BoM/TWS Message Forum

As Nostrum notes ("Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: W..."  ), the "Will and Sydney" thread went a little off tangent. Into interesting directions, but off-tangent.

Just to keep things in one place, and to start things off, here are some of the cryptid-related comments from the other thread:

Zuul got things started by asking:
"I wonder if the masks would work on a cryptid. Like a sasquatch or a ghoul ?"

To which Nostrum replied:
"No. The masks and mind bands check for human essentia. Ghouls may be human-like, but it's most likely they have different essentia, and the same would be for sasquatches.

To attempt to bind the concept to the discussion by taking another tangent: as far as we know, Aidan is a human being, but there's a good possibility that he's a Lamia, given the parallels with the captured creature in "The Vampire and the Snowman". If Aidan becomes capable of using a mask, it would be proof that he has human essentia, and if he is of the same cryptid type as the creature from that story, then it's reasonable to think that said creatures also have human essentia.

Of course, that would imply defining whether essentia is associated with a creature's species, genus or family. It's obvious it's not associated to a creature's kingdom because that would make masks work with every animal; it's also reasonable to think that humans are unique enough that our essentia is extremely different from every other animal. But it's entirely possible to figure whether something that checks for "cat" essentia would not just react to all species of house cats and wildcats (Felis) but also big cats (Panthera), lynxes and bobcats (Lynx) and cougars (Puma), as they're part of the same family and we associate with being either a "cat" or "cat-like".

This is what matters entirely. Is a sasquatch "human" or "human-like"? Is a ghoul "human" or "human-like"? If not, then it doesn't count as human. Given how ghouls are related to undead, they may be "human-like" but cannot be human because they're undead - and most likely, they lack essentia altogether.

(For an easier way to see it: if you've played D&D or any kind of RPG that has creature "types", and you... say, attack with a weapon that deals additional damage to a specific kind of creature such as "flying" or "undead", the weapon "checks" if the creature is from that type before triggering. This kind of "check" is how it works for the masks: it checks for "human" or "humanoid" type.)"

ThePrussian noted of Aidan Seabury:
"he either has human essentia, or essentia so close to human that it’s indistinguishable. And if he is a Lamia, I think that definitely raises an interesting point on what exactly they are given the essentia thing."

Zuul then said:
"Ah... well that makes sense. Although I've heard the idea floated that if a hunter were to shoot a Sasquatch and brought the body back as proof, and if antropologists decided to classify it as genus 'homo' it would be very possible said hunter would be put on trial for homocide. Just one of those legal mind problems I've come across and thought was a cool thought experiment. As for a ghoul, I see the aspects you mentioned and agree. Those were two off the top of my head in slightly different classes. How about cursed humans? Like werewolves, rougarou, skinwalkers, or wendigos? In case you haven't figured it out already, I've been getting into goofy cryptid stories over the last year and sadly I'm hooked. lol. I listen to them in one ear while I'm working, they help to pass the time when I'm doing repetitive work."

Nostrum:
"Loup-garou technically already exist in the BoMverse, and indeed they're humans cursed to become animals, so I feel they'd count as having human essentia - and they encompass werewolves, so that solves two. Skinwalkers are already doing what the masks do but with actual skins - that is, they're already humans but they replace their imago with those of other creatures. (The "Party of Five" branch has the villains effectively become skinwalkers.) I'd say they could put on masks as long as they're not wearing skins, since it'd count as wearing two masks at once. That said, they *could* wear mind bands and be affected by anima bands even if they're wearing skins - provided, of course, they're not human skins, since otherwise you'd have three minds.

As for wendigo, they're effectively like sasquatches, so I place them on the "dubious" group. The same could be said of the ettin, of which there are two branches that deal with them - they're more beast than human, which would cause a huge conflict.

Note, though, that you *could* make the masks work on other creatures, but to do so, you'd need to alter the sigil so that it either eliminates the "check for human essentia" requirement (therefore making it copy any imago, including that of inanimate objects) or expand the definition of that subroutine to "check for essentia", which as it is a trait of living beings means it'll only apply to living creatures. (But of course, that would require a genius, and the stories would quickly become insanely weird.)"

rugal said:
"I think whether or not masks would work on bigfoots and Draculas and whatever is irrelevant simply because I don't think masks being used on non-humans or semi-humans or whatever is going to ever come up or be addressed after a certain branch got exiled."

Nostrum then wrapped things up:
"BoM has cryptids, and more have been surfacing recently. Ettins, lamias, loup-garou, dryads, whatever the heck was creating the fire cult that Will and al-Bayoumi had to stop; all of these have been present in one way or another. Most of those, of course, are too distinct from a human to enter this discussion, but those rare few that do merit some discussion - which is what's happening (and what has effectvely taken over this thread. I find it fascinating how one tangent topic can overcome a discussion related to something else, and how often it tends to happen - not just here, but everywhere else.)

I feel that, even if it never happens on BoM or even TWS (where you'd expect the cryptids to appear), it's a worthwhile discussion. At its best, it frames a deeper question: what *counts* as a human in this world? "