Not about Orlanth Lay Members. (Or Humakti. Honest.)

From: Hasni Mubarak (richo@epix.net)
Date: Mon 21 Apr 1997 - 18:45:49 EEST


>
> Thirdly the Shaman is far more effective than a Priest in
> dealing with diseases and malign spirits. Thus he is more
> likely to be called upon for those duties rather than teach
> spells. Even then, there is simply not enough incidences
> in a year for the shaman to make a living by performing
> these tasks full-time.
>

However, perhaps the mere presence of a local Shaman increases the
likelyhood of malign spirits getting free and attacking the local
population. It would be kind of a catch-22. "Oh no, spirit activity
has picked up. Good thing we have a shaman here who can help take care
of it..." I did like [somebodys] suggestion that one of the reasons
their are shamen is to keep malign spirits from rampaging. It would be
interesting, if an area that USED to have a shaman noticed that all of a
sudden their are more free ghosts and disease spirits roaming around.
Maybe their was a bit of a revolution/witch hunt, and they chased the
Shaman off or something. Now, they need a new one. (Sounds like an
adventure hook to me.)

I'll tell you what. If somebody told the local shaman that the town
thought he was useless, and they weren't going to be feeding him like
they have for generations, all of a sudden nasty little spirits would
get loose all the time. (Until they hired him to fix the problem and
agreed to the extortion...er...gracious payments.)

Oh, a quick question about Lunar Occupation. I remember reading that
people were dropping Orlanth like a hot potatoe but there were all of a
sudden a billion and one Barntar worshipers. Is it just me, or does it
seem odd to drop a god and pick up a new one? I mean, even a close
associate is a different god, right? RW parralel, it's one thing to
switch from Catholic to Episcipalion, but another to go from Luthern to
Hindu, no? Or do I put to much value on the oaths of initiation?

------------------------------


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:59:08 EEST