True Names

[Rosver]

If you consider the complexity of languages, mispronunciation and misspellings is more that likely. It probably happen often.

Well, I will explain things further to you Tizzy.

Language is extrememly complex. Lets start with speech/spoken language

In speech, you communicate with sound we create with our mouth, throat, nose, etc. We are able to create different sounds with our speaking devices. Sounds like |s|, |b|, |p|, |e|, etc. These different sounds used in speech is called phonemes.

We are capable of making hundreds of these phonemes but each language only use a fraction of these available phonemes in its phoneme set. English for example uses about 40. Other languages uses up to more than a hundred phonemes. Other uses less to about a dozen of these phonemes. This difference of phoneme sets creates problems. Essentially it makes it impossible for one language to actually pronounce words from another language correctly.

There are also rules of how these phonemes are combined for each language thereby creating another layer of complexity making it the impossible even more difficult.

Say let say a Japanese person would speak the name Rupert. One characteristic in Japanese language is that they only use a limited set of syllables. They had a sylable ‘ru’ but they don’t have the syllable ‘pert.’ These makes it impossible in their language to pronounce these correctly because they don’t have the ‘pert’ sylable. The closest they could get is to pronounce it like this ru-pe-ru-to. Now that is four sylables not two as like the original. ](*,)

You could try and experience how difficult this really is, try speaking a language that contains phonemes that isn’t used in the English language (you’re Eglish speaker right?:-k ) and have a different speech pattern. Try following this How to Speak Mandarin tutorial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLGHLQq_hyg

Notice the letters with strange markings bellow the Mandarin texts. Can you read them?

Or try this strange language, the ‘clicking’ language these natives in the documentary speaks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c246fZ-7z1w

Now imagine what the names of these people would be. Could you even speak them? :-s

Also there are very interesting rules that other languages follow that are quite alien to English speakers. For example, in Mandarin a difference in pitch of a single sylable could change the meaning of the word even though the words are the same phonically. You might not be calling the person in their correct name because you don’t get the pitch of a sylable in their names right.

There is also the language used by the deaf and mute. The Sign Language. This don’t use sounds and, yes, these people do have sign language ‘names’ they use which is just a bunch of motions and has no corresponding sound attached to it.

Not to mention, these people might not even know how to speak their names. How could they when they can’t speak or hear their names. Even if they are magicaly given the ability to speak and hear, they don’t have the skill to do it. The mute never have spoken it would have as much dificulty as a baby speaking their first words. And the deaf never even know what their names sounds like. Then you ask them to speak it?

Now these is just human speech. In the book, it is clear that there are non humans. One is reptilian in nature. Now these nonhuman species would even have even different sound and phonemes in their languages.

Think of the dolphins. They are said to have a spoken language, in all their clicks, and razz, and whistles. Many of the sound the dolphin makes is even supersonic and out of humans hearing range. Now how could you even speak language like that when your mouth and throat is not even designed to make those sounds? Not to mention, you can’t even hear many of those sounds.

Now, mispronunciation? Hahahahahahahah. LOL. LMAO. I have to laugh at that.

Now, we don’t even touch about writing yet. :d/

[Rosver]

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.

[Tizzy]

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….

[Maou]

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.

[Tizzy]

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!!!!

[Maou]

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.

[Tizzy]

Who are you calling ugly?

I think the avatars are ugly.

[Korwin]

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]

[Tizzy]

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.

[Maou]

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.

[Korwin]

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.

[Maou]

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.

[Korwin]

[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.

[Tizzy]

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….

[Korwin]

[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)?

[Author]

Posts