Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: FST_Gemstar on <01-02-16/1050:40>
-
So I guess these aren't official, but I always thought that Charisma-based traditions and the people who practice them can be broadly called shamanic or shamans and that logic-based traditions and the people who practice them Hermetic. Of course there are actual traditions with these names, but I also thought these were the more general category names too.
I realize that there is no broad category name for magic or magic users that use Intuition-based traditions. Anyone have any ideas of what they could be called?
-
A quick look at Int based traditions shows Buddhism, Chaos, Druidic, Sioux and Goddess Wicca.
If we follow your line of reasoning and broadly claim Logic-based traditions are focused around Hermetic-style "understanding", and Charisma-based are about shamanic-style "communing" then....
... the common thread for Intution-based traditions seems to be "becoming" or "harmony." Buddhism is about harmony within oneself, Druidic is harmony within nature, Sioux is about harmony with the Great Spirit. For a western (Hermetic style) classification I'd probably go with the most known and call them the "Druidic" styles.
-
Harmonic?
I think the charisma based are spiritual. Logic based are likely the practical traditions.
-
That's a great question. The traditions are no help because they're all over the place, and a high level view has hermetics view magic as a science and shamans view magic as more spiritual.
Maybe philosophy could work as a reference. If hermetics are the empiricists of philosophy, realism could perhaps be the alternative.
Alternatively, maybe the study of metaphysics could be applied to Intuition based magic. Metaphysics include realism and a host of other theories. More importantly, I just like the term metaphysicist :D
Alternatively alternatively, pragmatism is certainly different from hermeticism and shamanism. While the hermetics want to study and codify magic and the shamans want to commune with the spirits and achieve harmony with nature, the pragmatics just use magic as they want/need to and don't question why. In other words, they're more focused on action rather than words.
Of course, it's been a long time since my introduction to philosophy course, so I could be entirely off on all of this :D
-
I'd go with Druidic to keep the feel of a traditional user of magic (eg the counterpart of the Shaman in a Indian tribe is the Druid in a Celtic tribe).
-
Druidic sounds nice to me as well. If your classifying by theme logic = magic is a sicence, charisma = magic is a spiritual communion, intuition = magic is an art form and an understanding of the beuaty int he world?
-
I view the traditions differently. I see the three non religious traditions as Shamanic (charisma), Hermetic (logic) and Chaos (intuition). I don't consider all charisma traditions to be shamanic. I see the non religious charisma tradition to be shamanic. I don't consider all logic based traditions to be hermetic, I consider the non religious logic tradition as hermetic. I think Chaos should be in the base book as a generic tradition.
-
I view the traditions differently. I see the three non religious traditions as Shamanic (charisma), Hermetic (logic) and Chaos (intuition). I don't consider all charisma traditions to be shamanic. I see the non religious charisma tradition to be shamanic. I don't consider all logic based traditions to be hermetic, I consider the non religious logic tradition as hermetic. I think Chaos should be in the base book as a generic tradition.
Chaos is a horrible name for the whole group as Chaos is rather more loosey goosey about what they believe as a whole than other Int based (heck any based) tradition.
I'd go with "esotericism" or "esoteric"
-
I'm saying that hermetic and shamanic aren't good names for the "category". They are specific, non religious traditions. The categories are Intuition mages, Charisma mages, and Logic mages. That was my point by saying all charisma mages aren't shamanic, etc.
-
Here's a suggestion, that goes in a slightly different direction.
Charisma based traditions: Channelers ( since they mostly view their magic as being channeled through them from other sources ( i.e. a God or a Totem ...)
Logic based traditions: Benders ( since they usually see magic as a force to be mastered and its Laws to be bend to serve the magician )
Intuition based traditions: Weavers ( since i imagine that they would view magic as something to be shaped through imagination and inspiration, sort of like an artist )
-
I'm saying that hermetic and shamanic aren't good names for the "category". They are specific, non religious traditions. The categories are Intuition mages, Charisma mages, and Logic mages. That was my point by saying all charisma mages aren't shamanic, etc.
Rereading, yup, that's what you said...
Went right over my head the first time... silly wabbit that I am.
-
Here's a suggestion, that goes in a slightly different direction.
Charisma based traditions: Channelers ( since they mostly view their magic as being channeled through them from other sources ( i.e. a God or a Totem ...)
Logic based traditions: Benders ( since they usually see magic as a force to be mastered and its Laws to be bend to serve the magician )
Intuition based traditions: Weavers ( since i imagine that they would view magic as something to be shaped through imagination and inspiration, sort of like an artist )
Except there are several Logic and Intuition based religious traditions.
How about we settle for calling them by their individual names.
Mechanically, CHA, INT and LOG are one of the three things that separate traditions (the other two being type of spirits summoned and materialization/possession).
However, fluff wise, there's a whole lot more that separates the traditions.
So trying to categorize them just on drain stat is probably the wrong way to go anyway.
-
@Gradivus
My categorizations have nothing whatsoever to do with religion, but rather they way those people following the traditions see the way that they interact with magic and mana. I'm well aware that there are several religious traditions that have for example logic as the Associated stat. Take for example the Egyptian tradition, a logic based tradition as far as i recall. Egyptian magic, especially when we ar talking "Book of the Dead" style magic is very much based around the idea that magic bends reality to the magicians will, and that you can even use it to "cheat" your way into the afterlife if done properly.
So whether the tradition in question is religious or not has no bearing on the terms i chose, but as i said rather the way the magician sees him/herself interacting with the forces of magic.
Personally i don't see a need for a "name" for intuition based traditions, but if people want to have name for them, then by all Means, i've added my two cents on the matter.
-
@Rosa my point is you called CHA channelers cause they're channeling a higher force whether it be god or nature or whatever,
Aren't INT based religious traditions also channeling their gods?
And Eygptian tradition is INT based so your Book of the Dead logical magicians must have been practicing hermatic magic on the banks of the Nile. Or maybe it was written by the Hebrew slaves and is actually Qabbalistic.
Face it, the developers wanted a spread between the three mental stats and some of these traditions were arbitrarily pigeonholed holed to satisfy that. It happens all the time in game design.
-
Why I'd personally prefer willpower + magic but then you run into balance issues.
-
Why exactly do you feel the need to group them?
-
I think I disagree with the assumption that different traditions sharing the same Drain stat have something in common thematically. In fact, I think a lot of similar worldviews are spread across a number of different traditions to help players find a thematic choice that makes sense to the player.
So, let's say that we get together practitioner from each tradition and set them on a round of speed-dating. The deepweed is thick in the air, the elven wine is flowing, and each mage gets a few minutes to talk and share their worldview. I have a feeling that the Sioux mage would find the Chaos magician to be boorish and forceful compared to her method for weaving mana, while the Hermetic and Wuxing devotees would probably appreciate the formalism of the practitioner of the Path of the Wheel. The druid and the Aztec would probably appreciate one another's attitude toward spirits and the land they are tied to, while laughing about the Shinto's talismans, and the Christian theurgist would reject the previous three looking outward, when they should be looking up. '
-
Wacky thought, if you're talking about all Intuition Traditions you call them Intuition Traditions, same for Charisma and Logic. And if you're speaking of a specific Tradition, or set of Traditions you use the name for that specific Tradition or sub-set of specific traditions?
;D
-
Sounds like something one of those wacky Logic based trads would suggest. :P
-
Good one!
-
Classify and measure -> Ensure Victory ;-)
-
@Gradivus - My bad about the Egyptian tradition, i didn't have my books handy yesterday. I don't recall if the Egyptian tradition were logic based back in 4th ed. or if its just because it's one of those i feel had the wrong drain stat Associated with it, some of them were changed from 4th ed. to 5th ed. I totally agree that the drains stats were arbitrarily assigned more or less, which is why i personally don't try to categorize them one way or the other, i just don't feel the need to try to streamline everything, but some people would like to, so therefore as i said a suggestion that went in another direction.
But essentially when it comes Down to it, it's hopeless to try boil one magical traidtion Down to just one stat, a good case in point is the Norse tradition. Now in this 5th ed., it is apparently a logic based tradition. Now if you actually know a bit about Norse Magic, you can at least identify 3 distinct types of Norse Magic - Seidr, Galdr and Runor with Seidr being all about induced ecstasy and contacting the spirit World, Galdr being about magical verses spoken or sung and Runor being magical runes carved or painted onto material objects. This is of course a somewhat simplified version of the differences between magic types inherent in just one of all the traditions that they choose to arbitrarily assign one stat ( logic ) to.
A Little round about way of saying "There's no way any form of categorization of traditions is ever going to be accurate, so either go with what the devs arbitrarily decided or come up with your own, one is likely to be as good and as accurate as the other".
-
Good one!
As an Intuitive Tradition I knew you were going to say that. :P
-
Early in the 6th world, the general public's understanding of magic was limited and Hermetic/Shamanic were OK classifications. As much as knowledge has grown, and magic has continued to change, there would be a greater understanding that not everything fits easily into those two categories. It would probably be best to mark a specific tradition by calling it what it is, instead of some broad categorization, so that people hearing the tradition's name would have some sense of what to expect.
-
Why I'd personally prefer willpower + magic but then you run into balance issues.
Actually-no.
You only have balance issues if they keep the Centering Metamagic.
Though this is , of course, IMHO and YMMV
-
Depends more on how high your game goes I think. Centering is initation grade added to your drain check, by losing charisma/intuition/logic you lose the ability to increase attribute for an easy +4 which means you'd need to initiate and raise magic 4 times to get the same effect you can via increase attribute charisma. Thats 5 karma + some cash for the spell vs 240 karma for 4 initiations + 4 increases to magic. Now after that point is where I think you start hitting balance issues but that's a lot of karma and its all getting poured into magic + initiations no new spells, skills, increasing other attributes, qualties etc.
-
Here's a suggestion, that goes in a slightly different direction.
Charisma based traditions: Channelers ( since they mostly view their magic as being channeled through them from other sources ( i.e. a God or a Totem ...)
Logic based traditions: Benders ( since they usually see magic as a force to be mastered and its Laws to be bend to serve the magician )
Intuition based traditions: Weavers ( since i imagine that they would view magic as something to be shaped through imagination and inspiration, sort of like an artist )
I like where your going with this, but I think I'd look more at the stat for my terms...
Logic = Thinkers
Intuition = Feelers
Charisma = Lovers
or maybe
Logic = Thinkers
Intuition = Actors / Reactors
Charisma = Feelers
-
I'd go with:
Charisma-based = Spiritual or Devotional traditions
Intuition-based = Visceral or Natural traditions
Logic-based = Practical or Analytical traditions
For reference:
Charisma-based traditions = Aboriginal, Aztec, Black Magic, Christian Theurgy, Path of the Wheel, Shaman, Shinto, Vodou
Intuition-based traditions = Buddhism, Chaos, Druid, Egyptian, Psionic, Sioux, Wicca
Logic-based traditions = Hermetic, Hindu, Islam, Norse, Qabbalism, Wuxing, Zoroastrianism
Personally, I would swap Norse and Egyptian, making the former Intuition-based and the latter Logic-based, but it's never come up at the gaming table.
-
I'm gonna go with "Occultist"
Because it seems to me while Charisma is communing, Logic is understanding, Occultist is someone who just FEELS it. Like they just..... they just can't escape it, they feel it
-
"Cheesy"
;)
-
"Cheesy"
;)
Ha!
-
I'd go with:
Empirical = Logic based
Esoteric = Intuition based
Charismatic = Charisma based
...but that would be imposing Western-Philosophy/Christian categories on world religious/spiritual beliefs from within a hermetical paradigm.