is that we have the ability to take things from it others may not. We can make connections specific to ourselves, to our experiences, to our knowledge, and form deductions that others may or may not agree with. Without these personal interpretations, Buffy'd be boring. I certainly don't want Joss or Jane telling me what to think -- I'd rather figure that stuff out for myself! Don't get me wrong -- Joss and co's input is very important, to a degree, but it's not the end-all-be-all when it comes to totally minor things like the "rules" surrounding Olaf's hammer. At least not for me!

I'm not sure that made ANY sense...but yeah! I don't think there's any harm in WA proposing his theory. He's backed it up in a way that makes sense to him. If you don't see it, that's fine! Like I said, I don't even agree with it...but I also don't get why we can't entertain the thought!