When I play a Shaman, I do not consider it a vice to have the character's personality basically match up with the totem. For the shaman, the totem is Awakening him or her to the possibilities of magic. Strictly speaking, it is a spirtiual/religious experience. For the mage, it is different. Mostly they undergo a self-enlightment without referring to an outside agency. Based on these initial and vastly different experiences and relationship to magic, of course mages and shamans will have very different personality types attracted to them.

I stand by my assertion that you can make a pretty good shaman with low or no resources while a mage with no money is kinda hosed.

Well, keep in mind that the only library you really need at chargen is a conjuring library; the sorcery library is only used to learn new spells, and in the beginning there are many good spells to learn at low Force so you don't need that good of a one even if you're planning on learning new spells right off the bat. In other words, you *could* make a passable mage on 20,000 nuyen, or even 5,000 if you gave up o summoning elementals higher than Force 2, but it is tough.

Or your Hermetic can join a magical group and use their libraries. I'm a big fan of that rout, as it makes my job (as a GM) easier, in that I can use the 'group as a source for runs, plus it gives the player a bit more flexibility, in that he can move, or even be temporarily homeless while still having relatively safe, secure libraries.

Also, given the expense, it would make more since for a group to maintain them in game. And it always helps to have friends for ritual magic. . .

Of course one has to make sure the group's dues and strictures are somewhat restrictive, but it's a way to go.

A mage is just for some guy , a Shaman you have to add flavor with your totem.

For akarenti

So basically, what you are saying is magical groups are about the hermetic saving money? Just remember, you can go broke trying to save money. I'd wager that hermetic group you propose either has much higher dues or many more members to maintain their libraries. than the shamanic group you reference. Either situation could potentially be disastrous to a runner. The big thing about joining a group is the lower karma cost for initiating, you will pay a premium for high resource groups. Kind of a rent to own philosphy if all you're in it for is the book.

Of course, the unknown variables here are whether or not the GM runs a high cash game, whether the GM will allow a starting character to be a member of an initiatory group and if yes, under what circumstances. For example, if your prospective GM is looking to run a street level campaign, you just can't expect the cash to be pouring onto your character's stick and that probably means high resource magical groups are right out, at least at the beginning of such a campaign.

And again, let's not forget there are strings attached to being a member of a group.

I mentioned it on another thread, but what about Wolf, as in the runner (book-Wolf and Raven).

Pretty sure you'd consider him a physad, and yet he argues with his totem all the time. It even made him do things he didn't want to do a few times.
My favorite line from that book: Wolf's romantic interest was in danger, his totem comes on down to him, says to him "don't worry [insert what ever weird name it had for him that I forget at the momeny], I won't let them harm your bitch."
Then he possess Wolf, and proceeds to throw down with a MASSIVE troll (And gets beat on pretty hard).

Wolf knowing the odds of winning in hand to hand, tried to resist, but wasn't able to. Wolf shaman going berserk?

You and your totem don't always want the same thing.

i would try to avoid useing novels to interpet how shamans shoudl be as it have been shown that novels often diverge from the rules a good bit. i cant recall reading anything about totems being able to posess (loa on the other hand can do so)...

Perhaps one of the issues against shamans is the desire for personality to go into one general direction (or be entirely non-restricted), conflicting with the desire to get +2d to [fill in the blank]. We might want a (metagame!) edge on a specific type of power, but ask us to balance it against specific requirements, especially relating to personality, and we're up on edge.

Huh. This isn't all that different from some of the debates over the appropriate use of mind-manipulation spells; or for that matter any of a number of debates over "inappropriate" use by the GM of Lone Star etc. It seems that many of us want to be able to do whatever we wish, ideally without any restrictions of any kind -- but especially without personality restrictions.

That being said, there's many ways to play exactly the same kind of totem. One of them is suggested in the "Wolf" novel": the shamanic type obeys the ways of the totem ... reluctantly, but they are obeyed. Another would be to determine what exactly constitutes the pack, and what the hunt or fight. It's a matter of assigning appropriate labels and degree of importance to the PC. Is a Wolf shaman doctor who fiercely fights for the life of all his patients any less legitimate than a Wolf shaman street kid who's taken it as her responsibility to find adequate shelter and food for her "pack" of friends and to protect them, or for that matter than a "traditional" Wolf shaman combat-focused PC? Or take Snake: a seeker of secrets and a healer could mean PCs as diverse as the "traditional" doctor, a reporter, a decker, or even a nosy kid sister who's worried sick about the trouble her brother is about to get himself into but hates to get into scraps of any kind. I've even (once) run a Snake shaman programmed assassin (heck of a lot of appropriately totemed bioware, including poison fangs).

As to preference, one over the other: since I tend not to design an appropriate PC to fit into a specific team slot (that part tends more toward making sure to pick a background that allows for needed skills) or to look primarily at the possible bonuses, the choice often tends to be made well after I've decided the character is Awakened and after I've got the sense of that PC in my head. Basically, what fits? Interestingly, while one relevant point is certainly the degree of "flexibility" within a PC's self-image of their magic, the single most common marker determining subsequent choices that I've found is to what extent the character feels that they should have absolute control over their environment. Very few shamans should seek such utter control -- in that, it seems to be rather more equivalent to a vocation and a way than our technologically-oriented universe generally allows for -- and that only if they follow a totem that explicitly demands attempting such control.

One option that's not yet been mentioned (I don't think?) makes an interesting compromise: the wu jen.