True Names
- This topic has 111 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Wah! That sucks. Names has such a strong hold ain’t it?
Well, if the demon’s name enable such a strong control over the demon, is such thing the same to other creatures? Will it work on wizards for example? You know compel them. Or maybe it isn’t done (that much) because it is bad manners and all? You can do that to a demon but not your fellow wizards.
Hmm…
You have me thinking…
I am sure it would be very bad manners.
I really don’t know as I’ve only been the recipient of said power. I would think a conjuror would know. They summon other things than just demons…including animals. They usually refer to themselves as Summoners then, but it’s basically the same school of wizardry. Maybe some thaumaturgy mixed in.
Vaselle might know. Probably does, know, probably will know shortly….Bwah hah hah hah….
So if a soul was flooded by a sudden surge of external animus, or if a person went through a literally soul changing event, would it be possible for their true name to change. In a world of magic their is always an exception to every rule with enough power.
Also if it is possible for priests to learn of a person’s true name, shouldn’t a few objects exist that compel others to speak their true name or to tell their wielder the other’s true name, like Tal’s mirror, but revealing names as opposed to demonic natures.
Another post mentioned that God’s view the agent’s of other gods as demons, so does their magic have as negative effect on each other as it would against a demon. If so it would help spread the whole heretics are evil ideology. How were the God’s and their agents made anyway.
Yes, that was my point, it would make you fundamentally something/someone else.
It would be a major schism. Obviously there are legends of people having “revelations” and completely changing, although usually this is due to divine intervention. I am, of course, thinking of a Pharisee on the road to somewhere…did a dramatic 180. Changed his name, dropped an S and added a P.
However, I’ve never seen it happen.
[quote]As for gods seeing other god’s agents as demons. That bids the question, how could a god (or anyone) tell its a demon? And if a god can mistake other entities as demons, does that mean, these entities and demons are basically the same? Could you even say that these gods are demons themselves?[/quote]
To be absolutely clear: I am NOT saying this. I would NEVER say this, and if anyone says I said this, they are a LIAR and their pants are on FIRE.
Gods are supreme beings of unimaginable might, way beyond the comprehension of mortals, demons and avatars….unimpeachable and unarguable. Forever and ever amen.
I am standing away from the lightning rods in this forum!!!!
It has been noted that demons and angels are similar, but created in different ways. A demon by a wizard, and an angel by a god. So could it be that demons are just crude copies of Angels. If so it would explain why they dislike the ugly, twisted imitations of themselves. It would be like Frankenstein, but weaker and inferior to you in every way, but similar enough that you might feel uncomfortable. Some humans hate the idea of identical, or improved humans created by other humans, so Angels/ Gods might hate the idea of ugly, weaker, crudely made demons made by humans that just happen to resemble Angels. It goes against many of their ideals and could allow humans to glean more information about the origins of the celestial and divine than they might like.
We dont really even know if Angels hate Demons.
Well they wont like them, because they in another political faction, whose goals often differ.As I understood the first binding of Demons, the summoner could create an Angel looking Demon, if he could get rid of his preconceptions.
[quote=Maou;590]It has been noted that demons and angels are similar, but created in different ways. A demon by a wizard, and an angel by a god. So could it be that demons are just crude copies of Angels. If so it would explain why they dislike the ugly, twisted imitations of themselves. It would be like Frankenstein, but weaker and inferior to you in every way, but similar enough that you might feel uncomfortable. Some humans hate the idea of identical, or improved humans created by other humans, so Angels/ Gods might hate the idea of ugly, weaker, crudely made demons made by humans that just happen to resemble Angels. It goes against many of their ideals and could allow humans to glean more information about the origins of the celestial and divine than they might like.[/quote]
And in theory, one can summon angels. There is a precedent for this within religious mysticism. Typically priests are doing it. They don’t do it among the Etonians, as far as I know, but I have heard of some religions where it is done.
In particular, dark religions may summon dark avatars for reasons similar to demon summoning.
Probably not Saints, have to ask Hilda.
Just to be clear it is impossible for a demon to unbind themselves and then rebind themselves with a new name in a horribly painful and soul altering process. First generation bound demons is branded into their bindings as that is always what wizards spells bind to.
Unbind in this context would be kill themself?
An unbound demon is ‘only’ an soul and without body and without godly afterlife contract they will lose structure an merge with nature.But [i]if[/i] unbinding is possible
and [i]if[/i] contigency spells (= prepared spells with an trigger) are an possibility, I could see it happen.Rupert is what I assume is an unbound demon as he lacks that black thing in his chest. The book didn’t go into much detail, and from what I know it is unlikely Rupert’s true name is his given name, and it is unlikely a god gave him a true name. All the other demons had the black thing in their chest and all demons with a wizard they were bound to had a link to the wizard as an extension of this black thing. You can view the bar scene with Tom, Rupert, and Boggy for clarification of the event of which I speak.
[quote=Maou;692]Rupert is what I assume is an unbound demon as he lacks that black thing in his chest. The book didn’t go into much detail, and from what I know it is unlikely Rupert’s true name is his given name, and it is unlikely a god gave him a true name. All the other demons had the black thing in their chest and all demons with a wizard they were bound to had a link to the wizard as an extension of this black thing. You can view the bar scene with Tom, Rupert, and Boggy for clarification of the event of which I speak.[/quote]
I would guess unbound and not bound are not the same thing in this case.
Unbound = not an Demon(body). Only an soul out of its body
not bound = currently (or never) has had an (wizard)master.Yeah, that’s very sloppy terminology, but is quite common among demons, and wizards for that matter.
Technically, bound means you have a binding link to an Accursed Master.
Boggy was a bound demon, his AM screwed up and he’s now unbound.
Demons can have multiple masters, anyone who knows your name can bind you. In conflict the stronger binding spell usually wins, caveated to the strength of the AMs.
The very first time you are bound you are incarnated, and they almost always bind you at the same time.
Lenamare mentions this and glosses over it. He was trying to summon a previously bound demon. One that had been bound/incarnated but wasn’t currently bound to him (or least I think that’s what he said)
He was surprised to find a new completely unbound/never bound demon.
So technically there are three states
Never been bound (unbound/un-incarnated)
Not currently bound, but previously bound (unbound/currently unbound)
Bound to one or more AM’s. (bound)I suppose in theory, you could have Never Been Bound Demon who has been incarnated, just not familiar with that happeing.
But in theory, a wizard could conjure and summon a previously never before bound demon, incarnate them and let them go.
Although, thinking on it, I don’t think that would work with the current spells they use. I am pretty sure all the incarnate spells have implied bindings in them, because why else would you do this?
So perhaps an Animage Summoner might be able to do this. Or a Demon Prince….
[quote=Korwin;748][quote=Tizzy;739]
I suppose in theory, you could have Never Been Bound Demon who has been incarnated, just not familiar with that happeing.
[/quote]
Pretty shure this will happen, as soon as Wizards know the Origin of unbound Demons and try to become Demon Princes themselves…
[/quote][quote=Tizzy;760]
It’s for this very reason we don’t tell them the truth!
[/quote]Are there Necromancers who also conjure demons, or vice versa?How similiar are the spells to first bind an demon and the one where you become an lich?
Would an Conjurer and Necromancer be able to see an similarity (if there is one)?I don’t think you’d find a demon summoning a necromancer very often.
Necromancy is a bastardization of a lot of other forms of magic. But in particular they do have to know summoning/conjuring spells to call the dead back from beyond. All the summoning and conjuring stuff is related, whether you are summoning the dead, a demon, a djinn or bunnies from the forest.
So, pretty sure there are necromancers who can summon demons. Almost positive.
And…well, on this other plane, there was that one Necromancer (who used to be here) that was playing around with a Balrog…but that was in a cavern and I’m not sure it was the Necromancer that put the Balrog in the cavern to try and stop the old wizard.
It did scare the wizard pretty bad, turned his hair from grey to white. And his clothes too. Now that’s what I call a scary demon!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.