Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tonguez" data-source="post: 8416154" data-attributes="member: 1125">Firstly I will say I do like your suggestions on how an Shaman/Animist/Spiritualist class could be developed and I've go no issue with use of the term generally (though as an Anthropologist my usual advice is to either be culturally specific or to use a broad english language term/phrase). However1 In developing a fantasy version of Shaman one needs to be careful that they not fall into error of depicting the Shaman as a 'more primitive' approach to religious practice, which is where much of the error and criticism of the use of the term lies both generally and within Anthropology scholarship. Limit shaman to simple weapons because thats how they are commonly depicted treads that soggy ground.  When lists like Kracheks which include everything from Amazonian to Navajo, Mongolia to Africa to Australia to Norse, Sami to Malay they are coding for 'exotic primitive' and very, very rarely include things like Anglo-American Mediums conducting seances or the Italian Benandanti  (17th century, whose spirits would leave their bodies at night in the form of snimals in order to battle witches)2 I'd argue here that the purpose of class design in a RPG concept is to define a core idea and not to provide for the wider scope of things - sure a traditional Tunguska Shaman can be a religious political advisors, story teller and healer, but so can a Bard.   The distinction with Shaman, whether Tungusic  or more broadly is the Trance-state interaction with spirits. as its core hook around which players can then layer on their own 'heritage' ie Healing, Augury, Spirit walking. That said I do like the suggestion of taboos being built in to the class too - which suggest Druid style limits or Warlock patron taboos.Also I think that by concentrating on the Communing with Spirits element generally (including Victorian seances) you remove the primitivist exoticism that can creep in.I'm not sure shapechanging is considered entirely 'positive' in Malay/Polynesian beliefs either.  I do have ancestors who transformed into fish and he act as guardians, but there was still a level of fearful veneration (they are still dangerous). And generally people who became Sharks or Eels or Pigs were dangerous and not openly welcomed into your home.(It also amuses me still that amongst my grandmothers people we were told not to kill blowflies because they might have been sent by your dead ancestors to check up on you)</blockquote>

Verification