Zitkala Sa, also known as Gertrude Simmons Bonnin, was a groundbreaking Native American woman who fought for the rights and recognition of her people. While she is often celebrated for her activism and writings on Native American culture, it is important to understand her perspective from a pagan point of view. Paganism is a broad term that encompasses a range of indigenous religious beliefs and practices. For many pagan populations, the natural world and its spirits hold great significance. There is often a deep respect and reverence for the earth, animals, and the spiritual forces that govern them. In understanding Zitkala Sa's work, it becomes evident that her writings are deeply rooted in her pagan beliefs and her connection to her traditional Native American heritage.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
Affected creatures must make an intelligence saving throw, on a fail they take 1d4 psychic damage and have disadvantage on intelligence checks and saving throws until the end of their next turn. What I m talking about is a risk reward trade-off in difficult social situations such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested.
In understanding Zitkala Sa's work, it becomes evident that her writings are deeply rooted in her pagan beliefs and her connection to her traditional Native American heritage. One of Zitkala Sa's most notable works, "American Indian Stories," provides a firsthand account of her experiences growing up as a Native American woman in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Her stories often center around themes of nature, spirituality, and the interconnectedness of all living beings.
D&D 5E Deceptive Spellcasting
I have noticed people talking a lot about how they allow spellcasters to hide the casting of their spells and even not have their effects noticed even when they have a clear effect.
Most spells should be obvious. They are very powerful abilities, but their downside is that you can't be subtle about it.
The most common form of this is having a character whisper the Verbal components. They require "specific pitch and resonance" and as such should not be able to be whispered.
Somatic components ". include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures." You can't change the gestures of a spell just to make it more subtle.
Material components are again, pretty obvious.
Then there is the matter of people living in a world where spells exist. Most NPCs should be able to recognize a spell being cast. It is an important thing to learn about. Casting spells on other people should also be illegal. It is assault or worse.
log in or register to remove this adwedgeski
Adventurer
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
Otherwise, Stealth, Performance, and Sleight of Hand checks are all available for the DM in these circumstances, naturally with some kind of penalty to the effectiveness of the spell on failure, or perhaps whatever happens (Disadvantage on attack rolls, opponent advantage on Saving Throws, etc.).
And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.
wedgeski
Adventurer
And I think allowing that to happen is a huge buff for spellcasters that they don't need. It is also a nerf to Sorcerers. Subtle Spell should be a unique ability that only they get.
Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Nah. Subtle spell gets the sorcerer out of a jail cell when he's bound and gagged. What I'm talking about is a risk/reward trade-off in difficult social situations (such as law enforcement frowning on public displays of magic, as you suggested).
That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.
Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.
Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.
Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.
KahlessNestor
Adventurer
And yet it happens in the novels all the time. I'm not too worried about it.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
wedgeski
Adventurer
That is reducing Subtle Spell to a very narrow application.
Spellcasting is anything but subtle. You can't whisper. The pitch, resonance, movements, etc. are all exact and specific.
Maybe in the situation you describe it should be the Rogue or Fighter that steps up and uses their skills for the party's benefit.
Magic is brute force. In a social situation you can cast a spell to compell people to do things, but there will be repercussions.
Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Eh, honestly I think that strips the game of potential drama for the very small cost of *slightly* reducing the Sorcerer's niche. Your reading of the spellcasting rules is reasonable, but not one by which I'd live or die.
I feel like you haven't read my posts.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
How spellcasting works in this regard is entirely up to the group. The game works fine if one allows subtle spellcasting.
I just require a bluff or slight of hand check, and investigate or arcana to detect the spell in spite of the attempt to hide it.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
Lots of ways you can play the game. If your group is having fun you're doing it right. If someone else is having fun playing differently, they are doing it right too.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
Lots of ways you can play the game. If your group is having fun you're doing it right. If someone else is having fun playing differently, they are doing it right too.
But we shouldn't discuss anything?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Satyrn
First Post
I feel like you haven't read my posts.That may be because you're not expressing yourself clearly, and he's interpreted your posts differently than you intended them to be interpreted.
When I read your OP, for example, it seems like you're telling people they're playing wrong, that what you think is the right way is The Right Way.
But that's probably not what you mean, so you're probably not expressing yourself clearly.
Satyrn
First Post
But we shouldn't discuss anything?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Oh, that's better. Now I see that you're talking about helping people fix poor experiences that they've described.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
But we shouldn't discuss anything?If you're interested in the question "Is it better to allow subtle spell casting or not?" then that's something that can be debated. But your posts do seem to come across as: "If you allow subtle spell casting then you are doing it wrong." If you're just interested in stating your opinion then what is there to debate?
Buffing spellcasting by not having them be noticed by other characters causes all sorts of problems.
I made the thread in response to a variety of posts I have seen lately either stating that certain spells are overpowered or are must haves. It turns out in these cases the problem was ignoring the components of the spell.
For example, complaining that Guidance was broken because it made Clerics better at skills than Rogues or Bards. They were using it for Stealth and allowing the cast to ignore the verbal and somatic components.
So they were having a bad time but blaming the spell Guidance rather than their mishandling of spellcasting.
Explanation like this is more helpful.
Me, I don't allow subtle spell casting in general because I think you have to say the V component firmly.
jgsugden
Legend
There is a lot of advice from Crawford out there on this topic. There are obvious physical and verbal elements to spellcasting, but you can disguise them, hide them or obscure them if you're smart.
Casting a spell in a loud and bustling marketplace, even when it involves huge gestures and loud speaking, might go unnoticed by the target. If the spell has no obvious signs, the target may never know it was the subject of a spell. That is all well explained in the rules / advice.
If you have a quiet room, the spellcaster is mere feet from the target and the spell has verbal and somatic components . well, you need to be able to mislead the target if you want them to not realize you've cast a spell. Do you have an excuse for the gestures, weird speech and bat guano you're flinging / bell you're chiming / etc. Those things might not be too out of place if they come from someone that looks like a crazy person. or might seem perfectly logical as part of a blessing or ceremony. Can the spellcaster pull off such a ruse? Sounds like a roleplaying challenge to me.
In the end, I think the proper question is not, "What is too powerful?" I think the question to be asked when a PC wants to pull this type of thing off is, "What is the most fun way to proceed?"
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
My view of casting is that the components aren't set in stone. Those listed or described are the "traditional" ones, and many casters will view them as having to be exactly right, while others will use completely different sounds and gestures (Fuego! Rather than Ignis! To set a thing on fire) to cast the same spell.
I also figure it is harder to cast subtly, because you are splitting focus, and the components are there to help focus your will as it is.
Notwithstanding your snippets from the PHB, I'd have a hard time telling a bard that he couldn't weave magic into a song or limerick, but that's just a personal call.
In "The Trial Path," she describes a spiritual vision quest where she seeks guidance and direction from the spirits of her ancestors. This vision quest is a pagan ritual that seeks divine wisdom and connections with the spiritual realm. Zitkala Sa's writings also highlight the pagan perspective on the land and its significance. In her story "The Soft-Hearted Sioux," she describes her profound love for the land and nature, stating, "I loved the land of rolling hills, the sioux loved it." This love for the land is a reflection of the pagan belief in the sacredness of the earth and the interconnectedness of all living beings. Furthermore, Zitkala Sa's activism and advocacy work can also be viewed through the lens of paganism. As a pagan, she would have seen her fight for Native American rights as a spiritual duty and a way to honor the spirits of her ancestors. Her work aimed to protect the sacredness of the land, preserve indigenous cultures, and ensure the well-being of Native American communities. In conclusion, understanding Zitkala Sa's perspective from a pagan point of view provides valuable insights into her writings and activism. Her deep connection to the natural world, her reverence for the spirits of her ancestors, and her fight for Native American rights all reflect a pagan belief system rooted in the interconnectedness of all living beings and the importance of honoring and protecting the earth. By recognizing the pagan perspective of Zitkala Sa, we can gain a deeper appreciation for her contributions and the significance of her work in advancing the rights and recognition of Native American people..
Reviews for "Zitkala Sa's Pagan Influence in Native American Literature"
1. John - 2 stars
I was disappointed with "The Pagan Perspective of Zitkala Sa." While I appreciate the exploration of indigenous culture, I found the writing to be lackluster and disjointed. The author seemed to jump from one topic to another without a clear direction or purpose. Additionally, the characters were underdeveloped and lacked depth, which made it difficult for me to connect with the story. Overall, I found the book to be a missed opportunity to delve deeper into the pagan perspective and provide more meaningful insights.
2. Sarah - 1 star
"The Pagan Perspective of Zitkala Sa" was a letdown for me. I was expecting a thought-provoking exploration of pagan beliefs and traditions through the eyes of Zitkala Sa. However, the book failed to deliver on that front. The writing was dry and lacked passion, making it hard for me to stay engaged. Moreover, the storyline felt disjointed and left me confused about the overall message the author was trying to convey. Overall, I found the book to be a missed opportunity to shed light on the pagan perspective in a compelling and meaningful way.
3. Michael - 2 stars
I was excited to read "The Pagan Perspective of Zitkala Sa," but unfortunately, it didn't live up to my expectations. The writing style was unremarkable and didn't capture my attention. The author didn't fully explore the pagan perspective, and the plotline felt shallow. I was hoping for a more in-depth understanding of Zitkala Sa's perspective and experiences, but the book left me wanting more. Overall, I found the book to be lacking in substance and depth.
4. Emily - 2 stars
"The Pagan Perspective of Zitkala Sa" had the potential to offer a unique insight into pagan beliefs, but it fell short. The writing lacked clarity and failed to effectively convey the nuances of the pagan perspective. The characters felt one-dimensional, and the author didn't provide enough context or background information to fully understand their motivations. Additionally, the plotline was predictable and lacked depth. Overall, I found the book to be a missed opportunity to delve into the pagan perspective with more depth and substance.