Impudite Dissonance Rationalization

[Archangel Beth]

Originally Posted by naraht

Is it Canon that all minor bands did not exist until a member of their minor choir equivalent fell?

I don't believe that's canon. I believe there's a comment about minor Bands "evolving" in the pressure-cooker "survival of the fittest" environment of Hell, but I'm blanking on if it's in the core rules, the IPG, or GURPS IN.


I do know that I've been toying with the concept that Impudites get Essence out of people by forcing the human to resonate to the Impudite's personal symphony a little -- just enough that Essence can be passed over, as if the human were a part of the Impudite. (I've been toying with some other resonance tweaks, too, which would tend to strengthen this sort of concept of forcing a relationship via Charm (instead of sensing it, as Mercurians do). But anyway.)

If you want to use that metaphor, that the Impudite is synchronizing the human's symphonic theme (as a living member of the Symphony) in its own personal symphony... then killing a human could be viewed like chopping off a piece of oneself, and thus as dissonant as a Shedite riding a host to actual death.

[JCD]

Originally Posted by Archangel Beth

I don't believe that's canon. I believe there's a comment about minor Bands "evolving" in the pressure-cooker "survival of the fittest" environment of Hell, but I'm blanking on if it's in the core rules, the IPG, or GURPS IN.


I do know that I've been toying with the concept that Impudites get Essence out of people by forcing the human to resonate to the Impudite's personal symphony a little -- just enough that Essence can be passed over, as if the human were a part of the Impudite. (I've been toying with some other resonance tweaks, too, which would tend to strengthen this sort of concept of forcing a relationship via Charm (instead of sensing it, as Mercurians do). But anyway.)

If you want to use that metaphor, that the Impudite is synchronizing the human's symphonic theme (as a living member of the Symphony) in its own personal symphony... then killing a human could be viewed like chopping off a piece of oneself, and thus as dissonant as a Shedite riding a host to actual death.

I had always likened it to this:

A Mercurian cares about ALL the relationships a person has.

An Impudite only cares about the relationship to HIM. That focus allows him to shift the person's viewpoint.

But to latch onto your original point: maybe the Impudite, in some perverse way, is only able to use his resonance by finding a piece of himself in the victim: some personality trait, quirk, what have you. He uses that as the lever to adjust their reactions AND as the window (to mix a metaphor) for draining off the Essence.


It isn't that is is making them change to be him. He is seeing a part of him inside of them, so it feels self destructive.

[Azel]

I previously commented on this idea of celestials being creatures of thought versus us humans being creatures of matter. They are words made manifest, and certain concepts are their embodiment, be it their choir/band or served word. It's back in the forum somewhere, where I made the distinction of Seraphim and Balseraphs resonating to the extremes of Truth, Kyriotates and Shedim resonating to the extremes of Perspective, and Cherubim and Djinn resonating to the extremes of Attachment.

(Ahh, there it is: What is the Main Psychological Difference? topic)

For Mercurians and Impudites I would say Politics is their core resonance spectrum. Now I could say Relationships instead, but Politics is an important word. Politics is often summarily defined as "who gets what, and how, when, where, and why." It's essentially about perceiving distribution.

A Mercurian sees Politics according to their Superior's needs, but also takes a selfless and self sacrificing viewpoint in encompassing broader peoples into account. Then comes the entertaining "polite disagreement" among good on distribution -- good, though cooperative, still has arguments about ordered priorities.

An Impudite also sees Politics according to their Superior's needs, yet its selfish and self-preserving viewpoint restricts its targets. "Power belongs to me, and grudgingly anyone above who makes my survival possible." Thus major power resources lost -- and that's what humans are, batteries of essence in their power base -- is self-denial and undermines survival. So disagreements over the politics of distribution is also common, but destroying the stakes that keep you in power is the absolutely last thing you want.

To destroy a human removes a thread in the safety net of power resources, and that's horrifying! Better to let the human live to be stolen through the games of politics another day than to strip the foundation of your power, and threaten your existence. A human lost is that much more exposure for an Impudite versus every other competing bastard that wants them dead, both angels and demons.

YMMV, IMC, etc.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Azel

Politics is often summarily defined as "who gets what, and how, when, where, and why." It's essentially about perceiving distribution.

That's ... a very materialistic concept of politics. It is often a practical summary of the effects of politics, but it isn't general enough for some circumstances. How does a definition like "Politics is about who has power, who gets their own way, and the limits on that" work in your reasoning?

[Azel]

It's only materialistic if you see "what" solely in the human terms of material things.

Harold Lasswell's definition is an easy to grok summation of power, which is what Mercurians and Impudites resonate to (one being more focused on the body politic and the other actual Force makeup). Status, essence, tethers, forces, relationships, position, viewpoint, etc. are all part of the tangible stakes of what gets distributed. What you see as non-materialistic generalizations, such as getting one's own way, positioning, agreed terms, etc., is as real to celestials as the material world is to us.

From a celestial perspective what do they need to conform to human attitudes, that abstract reasonings to power are somehow separate from Lasswell's summary of distribution? They don't do nominalistic at all; the word is real, they've literally seen and lived it from the ethereal and celestial plane. Humans are free to pretend otherwise, and they can afford that luxury because they are creatures of matter, not creatures of thought and soul. The distinction we'd see here just would not be relevant to them.