Talk:Dream character

Destroying malignant dream characters Djatafie (talk) 23:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

A malignant or combative character can be destroyed by grabbing the character's head and staring into its eyes intently. I have done this on one occasion, in which the character quickly vanished in a flash of light. The character has never returned, but it seemed as if other characters were aware of that one's destruction and have appeared to show some respect for the dreamer's power. Djatafie (talk) 23:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

According to Paul Tholey you should talk to the character, ask them why they're chasing/attacking you, and come to an agreement (the English version isn't available for free, but the original German version is [1]).

C. Scheler (talk) 11:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC) C. Scheler (talk) 11:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion

This article should definitely be deleted. Not only is the topic not notable enough to warrant it's own article, but the article itself is lacking. Perhaps it could be merged, but I think deletion is best. 2600:4040:A4B9:E000:CD4E:F439:6A11:EFF1 (talk) 03:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree that this article's relevance should be reconsidered and that it would probably suffice to mention the information in a different article. But if this remains its own article, it needs to be expanded to cover the most relevant information about this topic, which is why I have added a few things about the nature and capabilities of dream characters.

C. Scheler (talk) 12:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Human-like?

While most dream characters resemble humans, there can also be also other entities (like animals or robots) capable of speech etc. In fiction these would also be called characters, so I suppose that the term "dream character" should include them too. Psychonaut Wiki defines them as "inhabitants of the setting of almost any dream which can be spoken to and communicated with in extreme amounts of detail". In case the term "human-like" refers to cognitive/communicative abilities rather than visual appearance, I suggest replacing it with a less ambiguous formulation.

C. Scheler (talk) 12:52, 4 October 2023 (UTC)