FANDOM


Forum: Index > Frog Temple > Classes - Part 2

OK I am making a new thread because the old one has gotten clunky and such (especially since it pre-dates the revelation of the Bard/Prince pairing). So starting off, all known information wrapped up in a nice set of tables.

InformationEdit

  Female Only Unknown Female Mostly Female Unknown bias Mostly Male Unknown Male Male Only
Passive Muse Rogue Seer (f) Bard
Active Witch (F) Thief Prince Lord
Unknown Sylph (F) Knight (m) Page (*)
Maid (F) Mage (m) Heir (*)

Key for unknowns
(F) - Unknown female alignment. Presumed to be female exclusive, may potentially be female biased.
(f) - Confirmed to be assigned to males and females but the bias is unknown. The biased is presumed to be female.
(M) - (not included on table) Unknown male alignment. Presumed to be male exclusive, may potentially be male biased (see the * key).
(m) - Confirmed to be assigned to males and females but the bias is unknown. The biased is presumed to be male.
(*) - Page and Heir, unknown male alignment. Due to a statement by CalliopeHS (the number of exclusive female classes = the number of exclusive male classes), therefore one may be male biased and the other must be male exclusive, but they cannot both be male exclusive due to lack of exclusive female classes to balance the number as per Calliope's statement. **

** They can both be male biased if one of the classes speculated to be female exclusive (F) is only female biased (f).


Information about the passive/active scale.

+7 +6 +5 +4 +3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7
Muse Two male classes1 Likely to be female
based on inference
Speculated to
be one male
and two
female classes
Speculated to
be two male
and two
female classes
Likely to be male
based on inference
Female class1 Lord
  1. It is unknown if Hussie's reference to male and female classes was a statement of gender exclusivity or whether it it includes gender biased classes.
    • In the case of gender exclusivity, this would require a third male exclusive class, requiring 3 female exclusive classes.

A table of all possible pairings with self/self pairings and duplicates blocked out, leaving 28 possible pairings (of which only four are correct).

Table hidden due to size
  Sylph Heir Page Knight Maid Mage Witch (-)
Seer (+) No connection.
Possibly both
passive.
No connection.
Possibly both
passive.
"Learning".
Possibly both
passive.
Strategy. No connection. Understanding. Manipulation?
Sylph No connection.
Possibly both
passive.
No connection.
Possibly both
passive.
No connection. Healing/
repairing.
No connection. Magical
Witch
.
Heir Earning vs.
inheriting.
Possibly both
passive.
Protection.
Earning vs.
inheriting.
Representation.
Become their
aspects.
Control. Manipulate.
Page Earn for themselves
vs. others.
Serve. No connection. No connection.
Knight Serve?
Possibly both
active.
Exploit?
Possibly both
active.
Wield?
Possibly both
active.
Maid No connection.
Possibly both
active.
Cast spells?
Possibly both
active.
Mage Manipulate.
Possibly both
active.

So that should be everything. So let the speculation re-start! - The Light6 (talk) 04:29, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

Well first off, I think you should clarify what statement you're referring to in regards to the Heir and Page bias/exclusivity, because there is a lot of information on that page. Also, suggestion to add more connections under Mage/Seer, as there's the clarity of Exile commands as well. I would also be suggesting "The heiress is the Maid."HS under Heir/Maid, but I do understand how that statement (while in my view a massive hint) can be seen as not strong enough or clear enough evidence. Aepokk Venset 04:54, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Clarified the Heir/Page thing. Also the pairing table really isn't for evidence, more just a quick explanation of what that pairing could be. For example Mages and Seers both hearing the Exiles clearly might be from their "understanding". - The Light6 (talk) 05:05, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Alright, to kick off this discussion, here's a table made by Sorceror Nobody, modified to my personal ideas with actives listed first in each paring. Also added Lord/Muse.

F-excl. (+) F-bias. (+) M-bias. (+) M-excl. (+)
F-excl. (-) Witch/Sylph - - -
F-bias. (-) - Thief/Rogue Maid/Heir -
M-bias. (-) - Mage/Seer Knight/Page -
M-excl. (-) Lord/Muse - - Prince/Bard

I'm not sure if this is how we wanted to start the conversation, but here's my opinion on the pairings regardless. I haven't formed an opinion of how they fall on the scale just yet, and I also want to STRONGLY SUGGEST (though I doubt it would've come up anyway) that we try to avoid discussing Inversion unless it becomes a canon concept. Aepokk Venset 05:57, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well inversion is currently a quasi-canon concept.
"UU: it is certainly possible that we may have common groUnd with oUr ancestors when it comes to oUr aspects, and the way oUr abilities reveal themselves to Us. i coUld not rUle this oUt.
[snop]
UU: player abilities may also manifest in ways in defiance with their aspects if they are heavily resistant to their trUe calling. or, if corrUpted in some way by an oUtside inflUence."
Basically, we know Light has to do with knowledge, while Void has to do with hiding it. Void players have been surrounded by a "black-out", when Rose went grimdark she also acquired the same black-out. Post-Scratch Rose also had it. In the context of the conversation, Calliope was telling Roxy that related players may have common ground with their aspects Rose and Roxy of course having aspects that are apparently opposites. Calliope then proceeds to say that if a person is resistant to their title or corrupted (like Rose) their powers and abilities can manifest in a way opposing what they are supposed to be. Rose was a Light player, became corrupted, and gained a very Void-like trait.
Likewise Hussie himself has said that Rose, prior to ascension, was acting in a very active way as opposed to passive nature of the Seer class. Also during Act 5, Rose while calling prey to her corruption was called on multiple occasions, a Witch and even at one point a "fake Witch" (by Eridan I think). Witches are of course an active class.
I mean most inversion theories basically take Rose as a starting point and extrapolate it to many other characters and actions. So while it does have a canonical basis, we have no idea if there is a pattern or system to inversions, among other things. - The Light6 (talk) 06:20, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, certainly! I've read BladekindEyewear's inversion theories and I fully agree with the concept (though not all of his class pairings). I was just placing that precaution there because I wasn't sure if you would consider it appropriate to discuss concepts that are not entirely canon. But hey if the case is that we can in fact discuss it, then here's my table:

Manipulate Steal Destroy
Active
(Witch)
Passive
(Sylph)
Active
(Thief)
Passive
(Rogue)
Active
(Prince)
Passive
(Bard)
Passive
(Seer)
Active
(Mage)
Passive
(Page)
Active
(Knight)
Passive
(Heir)
Active
(Maid)
Understand Exploit Become

I'm still uncertain as to whether Maid or Heir is the active class, but I've sorted them in accordance with the other table I posted above, which creates a nicely balanced layout. If I switched them, they would be in the Mage/Seer box, which would still be balanced, although it would make the table not "fully representative" (taking into account that Active female exclusive / Passive male exclusive is not possible with the existing classes and canonically confirmed pairings.)
Anyway, I do believe that's all I have to contribute until somebody else joins the discussion. Aepokk Venset 07:10, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Basically, I was thinking about it, and I wanted to run this idea/explanation by others first. I think Mages/Seers could be explained best with the definitions of "knows their aspect and gains experience(further knowledge?) personally", and "knows their aspect and gains experience from others", respectively.

If we use Sollux and Rose as examples, Sollux was on the forefront of causing the end of their world, and he "gained knowledge of Doom" personally by dying to various degrees. Rose on the other hand gains some of her knowledge from other people; she gets her information from the Horrorterrors, from Doc Scratch, and from the game itself by tearing apart her world.

Any thoughts/opinions? BooleanGargoyle (talk) 19:45, February 8, 2013 (UTC)


Regarding the active/passive scale, I'm thinking it may very well be asymmetrical and more vague than the current numbered line idea. Something akin to:

Passivity Activity
Master High Mid Low Low Mid High Master
Muse M
M
F
F
F
M
F
F
M
M
M
F Lord

Genders merely indicate bias. Could be gender-exclusive, biased or neutral. Added bonus, master classes aside, it's ==> shaped. How can it be so delicious ? 86.201.127.173 14:41, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

98.225.59.217's theories Edit

I believe I have solved the puzzle. When placed in the following format, there are quite a lot of amazing things that become true. Here is my table:

+7 +6 +5 +4 +3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7
Muse Heir Bard Sylph Page Rogue Seer Mage Thief Knight Witch Prince Maid Lord

Explanations:

Muse, Lord - influences x. This is given, but note that a muse entertains a lord.

Heir, Maid - becomes or has an extreme supply of x. My first instinct was that since passive classes seem to serve actives, a maid would be a lowly passive class. However, hints like "the heiress is the Maid" and other hints made me realize the maid can be considered a maiden, a princess, if you will. This makes the pairing instinctive: the fair maided is suited by the heir.

Bard, Prince - destruction of x. This is given, but note bards serve princes.

Sylph, Witch - source of x or benefactor via x. The 4 magic themed classes are tricky, but this pairing gives the best results, which I will detail in a minute. Certain definitions of sylph and witch are exceedingly similar. Note that Kanaya said that sylphs were like witches but more magical. Hussie has repeatedly said magic is fake, and Kanaya has a natural pro-sylph bias, supporting their pairing.

Page, Knight - equips (others/themselves) with x. Pages are servants that serve knights. This fact alone makes this particular pairing nigh undenyable.

Rogue, Thief - given, but note rogues and thieves are often interchangeable words

Seer, Mage - understands x, learns via x. These are the other 4 magic classes. While mage may seem to pair with witch, there is so much evidence that mages and seers are paired, and the sylph-witch pairing works so well that I paired them like this.

When you lay them out as I have above some very amazing things happen. Firstly, Hussie's hint holds true, in fact it was critical in my chart's derivation. Second, notice that the more extreme one goes, the more controlling over the aspect the class is (influencing, being, destroying, giving, equipping, taking, knowing). Thirdly, if you say levels 4-7 are gender exclusive, there are the same quantity of gender exclusive classes for each gender. In addition, note the same number of each gender is active and passive. These facts reinforce the spectrum as it is.

Speculation of observations: Another interesting observation: in the A1,A2, and B1 sessions, the sum of the scores are 0. All of these sessions are "normal" sessions; even though B1 and A1 are null sessions, it is stated that null sessions are just normal sessions destined to fail. However, in B2, the total of scores is -6, and the session is void. This offset is through no fault of their own. Rather, it is as if the session will fail because Sburb forgot to balance the classes and include the appropriate aspects. When Caliborn killed Calliope, he turned a 0 session, a null session with the bare minimum aspect requirements, into a -7 session that did not meet the time and space requirements, and it thus became a dead session. Food for thought. Anyone have any comments?--98.225.59.217 04:05, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

MonadicYawn's theoriesEdit

( + ) ( - )

Muse (female) - 7 - Lord (male)

Page (male) - 6 - Maid (female)

Bard (male) - 5 - Prince (male)

Sylph (female) - 4 - Witch (female)

Rogue - 3 - Thief

Heir - 2 - Knight

Seer - 1 - Mage


I have put lots of thought into the class pairings and using the confirmed gender roles on 'the scale' I found what I think is right. Here's my scale

( + ) ( - )

7 - Muse (female) 7 - Lord (male)

^ is confirmed.

6 - Page (male) 6 - Maid (female)

^ While not much can be said about these two, especially Pages, we can still know that Pages are traditionally male. Although the apprentice Knight theory makes sense I think that the jump between an apprentice knight and a young page is a bit big and if a young Page is trying to be a Knight - Why would one be passive and one be active?

While Maids are traditionally female, as counterparts it makes sense as they are both clearly defined as servants; and by looking at the wiki's scale we can only assume that the page is male and the maid is female - as for active/passive pairing, again, I'm following the wiki page.

5 - Bard (male) 5 - Prince (male)

^ Is confirmed.

4 - Sylph (female) 4 - Witch (female)

^ A witch is the female counterpart to a warlock. Sylph has been compared to the Witch although it's not hard evidence.

It is easy to assume that this active and passive pairing would both be female. This is the final pair of classes assigned to 'strict gender rules'. With these, the quantity of female-strict and male-strict classes on each end of the scale is balanced and we don't have any unisex classes paired with monosex classes because, frankly, that's stupid and doesn't keep too much in balance.Not only is it balanced on both sides of the active/passive scale, but it's also balanced evenly between 6 monosex classes and 6 unisex classes EXCLUDING the master classes.

From this point on the number classifications(3, 2, & 1) are interchangeable, without strict female or male guidelines we can only assume that the lower side of the scale is left to the more unspecific roles. Also, since the Seer and Knight classes are mandatory, I don't think they would be too close to the master classes which is why I place the rogue/thief pairing as 'level 3'

3 - Rogue 3 - Thief

^ Is confirmed

2 - Heir 2 - Knight

1 - Seer 1 - Mage


I originally thought that Heir would be on the 6 of the scale but I misunderstood the meaning of John having one of the most powerful class/aspect combinations.

I could go on more but I'll spare the forum. I do think that this is, more or less, going to be the final outcome and I am confident that from level 4 and up, it's correct.

MonadicYawn (talk) 05:36, February 11, 2013 (UTC)monadicYawn

I just want to point out that Hussie practically confirmed Seer as being passive, and the whole "defending" theme for Knights is an entirely fanonized concept, it was only ever said that they're weaponizers. And furthermore, I don't think it was ever said that Knights and Seers are session constants? Aepokk Venset 07:06, February 11, 2013 (UTC)
I believe the Heir is paired with the Witch and the Knight with the Seer. If you look at the sessions each one with a Heir had a Witch: John/Jade, Equius/Feferi, and Mituna/Damara. You can see the same with the Knight and Seer: Dave/Rose, Karkat/Terezi, and Latula/Kankri. Another guess I have is the Sylph and Mage being paired since there was only two of each and only in the Troll's session: Kanaya/Sollux and Aranea/Meulin. --BloodSoul (talk) 17:42, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

BloodSoul's theoriesEdit

I have a speculation/theory on the page class. So far we have seen three pages: Jake, Tavros, and Horuss. We have seen how Tavros played/acted which was in a very passive manner whereas Jake played a more slightly active role. I would also like to mention that the page has the possibility to become the strongest class/player in the whole game. One theory I have is that the page does not necessarily fall into the active/passive side of the class scale but in the middle, being a 0 on the scale. --BloodSoul (talk) 13:15, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

While I do not oppose the idea of a so called 0-class, I don't think Page is it. If it were such a class, and we assume Tavros and Jake both succeeded in being Pages, then the cumulation of their actions should have both be ambiguous about whether they were passive or active, not both having two different results. That being said, the a large issue with 0-classes is that all classes according to Calliope fit into either active or passive, for a 0-class this can be resolved by it being defined by its counterpart, but ultimately it leads to the conclusion that either Tavros or Jake was a bad Page and their actions don't say much about how the class should be played. - The Light6 (talk) 15:49, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
We still do not know much about this class but one thing I found is that each session that had a Page also had a Maid. Horuss/Porrim, Tavros/Aradia, and Jake/Jane. I feel that in order for the young Page to reach his full potential he requires help from his female counterpart the Maid(I could be wrong). If we pair both of these classes with one another we could say that their being a 0-class is a possibility.--BloodSoul (talk) 16:19, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, the "0 slot" doesn't really exist: it's just a quirk of how the chart's labelled. Imagine if all the classes were instead labelled 1-14 from most active to most passive, were the first half are considered "active classes" while the second half are "passive classes". There's no "7.5 slot" to be in. 67.176.198.143 17:41, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
But if there were a 0 slot, it would be a 15th class. So by your example, it'd be in the 8th position. An absolute zero neutral class is pretty unlikely, but it's neither proven nor disproven. Aepokk Venset 22:09, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

I have yet another theory. This one is more towards the classes in general. I have an idea on how the classes work but am not sure.

Page: Learns to use aspect;
Maid: Serves aspect;
Rogue: Steals aspect for team;
Thief: Steals aspect for self;
Seer: Sees using aspect;
Mage: Sees ?through? aspect;
Sylph: Heals aspect;
Witch: Manipulates aspect;
Prince:Destroys using aspect;
Bard: Destroys through aspect;
Hier: Inherits/becomes aspect;
Knight: Wields aspect;
Muse/Lord: Full control

--BloodSoul (talk) 22:57, June 29, 2013 (UTC)

Sylph is directly confirmed to be a healer class, just making note of that. Also, I feel a nuance is being missed in the Prince and Bard descriptions there, but I can't quite pin it down. Aepokk Venset 06:50, June 30, 2013 (UTC)
I thank you for clarifying the Sylph that one always slips my mind. As for the Prince and Bard. The Prince technically destroys their aspect while the Bard use their aspect to make others destroy. Is this what you meant?--BloodSoul (talk) 21:43, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
Yeah! I wasn't quite sure how to word it myself, but I think you handled that challenge masterfully. Aepokk Venset 05:54, July 2, 2013 (UTC)


Limmirind's theoriesEdit

Disclaimer: This is my first attempt at anything resembling a wiki edit in my life. The formatting will be terrible and anyone willing/wanting to tidy it up has my thanks/permission.

I've got some some ideas on the class pairings that I don't see floating around, so I figured I'd try to throw them into the mix.

Heir/Maid Seer/Sylph Page/Mage Knight/Witch

The Heir is tended to by their aspect The Maid tends to their aspect

The Seer is guided by their aspect The Sylph guides by their aspect

I can't think of a verb that quite works for the Mage/Page pairing at the moment. The Mage is innately attuned to their aspect to the point of being overwhelmed. They must grow into their aspect. The Page is initially very out touch with their aspect, and must grow attuned to it. Maybe "mature" is a workable verb, but it's getting a bit late

I find that the language Calliope uses to describe the Prince/Bard pairing is overly restrictive as well, and doesn't quite do the dichotomy justice. The Prince governs over the aspect, like The Grand Highblood and Dirk. The Bard unleashes their aspect and promotes the overall influence that their aspect in the world. The relationships that players of these classes have with their aspects tend to be quite bipolar. Most of the intricacies of this pair can be summarized by the fact that they are as the Lord and the Muse with all the faults and fervors of adolescence.

Valid points overall. But the Prince is not a ruler, but a destroyer. I'll use Eridan as an example. He is the Prince of Hope. The npc's on his world were angels, the very embodiment of hope itself. After realizing that no one was coming to his world he starting killing the angels for whatever reason. So in hindsight he actually destroyed hope. In the pairing of Prince/Bard it is paired based on destruction. The Bard influences others to desroy using their aspect. Your Mage/Page pairing intrigues me. A page in the middle ages was someone who studied under someone. A mage (from what we know about Sollux) is knowledgeable of something. So you could say that; The Mage shares knowledge of their aspect while the Page gains knowledge of their aspect.BloodSoul (talk) 16:37, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
We're told that the Prince and Bard are desroyers, but Dirk and Kurolz do quite a bit of govorning. Eridan going on a destructive tantrum and Cronus giving up just seems like what they as individuals would do in the position of a prince or bard. It also occurs to me that aside from Dirk, the only princes and bards we have to draw from are of hope and rage, which seem to be destructive in their own right. Limmirind (talk) 17:27, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
But Hope isn't destructive in its own right. Rage might be, but who knows? Literally the only in-story Rage players fall within two paired classes, giving us only speculative ideas of what the aspect could do aside from destructive purposes. I also want to say that while I disagree with Mage/Page, on the grounds of my view of class pairings being "two applications of the same function", it does inspire the intriguing question of whether certain non-paired classes tend to interact with each other in certain ways. Aepokk Venset 02:57, July 15, 2013 (UTC)


SilverEye's IdeasEdit

To begin i have little to add except and idea for the classes and how they are organized. A friend and i debated the end results but end up with this The obvious combinations of passive/active which are Muse/Lord Rogue/Thief and Bard/Prince Then we went with Knight/Heir Mage/Witch Seer/Sylph Maid//Page

Strange and maybe not perfect, ya. But our idea was that Passive classes normally give their aspect and/or serve with while Active take/get their aspect and/or are served by there aspect. So basically it's based more on how the aspect it's self is presented/given rather then how the player uses it. A Knight is one who wields their aspect, uses it to protect while and Heir is one who protects themselves or is protected by aspect. A Mage manipulates with or through an aspect and/or is manipulated by while a Witch physically and or literally manipulates the aspect the way they see fit. A Seer is one who benefits other with their knowledge of aspect and/or one who leads and guides with their knowledge of aspect while a Sylph is a healer that heals with their aspect. Finally we have the Maid who we theorized taps into other's potential and/or provides others with their aspect would be the passive to the Page who has untapped potential and/or are provided there aspect (once they tap into the reserve of course) Now it's not perfect, the two of us are still in a bit of a stand of with the Sylph but the idea was presented for others to debate over if they wish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SilverDemonEyes (talkcontribs)

Lukethehedgehog's theoriesEdit

So,here are my ideas:

Passive (+)
+7 Muse Exclusively Female
+6 Page Exclusively Male
+5 Bard Exclusively Male
+4 Mage Commonly Male
+3 Heir Commonly Male
+2 Rogue Commonly Female
+1 Maid Exclusively Female
0
-1 Knight Commonly Male
-2 Thief Commonly Female
-3 Sylph Exclusively Female
-4 Seer Commonly Female
-5 Prince Exclusively Male
-6 Witch Exclusively Female
-7 Lord Exclusively Male
Active (-)

--Lukethehedgehog 00:11, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

Hm... Interesting ideas. I'm not sure I agree with this whole chart, but pretty much the only thing I can outright challenge is this: Seer is a confirmed passive class. Aepokk Venset 18:55, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

Leenah's theoriesEdit

Is it possible that some classes could change on the active/passive scale depending on the session? Like Rose is a very active seer while Terezi is more neutral and Kankri, as far as I can tell, seems more passive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.235.166 (talk)

No. The scale is a thing that tell the general nature of a class, a person can defy and out of character for someone of their class but that has to do with the individual character, not with the class itself. - The Light6 (talk) 08:25, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

Seven-step arrangementEdit

Assuming that there is a pattern to passive-active arrangements - which isn't a guaranteed truth - I've been having some success with a table in which every class's pair, excluding master classes which are a whole other kettle of fish anyway, is exactly seven steps up or down from it. Note that that seven includes 0 as a number (though with no assigned classes) as it makes the mathematics more intuitive, and if you like it can also recall the Seven Gates and so on. My pairings actually agree with MonadicYawn's above quite by chance, but where I set them numerically is different. Short version:
(-7) Witch, Prince, Thief, Mage, Heir, Maid (0)
(0) Sylph, Bard, Rogue, Seer, Knight, Page (+7)
To explain, let's look at the agreed top Active classes, Witch and Prince, and their counterparts, the Sylph (not confirmed, but just for example) and the Bard. Under this theory, if the Witch is at -6, we find the Sylph seven steps up at +1; the Prince is at -5, and the Bard at +2. This arrangement implies that the Sylph and Bard would be among the most active of the passive classes, and this makes some sense; under the simplest interpretation of Sylphs as healers then while they are heavily support-based and do not benefit themselves then they are required to be fairly active in their form of support and the effect their powers have. Likewise, Bards are wild cards with the potential to have huge impacts on the course of their sessions; they're not necessarily in control of what will happen, but they're pretty unmissable.
I'd then follow this along to Thief(-4)/Rogue(+3), which again seems fair enough, and Mage(-3)/Seer(+4). Who knows what Mages are really all about, but given their counterpart and class name then maybe illusions and other prestidigitation, which do after all relate to knowledge? Seems fairly mid-active, anyway. That then leaves us with Knight, Maid, Page, and Heir, which from what we know of their present associations can give us the required two ultra-passive predominantly male classes.
I'm going to go with Heir(-2)/Knight(+5) under the logic of both being appointed champions; Heirs are, if you like, made champions with their aspect's power vested in themself to use as they like, whilst Knights are champions of a cause which is outside themselves and which they must defend. Low-active and high-passive: Not unreasonable. That then leaves us with Maid(-1)/Page(+6), servants to a higher power. Maids I suppose preserve the integrity of their aspect and keep everything ticking over, whilst Pages must bow and scrape nearly forever but eventually their aspect comes to depend upon them. The difference is that Maids create change while Pages rarely ever will. With that said I think there's an argument for switching the pairings around to Maid-Knight and Heir-Page, and/but it doesn't really make a difference to the theory if you connect them that way.
It's not a perfect theory by any means, though the truth is unlikely to be perfect either as I'm sure the actual roles and certainly the active/passive spectrum came long after the concoction of their names. But I think there is a compelling logic to the idea that a class pair has commonalities to their degree of activity or passivity; the most passive passive class is complemented by a relatively passive active counterpart, while the most active active class has one of the more active passive classes serving under its interpretation. 86.156.36.219 11:55, January 12, 2015 (UTC)

Villenium's Classpect Duality theoriesEdit

I've put a lot of though into how the classes are paired and I seem to share a theory close to those above but with a new approach. Inspired by Blade Eyewear Kind's theory[1] of classpect duality I have come to the conclusion that passive/active pairings are grouped into 3 categories (excluding muse and lord). If a hero were to be inverted as Rose was during her Grim dark phase she would have gone from the passive(+) seer to the active(-) witch. Her aspect would also switch from light to void (thus explaining the blackout on the trollian viewport). The classes would be as followed:

Steal/Give:
(+)Rogue (-)Thief
(+)Page (-)Heir
Understand/Manipulate:
(+)Seer (-)Mage
(+)Sylph (-)Witch
Destroy/Protect:
(+)Knight (-)Maid
(+)Bard (-)Prince


So for example an inverted Bard of Rage (Gamzee Makara) would become a Maid of Hope. This seems like a very odd combination considering Maid is likely a female exclusive class, yet Gamzee would never truly become a maid, he would only have the qualities of a Maid. Maid is an active class, therefor they use their aspect to protect themselves. We can see evidence of this in ⅔ of canonical Maids (i.e Jane Crocker and Aradia Megido. Jane uses her aspect to heal herself from a wound and Aradia freezes Jack in time so that she may escape from him unharmed.) So Gamzee as a Maid of Hope would protect himself using his aspect. Hope is to believe in something, whereas Rage is to resign oneself to hopelessness. At the beginning of Hivebent, Gamzee had a lot of hope, he believed that MuThAfUcKiNg MiRaClEs were all around, and perhaps he believed this so that he may psychologically protect himself.

The aspect inversion are pretty obvious:

Space Time
Blood Breath
Light Void
Hope Rage
Heart Mind
Life Doom







I also believe that using class inversion we can more accurately list the roles on the passive active scale. Since an inverted class also changes from passive to active or vice versa, it isn't implausible theorize that the inverted class will occupy the opposite position on the scale.

Passive (+)
+7 Muse

Exclusively Female

+6 Page Exclusively Male
+5 Knight Commonly Male
+4 Seer Commonly Female
+3 Rogue Commonly Female
+2 Sylph Exclusively Female
+1 Bard Exclusively Male
0
-1 Maid Exclusively Female
-2 Mage Commonly Male
-3 Heir Commonly Male
-4 Witch Exclusively Female
-5 Prince Exclusively Male
-6 Theif Commonly Female
-7 Lord Exclusively Male
Active (-)


This projection of the scale respects any hints that Hussie has since given us. It even respects his tweet mentioning that there are slightly more Male specific active classes and slightly more female passive classes. With the inclusion of Muse and Lord there are 4 Male active classes and 3 females and 4 Female Passive classes and 3 Male.

Obviously the 5 classes that have not yet been canonically assigned genders are only conjecture but they seem the most likely and they keep the scale balanced.

I believe that the classpect system was thoroughly planned out by Hussie boforehand and ussually when approaching something like this one tries to create a balance system, to make it symmetrical. The classpect inversion theory roots everything together in a manner that appears to be so balanced I can't really conceive it to be wrong, it all makes sense.

I will continue to update this theory when I have the time. For reference, I created this theory in late January of 2012 after the Alpha Trolls were first introduced, I originally posted the idea on my friends Tumblr but it has since been taken down. I owe many pieces of my theory to other theories I have read but the final conclusion is my own.

12:34, January 16 2015 (EST)


Oppo66 (talk) 00:18, February 26, 2015 (UTC) I have had a small theory that's been circulating my head for days, I think that a page is one who becomes powerful with aspect, ie a page of rage has the potential to become powerful with rage powers. The sylph is one who becomes makes others powerful with aspect, ie Aranea the sylph of light made Jake more powerful with light? powers and made Terezi's eyes more powerful by having them able to see. I think Page is the active counterpart to Sylph seeing as Theif is active and it steals for itself and Page makes itself more powerful. Sylph is Passive because rouge steals for others and Sylph makes others more powerful

CrowdControl's Class TheoryEdit

First of all, I'll say that I don't subscribe to the idea of a gender-biased system of classes. I feel that the prospect of it is detrimental to Sburb as a concept; as the limitlessly creative medium of self-discovery it's advertised as, how would it make sense that your gender determines how you can and cannot affect reality? Simply, it doesn't make sense, and I don't think that such restrictions should be considered when theorizing about classes. It's important to remember that class does not define the player; the player defines the class. Sburb is all about the player: the entire game is molded around them, from their lands to their titles to even their sprites. The player is the most important part of a Sburb session. Sburb would not restrict the player, it DOES NOT restrict the player.

With that said, let's begin. As you might notice, a lot of my views on classpect (and on Sburb and Homestuck in general) stem from the views and ideas of @revolutionaryduelist on Tumblr. If you haven't read their stuff, you definitely should.

The class Active/Passive system can be best explained with the concept of Yin-Yang. Yang is active; it is proactive and self-directed. It acts to benefit itself, it forces itself onto reality, and it exploits its aspect/exploits through its aspect. Yin, on the other hand, is passive; it is reactive and group-oriented. It acts to benefit others, it flows naturally with reality, and it allows its aspect/allows through its aspect.

  Inspire Destroy Create Steal Serve Know Change
Passive Muse Bard Sylph Rogue Knight Seer Heir
Active Lord Prince Maid Thief Page Mage Witch

I ordered these based loosely on how Active/Passive I think they are. Princes and Maids are the most Active classes, and have the most trouble switching between having an Active role and a Passive one. Similarly, Bards and Sylphs are the most Passive, which has the same implications. This does not mean that these classes can't take on a role opposite of their instinct, but when they do the result will be far more dramatic and attention-grabbing. This can be seen when Kanaya takes on an Active role as a rainbow drinker and the entire story stops and focuses on her rampage. Another great example is Gamzee, who more or less had the same effect on the story as Kanaya did during his rampage. An example of a Maid taking hold of the story is when Aradia made her transition from a Passive robot to quite an Active god tiered dream self. What makes her Active, however, is her general focus on herself and the fact that she constantly uses her time powers to do things that break the flow of time and go against its natural functions. Aradia's natural instinct is to force herself onto reality and create what she wants to.

The least Active are Witches and Mages, and the least Passive are Heirs and Seers. This is for the simple reason that they can rather easily switch between an Active and Passive role without a whole lot of fuss. Rose and Terezi are excellent examples of this. They are Passive people by nature; for the most part, they use their aspect within the realm of which it can be naturally used, and they tend to let the information come to them. However, multiple times in canon they throw themselves into Active roles and take control over situations. The same can be said of John, who is Passive in nature but can be Active if the situation depends on it.

But enough about that. Next comes something RD refers to as "unifying myths", though I mostly just call them "themes".

  ??? Royalty? Fairies Pirates Butlers Prophets Magicians
Passive Muse Bard Sylph Rogue Knight Seer Heir
Active Lord Prince Maid Thief Page Mage Witch

I'd elaborate some more, but I think I'm ready to wrap stuff up on this. If anyone reading wants to ask me to clarify anything I'd be super glad to.

As a closer, the inversion theory isn't true and someone "inverting" in their role doesn't exist. The fact of the matter is, if you aren't performing your role correctly you're failing as a hero. Classpect molds itself around the player's natural instincts, which is something that Sburb heavily encourages. Sburb wants you to be yourself, and become powerful as yourself and no one BUT yourself. Why do you think Vriska failed so hard while roleplaying Mindfang? Why do you think Eridan's wizard roleplay resulted in his demise? How come, in Homestuck, when one doesn't act like themselves, they are unhappy and they are explicitly being detrimental to their progress as a hero? Because Sburb does not like you being someone you're not. Homestuck itself encourages individuality and power within yourself. Your title does not and will not change because you decide you don't like who you are. What WILL happen is you'll die and fail everyone unless you can get a grip and find power and ability in YOURSELF, and not somebody else.

Like I said, if anyone read this and wants to ask questions, I'd be happy to answer. Like really happy. Please ask questions I love talking about this haha. CrowdControlOS (talk) 20:28, October 3, 2017 (UTC)

Exotic Meltdown's Theory (Rotation Theory, complete with links)Edit

So I thought of it like this:

  • F = Fully female, f = Mostly female, M = Fully male, m = Mostly male, ζ = Both.
  • Up and Down = Rival classes, Left to Right = Paired classes
  • The muse and lord aren’t of this speculation.
  • The rotations in this theory: Bard/Prince/Knight/Page, Maid/Heir/Sylph/Witch. The Thief/Rogue/Mage/Seer classes aren’t in a rotation.
Robbers
(-)Thief(f) (+)Rogue(f)
Destroyers/Recreators
(+)Bard(M) (-)Prince(M)
(-)Knight(ζ) (+)Page(m)
Protectors/Manipulators
(+)Maid(F) (-)Heir(M)
(+)Sylph(F) (-)Witch(F)
Prophets
(-)Mage(ζ ) (+)Seer(ζ)

The reason for this is to get an easy breakdown of what these classes have and don’t have in common. Under the table is an abstract concept of the opposite effects that one class has on another.

Prince and PageEdit

For a prince to destroy his aspect, he must take something retaining to that aspect and destroy it in anyway he can. A page would do the opposite; they must take something retaining to that aspect and recreate it. For example, two heroes of hope have done this at some point. Eridan destroyed hope by blowing up the Matriorb and trying to join Jack Noir. Jake, however (With “help” from Aranea), created hope when he released an energy wave while saying random things.

Bard and KnightEdit

A bard brings destruction using/towards his aspect, something that can be useful or dangerous, depending on the situation. A knight, however, would do anything to guard/improve their aspect. An example would be that Gamzee (A Bard of Rage) drank sopor slime to keep him calm (Something to bring destruction towards his rage)/beat the living crap out of Terezi (Something to bring destruction using his rage). Dave (A Knight of Time), however, must maintain a balance in the timelines and keep that balance going.

Maid and SylphEdit

A maid is able to provide herself with her aspect, as she is made up of it. This protects her from danger in various situations, as seen with Aradia freezing Jack in [S] Wake. A sylph, though, is able to benefit her team/friends through abstract or psychological sense that retains to her aspect (Or in some cases, even heal them). Aranea forcefully healed Jake, which caused him to create a blast of hope.

Heir and WitchEdit

An heir can be surrounded by his aspect/become his aspect/inherit his aspect. John can become the wind, while Mituna had Ψiioniic failures and Equius inherited irrelevance, having gone unmentioned by anyone (Until becoming Arquiusprite). A witch, on the other hand, can “break the rules” of her aspect or manipulate it/choose how she uses her aspect.

Other ClassesEdit

My theory doesn’t feature any rotations towards the robbers/prophets.

So, that's my take on it.Edit

If you have questions, go to my wall and ask away. I have the answers to why my theory is.


Quick Mage/Page HypothesisEdit

Mages and Pages may be counterparts, despite seeming wildly different at first glance. Pages essentially start with a deficit in their class, and, over the course of their journey, gaining more and more of their aspect as they progress. However, it is possible that a mage does exactly the opposite - starts out with a lot of their aspect and slowly loses it over the course of their journey. Unfortunately, since there are only two mages, the examples will be few. Sollux, the Mage of Doom, started out his journey by constantly prophecizing his doom, and by dooming Karkat with his Mobius Double Reacharound Virus. As he progresses, however, he is able to escape his doom numerous times - for example, having two dream selves (the Derse one taking over for his dead true self), only becoming KO'd and blinded by Eridan, or his ghost only being half-dead. Not much is known about Meulin, the Mage of Heart, but it's clear that she had a good relationship with Kurloz before her session. However, as time progressed, Kurloz deafened her, the relationship fell apart, and now has trouble with romance.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.