Mana, Shamans, and the Cultural Misappropriation behind Fantasy Terms

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

If it's done with respect, and with knowledge of the culture it's coming from, then ignorance isnt a charge that can be leveled, is it?

Sure it is. You can be ignorant of something that may be offensive while still having any knowledge of the culture.

 

[Fenris-77]

Sure it is. You can be ignorant of something that may be offensive while still having any knowledge of the culture.

Ok yeah, sure you could. You can always say that. But it's not likely. Respect and k knowledge are the key.

 

[Campbell]

While I understand concerns around cultural appropriation my personal criticisms are not rooted in that concern. My primary concerns all rest around perpetuating negative stereotypes and uncritical portrayals of imperialism, colonialism, centralized power, and authoritarian states. When I speak to punching up instead of down I am referring to those uncritical portrayals.

I have no control of anyone who is not me and I will not seek it. I will play the games I want to play with the people I want to play them with. I will also speak up for the things like and want to see. I will also criticize what I do not like. We all make these sorts of aesthetic judgments.

People other than us will make aesthetic judgments that determines what will and will not be readily available to us. That is just part of how culture is made. I am no fan of censorious attitudes, but there is another inclination that I find just as pernicious - the notion that cultural criticism and attempts to influence culture are forms of censorship. When someone says "Go woke - go broke" or complains about the social messaging in The Dark Knight or Black Panther I do not interpret that as a form of censorship. I do not agree with them or where they want to move the cultural needle, but I do not see it as censorious.

I just do not buy this sense that creatives need to live in fear that they cannot produce what they want to produce. We are experiencing a cultural moment where norms change. We have been here before and will be here again. I have been part of the indie RPG community for years. Games like Sorcerer, Dogs in the Vineyard, Apocalypse World, and Monsterhearts were culturally controversial when they came out and still found their audience. Remember when Vampire came out? How it shook up the entire culture of gaming?

No one gets to control this stuff. People will say stuff about everything.

 

[Hussar]

That Finnish Mythology I mentioned, it is barely remembered folklore, about as relevant to modern Finns than ancient druids to the modern Irish. And if someone would mine that mythology for a fantasy game, I obviously wouldn't mind, I might be pleased. (And D&D has done this. Mielikki is an ancient Finnish forest goddess.) But if the stated rationale why it was OK to do so was that the the culture was a cadaver ripe for plundering then I might be somewhat less thrilled. I fully get that temporal distance in these things matters, someone's living traditions are more important than ancient history, but the difference also isn't that clear cut. And considering that Celtic culture and language has historically been targeted by systematic attempts to eliminate it, your proclamation came across as a tad insensitive.

Yeah. Fair enough. I can see that. There is a side point though that you'll see people claiming membership of a culture in order to "be offended" which would be rather difficult as that culture doesn't exist anymore.

Like someone claiming to be culturally ancient Roman simply because they happen to live in Rome.

And, again, so long as the depiction is respectful and even celebratory even, then it's not a problem.

Sure.


Hey, with crusaders you can either get 'historically accurate' or 'respectful!' Because 'both' is not an option!

Well... let's just say that history is rarely one thing or another. And, you can at least try to be both.

Yeah, I fully agree. Having shamans in the game is not an issue, that only 'savage monsters' have shamans most definitely is!

Yeah, I think we're agreeing more than disagreeing to be honest.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, I fully agree. Having shamans in the game is not an issue, that only 'savage monsters' have shamans most definitely is!

Thankfully, that has never been the case in 5e. Shamans of every humanoid race and alignment have been present in the game from the day the Monster Manual came out.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Thankfully, that has never been the case in 5e. Shamans of every humanoid race and alignment have been present in the game from the day the Monster Manual came out.

Do you have a different Monster Manual from me? The only shamans in the book I can see are Lizardfolk shamans and some other monstrous races.

 

[Maxperson]

Do you have a different Monster Manual from me? The only shamans in the book I can see are Lizardfolk shamans and some other monstrous races.

Apparently I do. Mine says this on page 346

"DRUID
Medium humanoid (any race), any alignment

Druids dwell in forests and other secluded wilderness
locations, where they protect the natural world from
monsters and the encroachment of civilization. Some
are tribal shamans who heal the sick, pray to animal
spirits, and provide spiritual guidance."

So there you have it. Shamans come in every humanoid race and alignment.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Apparently I do. Mine says this on page 346

"DRUID
Medium humanoid (any race), any alignment

Druids dwell in forests and other secluded wilderness
locations, where they protect the natural world from
monsters and the encroachment of civilization. Some
are tribal shamans who heal the sick, pray to animal
spirits, and provide spiritual guidance."

So there you have it. Shamans come in every humanoid race and alignment.

I guess technically, that works, but I wouldn't call a druid a shaman anymore than I would call a warlock a cultist. Sure, they can be it, but that's not really the point of them, IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

I guess technically, that works, but I wouldn't call a druid a shaman anymore than I would call a warlock a cultist. Sure, they can be it, but that's not really the point of them, IMO.

D&D has been a game with a ton of "Doesn't quite fits" since it came out.

 

[Hussar]

If Shaman=Druid, then there is no need to use the term shaman is there? It's included under druid. So, all those races that list having shamans, can instead have druids and that is actually bringing it in line with the contradictory rules.

So, where's the problem?