From:	"Jeremy \"Bolthy\" Zimmerman" <jeremy@***********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Well, here he is.
Date:	Wed, 13 May 1998 13:11:54 -0700

----------
> From: Katt Freyson <katt@******.NET>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: Well, here he is.
> Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 11:02 AM
>
> |> From: Jeremy "Bolthy" Zimmerman
> |> Sent: May 13, 1998 10:56 AM
> |> Subject: Re: Well, here he is.
>
> |> Other than that, I do agree that Passions are different from Totems.
At
> |> best I'd say that they are similar to the Idols in the Germany
> |> source book,
> |> and even then that isn't an entirely accurate description.
>
> Well, I agree that Passions are different than Totems, but that was
not
> my point, my point was that Questors are different from Shamans.
Different
> in how they worhsip, different in their beliefs, different in what they
do.
> Hell, there are more similarities among SR Shamans and Mages than among
> Shamen and Questors.
>

Sorry, that's sorta what I meant, but I wouldn't extend that to all
shamans. I guess that's why I phrased it that way. Were I to have
something like Questors in SR, I would have them be shamanic in some sense.
There is a lot of leeway with the shamans, imho. I mean, you could call
houngouns shamans in some sense. Same with the ancestor worshiping
Africans in Cyberpirates. Shamans with totems have one kind of
relationship with their totem, shamans with german idols probably have
another kind of relationship, druids probably have another kind of
relationship, etc. And these types of relationships aren't exclusively
limited to spellcasters. Shamanic physads, mundanes who have a particular
affinity with a totem/idol/loa/etc. Possibilities are endless.