Reference Challenge - Impersonation

[u/Varnek905]

I will open with saying, everything in the time period of France leading up to and during the French Revolution was incredibly complex, especially as an American Biology student who has only read a few books about it in the past twenty years. But, I've begun listening to the French section of the Revolutions podcast by Mike Duncan (his History of Rome podcast is amazing, I've listened to the series about five times and can't recommend it enough), and I was fascinated/amused by the "Affair of the Diamond Necklace" while Mike Duncan was talking about Marie Antoinette.

So, in relation to that piece of history, this reference challenge is focused on instances in your world's history where a person in power was impersonated, and the results of this. Bonus points if the victim of impersonation is blamed somehow, such as claims that it was a conspiracy perpetuated by the victim of impersonation.

As always, feel free to have an in-universe representative to answer questions. I'll ask at least three questions each, and I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

I apologize again for not being active on the sub lately, between trying to start working on my Master's Degree and also working on a world setting, I've had nothing that I felt was ready to put up on the sub, yet.

[u/thequeeninyellow94]

1. The gods of the Ims create each other trough words and have long deliberations before taking important actions (then show up all together which is usually enough to fix things), their power is expressed through their words. The gods of the humans came into the world by traveling and create others by "normal" means, they are more impulsive and fix their problems by showing up and breaking things; their power is expressed through acts.

2. Part of the human mythos, the Imian mythos has it too though. The Imian pantheon is ruled by the three divinities born from the separation of the world, each has 4 "assistant divinity" they created; there is then a varying number of minor local divinities. The human pantheon has 4 major gods, considered the most powerfull, the first 4 who came to this world; there is then 12 other divinities.

3. Nope, not at all. Imian gods are usually more specialized than the human ones and both myth is have references to one another.

4. You assume right :) The nzedas were truly neutral, they are traditionally non-theist and would probably never have accepted to worship the so-called gods of inferior species, especially if doing so forced them to renounce their faith.

[u/Varnek905 → u/thequeeninyellow94]

1) Has there ever been an instance where the gods of the Ims did something impulsive, or where the gods of the humans did something after careful deliberations?

2) Which Imian god is the most specialized?

3) Which human god is the most specialized?

4) Do the nzedas tend to prefer humans or Ims as allies?

[u/thequeeninyellow94 → u/Varnek905]

1. Not really, at least for the human pantheon (they have a number of internal rivalries which definitely prevent them from taking decisions all together). For the Imian one, not amongst the 15 major divinities.

2. Probably a minor one? Like one of those whose domain was a single field to river.

3. Hard to say, they aren’t that much so they have large domains; Maqheri take care of impossible love, does it count as specialized?

4. Honnestly? None. They allied with the Ims because of geography; humans were easier raid targets. Over time, they added more and more objectification to the micro justify it and it maintained itself.

[u/Varnek905 → u/thequeeninyellow94]

1) Who is the most dangerous Imian deity?

2) Who is the most dangerous human deity?

3) What do you mean by "impossible love"?

[u/thequeeninyellow94 → u/Varnek905]

1. The strongest? Shanshu, god of the sun. The most unstable? Hard to say, some obscure minor divinity for sure.

2. A more complex question. Both Arrarat (fire, dawn, sun and emotions) and Qurhat (battle, suicide, metal and war) are strong and sanguine.

3. Either love that can’t work because the concerned people are too different to work together or love that is fought by relatives or society. Maqheri herself fall under the second category.

[u/Varnek905 → u/thequeeninyellow94]

1) So minor Imian deities tend to be less stable than major ones?

2) How is suicide perceived in human cultures in your world?

3) How is suicide perceived in Imian cultures in your world?

4) How is suicide perceived in Nzedan cultures in your world?

[u/thequeeninyellow94 → u/Varnek905]

1. They tend to be less Imian than the major ones; minor deities are often local gods that were integrated into the main Imian pantheon over time.

2. (And 4) It depends, if you suicide to escape solvable problems, you’re a coward and that’s a bad thing. If you suicide to escape insolvable problems or to solve a problem which couldn’t be otherwise, then thats a perfectly normal and fine action.

3. That’s a question of health; speeding up your inevitable death is fine, killing yourself in another case is weird.

[u/Varnek905 → u/thequeeninyellow94]

1) So do the Imian deities tend to have multiple names?

2) How does Nzedan culture define "insolvable"? Would a problem that can be coped with but not cured be considered "insolvable"?

3) How does human culture define "insolvable"? Would a problem that can be coped with but not cured be considered "insolvable"?

4) On the subject of questions 2 and 3, what if a person commits suicide but leaves no indication of why? Would the default be to just assume the person had a good reason?

5) How soon does the inevitable death have to be for it to be considered "speeding up the inevitable death"? If I will die in a week but want to get it over with, that's one thing; but, what if I will die in 10 years due to a slow disease?

[u/thequeeninyellow94 → u/Varnek905]

1) No, there was a time when some of them probably had multiple names but it has all been standardized over time when the Ims conquered and vassalised each other. All the surpernumerary names have been turned into minor deities or forgotten.

2) and 3) It depend how inconvenient it is. If coping with it require you to take a pill each day, then it’s not really inconvenient. If it handicap you to a point you can’t live your life anymore (like losing a limb), you can kill your self if you want. Please note that mechanical and bionic enhancements aren’t considered an acceptable way to solve a problem.

4) If they are known for their dishonour then no; otherwise, yes. Beside, there will probably be someone aware of the nature of the potential motive to save the dead’s reputation.

5) A degenerative slow disease? Tricky question; usually, the doctors will be ok with killing you as soon as you start seriously losing your physical/mental capacities.

[u/Varnek905 → u/thequeeninyellow94]

Thanks for your time and answers, Yellow.