Jot writes in response to me: > According to my memory from _Issola_, a demon does not *require* a > master, a demon *can* be controlled. (Hmm...I think it was _Issola_) . . . > My take on this is there is a big difference between CAN and MUST > when it comes to demons. Yes, it was Issola, but the distinction doesn't work the way you think it does. What separates a God from a demon is that a demon CAN be compelled. If Bolk *requires* a master, then he CAN be compelled. Therefore cannot be a god. But he could be a demon. The MUST doesn't affect the situation either way. Of course, we could be misinterpreting 'must' have a master as to mean 'can be compelled by that master'. It could well be that Bolk must have someone for whose betterment he works, but that he doesn't have to go along with a specific order if he thinks there's a better way to do things. In that case, he might not be a demon either. -- 'Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.' -- credited to various people, I heard it from Robert A Heinlein.