I'm thinking of making a Hindu "shaman" But I would like any suggestions that you have for "Totem" Rules.. example

Shiva is the god of destruction and renewal (also yoga and some other things that I cant think of right now). "Priest" of Shiva are fierce combatants but often know when to stay thier hand.

Environment-any where

Advantages- +2dice for combat spells and healing spells

Disadvantages -2 dice on conjuring (but not banishing) tests

Now YOU give it a try

If you have ideas for hermetics thats cool to. If you have alternative ad/disad (ie something other than the usual +2 dice for this -1 die for that I would like to hear them as well. Finally if you think some current totem would fit (ie The creator totem would work nicely for a follower of Brahamn) Then let me know.

Thank you for your help and I hope you have fun with this "assignment".

The beauty of the MitS expansion is the Idols do not neccessarily need to be any particular diety, they're abstract, like everything else.

Case in point, my devout Catholic character who celebrates the Archangel Michael as his Patron.

In this case, I opted to consider Michael as the Wise Warrior, a very obvious tilt-of-the-hat to Athena.

Shiva, as you've described him, is also aptly fulfilled by Wise Warrior.

Kali would be adqetuely represented by one of the lust/seduction idols, Krsna would be a fine Creator.

Man, there are days when I really, really hate my NDA. Regardless, it's worth noting that most hindus are panthaestic and while there are cults and priests to specific dieties, hindu wisemen like Saddhu and Brahmin never subscribe to one patron. I agree with gfen Idol follower is the way to go.

My bet is SotA:'64 (locations locations locations).

But for Brahma I'd use Creator, Vishnu as the Wise Warrior, and Shiva as Raven.

I would really consider doing most Hindu magical practioners as a type of hermetic or something different like the wujen or houngan are presented as.

As a side note to what others have mentioned, i think +1 die combat and heal seems more inline.

Actually Hermetic is completely off. The hindu belief has no such thing as formulas or the basic arcance powers and hierarchies hermetic structures imply. Actually the Idol follower is the perfect model since all the Hindu dieties are in fact themselves aspects/incarnations of a higher diety - Brahman.

The Totems in MITS are so generic (Wise Warrior, Sky Father, etc.) that they could be used for almost anything, from Catholic saints, to neo-pagans, to abstract personal ideals, to strange post-awakening cults.

Okay, let's clear that up. The use of the technology terminology to make a point does make it sound vaguely hermetic but the practice is nothing close.

The single greatest distinction between a Hermetic and Shamanic (or Idol follower) paradigma is the perception of the source and nature of the magician's Gift.

A hermetic believes in a Hermeticist cosmology where Man can manipulate the universal power known as mana through symbols and objects of power. That is essential. There might even be higher powers but the mage is master of his art and magic in itself is neutral. Personal understanding of the forces and powers at play allow the mage control.

A shaman or idol follower derives his ability to control mana from his belief. A shaman believes his Totem/Idol is the focus that allows him to use magic. Not only that, but he believes it is a Higher Power in his cosmology which allows him to use magic. So be it a Native American shaman (very loose), a Wiccan (quite ritualized) or a Japanese Shintoist (very ritualized), you could say that a shaman's magic is not neutral but "divine" in nature (from his point of view). What this means is that his ability to wield magic is attributed to an external Power (his Totem/Idol) and maintained by his adherence to the Power's "codes".

Both interpretations assume "they fundamentally understood the workings of the universe and could, through that understanding, manipulate the material and spiritual worlds through magic. In this sense, magic is a form of technology, that is, it is primarily efficient: it begins with an understanding of the mechanisms of the universe and exploits those mechanisms to make things happen".

The true issue above isn't understanding or even the mechanisms, because those are shaped by the paradigm of the mage and are common though distinct to both hermetics and shamans, but rather the very nature of magic and the forces that govern it.

Would you say that praying to a higher power to intervene to create a specific effect sounds Hermetic? Isn't that the same as "an understanding of the mechanisms of the universe and exploits those mechanisms to make things happen."

Just because the american writer wrapped the reality in easy to digest scientific woding doesn't mean the way it is practiced by a half-naked and painted-up aesthetic saddhu sitting on a rock outcropping overlooking the Ganges or a Brahmin untouchable presiding over one of the numerous Monsoon festivals is any less mystical and divinely inspired.

For a Hindu shaman I'd definately go with the rules for Hindu Magic on pg.25 of MiTS.

That is, Hindu shamans are often pantheistic. (each lunar cycle you choose one spell category and one spirit type to get +2 dice in. They receive no minuses, but when they undertake an astral quest they must visit all four planes.)

The example Idols they list they list are Vishnu(Sky Father) and Kali(female Wild Huntsman), if you want to follow a certain path.

So basically, what yer saying Synner is Hermetics invoke while Shamans evoke?

However, I'm still not following why Idol followers summon Nature spirits.

It would be more like the voudoon hougans.

Kali is not so much lust as death and rebirth. Others may kill but it is to Kali-ma that the souls return to be reborn. She is the end to the go and the mother from whom they are reincarnated. It would be more like Ghede.

Well, you make a good argument, and I think I can see more it your way. I wasn't aware that he was using specifically anthropological terms, I had assumed that the words were used in their common meanings. I'm aware, though, that words can take different meanings in technical contexts.

Actually the argument has been productive since I got to organize some thoughts I need to put into words in something I'm currently writing.

I like the idea of a hindu that follows the path of the Munchkin.

Munchkin followers are very cheesey and tend to be all powerfull demi gods. They are experts at abusing rules to their own advantage, pointing out flaws in others, and cheesing the system. Followers of the Munchkin gain 20 dice for all spells and spirits, do not take drain, and can summon any spirt of any type with an exclusive complex action.

Don't forget unlimited access to gamma-delta-ultra-mega ware that is twice as effective with no essence cost.

I belive you are also forgeting the Bioware that gives you essence.

Yes, I did forget that.

But we both forgot about allowing to stack all of the reflex enhancing mods.

Ahh....My mistake

Thank you for your impressive contributions to what was an interesting discussion.

Synner, (this board needs a poking icon)

What about Hermetic A, AmerInd Shaman B, Shinto Priest C, and Hindu Brahmin D?

I don't see how B, C, and D should all fit into one framework. Each of these traditions are, IMO, as compatiable and simular to each other as they are to Hermetics.

My basic idea, is that either the core usage of mana is simular enough amongst all practioners that in reality there is no difference other then style, or each tradition should be seperate way of working magic.

Was this just a rules expediancy to bunch any one not Hermetic into this catagory, and to save word/page count on something that just wouldn't come up that often in SR games?

And looking back, I can see a reason for the AmerInd bias is in the corebook; most other Shamanic Path followers aren't exactly cut out to be Shadowrunners. Still don't like the bias though.

Well clearly magic in Shadowrun is greatly affected by belief/cultural bias but thats not the end all be all of it. There are Native American hermetics and the the main character in the Secretes of Power trilogy had a hard time accepting that Dog was the source of his magic since he was christian (please no Dyslexic jokes )

I willing to believe that the original authors didn't put much thought in to all the meta-physical implication when they first wrote backgrounds. I bet it was more like...

"Hey lets have two type of magic users, one like mages and the other like clerics!"

"Clerics!? Thats lame...Ooh! How about Shamans!? We can have Totems and stuff! Totems are cool!"

"Ok, but I still want mages. Hmmm, I know! Mages see their magic as formulas and scientific like while your shamans use their totems...."

And the rest is history. The distinction between the two just gets more and more blurred with each new supplement that details new cultural "styles" of magic. Wether or not this is deliberate is debatable. I guess in the end it really depends on what you think that "style" should be able to summon. If you think hmmmm, Spirits, then make it a Shaman. If you think Elementals, well then, Hermetics.

Elemental spirits have their own distinctions in the different Hermetic traditions. Catholic Elementals appear as angels, Satanic as Demons, some look like generic humanoid elements, and then you have the Jinn and so on.

Shamans view nature and magic as an ally.
Hermetics view nature and magic as a tool.

I don't see any problems with the line between the two.