|Archive 1||March 2012 - Feb 2013|
|N.B. This page is not for discussing theories, but for discussion about the page, namely how to improve it or deal with any new revelations.|
For discussion of theories please visit the forum.
Templates for classesEdit
- Continuing discussion on from the previous talk page.
Since people are ripping some of the flash assets from [S] Collide, we now have a clear and canon sprite for the Mage Outfit, which can be found in http://mspabooru.com//images/15/bcef66eb2910262543b80b20d323d132.gif?159976 and http://mspabooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=159977. I'd suggest someone to do the wiki a favor and make a template sprite of these and post it in the templates page as well as the mage subsection.
Well given the recent ascension of the B2 kids, we might have a clear view of the Prince, Page and Rogue sprites soon. So we can discuss any issues about templatifying them when they are revealed. Than all that is left is Mage, Sylph, Muse and Lord. - The Light6 (talk) 06:45, February 11, 2013 (UTC)
Deleted the fan Rogue and the two fan Pages and added their canon ones to here, although the legs are fabricated at the moment the sprite is close enough to canon to use and any issues can be corrected later. Also as a side note bitterlime was responsible for both the old fan Rogue and the new canon Rogue. - The Light6 (talk) 11:09, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
While removing the notice about the Rogue leg fabrication I decided to make a note here for the future in what is turning out to be a monologue with myself. Where we have the sprites for the classes with the hoods up (Maid, Heir, Thief, and Bard) we use those. We could easily achieve more consistency by using the hood-down sprites but fairly sure the hood-up ones offer a better picture about the design of the class. So we just have to keep an eye out for Knight, Witch, Seer, Rogue, and Page with their hood up in sprite mode. - The Light6 (talk) 00:39, August 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good standardization to me, supported. Aepokk Venset 02:18, August 25, 2013 (UTC)
- It's so good to finally see this coming together. And yes I agree that hood up is the way to go. Also am I the only one that thinks that Hussie knowingly turned this in some sort of cruel teasing game? :p bitterLime 07:37, August 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Fairly sure he has, I mean ignoring the god tier designs, it has been over a year since we have got any clear cut class exposition. Also for everyone else (not you Bitterlime, because you were the one who did it), we now have the Prince outfit in sprite mode. Mostly (expect any errors, if any, to be corrected in the near future). - The Light6 (talk) 03:27, September 18, 2013 (UTC)
Rogue template Edit
Okay, there's a slight problem with the rogue template. Making a template based on Roxy's outfit would look like the one you see on the left.
As you can see her hood and many other things feature the colour of her symbol. This is highly unusual, nothing any other class outfit ever did. Additionally it contradicts the colouring of Rufioh's rogue outfit. A template based on Rufioh's colors would look like the one on the right.
Now I know that the Rufioh sprite wasn't created by Hussie. But it has been used in canon and he would have had the chance to easiely recolour it. I personally would go for the template based on Rufioh. To me it makes more sense to assume that void is simply an unusual colour scheme, than to assume that the Rogue class outfit has a non standard way of using the aspect colours. bitterLime 10:38, February 10, 2013 (UTC)
Close examination of Roxy's image shows that her symbol (in the darkest point available, as it's been heavily blended with surrounding colors due to its narrowness) is considerably darker than any other areas, excluding the shadowed areas of her cloak. Also, the only other Void god tier we've seen, Horuss, has colors nearly identical to but slightly lighter than his symbol in places where other pages have radically different colors. I think it's safe to assume that Void god tiers have some general colors that are nearly identical to their symbol colors. This still leaves the point of the sections that match Breath's symbol, but not Void's; unless we find out differently, I would assume that these sections (lace on hood and vest, and I suppose the boot rims, by proof of being the same shade on Roxy) correspond to the secondary symbol color seen in Bard codpiece stitching and Witch socks, as they are 1. similar areas in terms of being minor costuming detailing and 2. never otherwise shown to differ from the main symbol color in Breath, with which 3. we are going by a small, semi-canon sprite as the only thing telling us they're the same for Breath anyway. Firecrow91 (talk) 13:47, February 10, 2013 (UTC)
I don't know about that. It is true that in the full body shot Roxy's symbol is blurred? But in the close-up of her chest you can see that her symbol and hood are identical in colour. The thing about the secondary aspect colours is possible though. But even if all that is correct there are still inconsistencies between Roxy and Rufioh. Roxy's mask is the colour of her stitchings, Rufioh's is the colour of his pants. The pants are another inconsistency, because Roxy's pants are like her hood, but Rufioh's aren't. I think until further notice we should probably ignore Rufioh, because he would have had the chance to tweak his god tier outfit, while Roxy's is freshly after ascension. If we do that the main question that remains is wether or not her hood etc, are the colour of her symbol or not.
One idea I had is that the colour-schemes that have a dark symbol on a lighter shirt (i.e. Doom and Void, not counting life because that one is weird anyway) perhaps use the symbol colour as the hood colour? I mean it's a possibility...? I don't know really. But we can agree that it's a Void thing, right? It would be weird if it was a Rogue thing. bitterLime 14:40, February 10, 2013 (UTC)
Mage concept art Edit
Hey, here is some canon Mage concept art, so maybe someone can add it to the page somehow? Like, either just straight up add the image or edit out Meulin or something? Is that okay? What does everyone think
- No. We've discussed this before. Feastings' concept art isn't canon because Hussie didn't draw it. And also that's a pretty horrible filename. Aepokk Venset 04:54, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
- As said, we've discussed it before, while Feastings' sprites were used and are canon, her other pictures are technically fanart and so we are refraining from using them. - The Light6 (talk) 05:13, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it's so much an issue that he didn't draw them, considering there are a large amount of things in Homestuck that Hussie did not draw. It's that her concept art did not appear in Homestuck itself. While it's cool to know that picture exists, it just can't be on the Wiki. Rabbeseking (talk) 06:33, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Expanding Scratch's Definition of Seers Edit
To continue Scratch's comments on Seers, he also alluded to the concept of "alternate possibilities", and, according to his statements on, the fact that they are "fully within the domain" of Seers. The remainder of his statement implies that the Seer's Aspect merely contributes the Seer's specialty to their Mythological Role (and subsequently to their powers). If this information is entirely reliable, then we already have a comprehensive definition of the basic Seer class to work with.
Given this, Scratch's earlier statement about Seers having access to a "strategy guide" of sorts would seem to hold true.
I thought this was already mentioned, that roughly seers can view all relevant offshoot timelines in terms of their aspect, and pick the most fortuitous one also in terms of their aspect. Aepokk Venset 18:11, May 25, 2013 (UTC)
Because of what Scratch said, I felt that it was understating things a little to say only that "they know the most fortuitous path"; they would appear to have the ability to (occasionally) view and pick any path in addition to the one the Alpha Timeline follows. Maybe I'm reading into things a little much? I dunno. tachyonTrajectory (talk) 20:24, May 25, 2013 (UTC)
With the latest updates there is a ton of new information to add, but I'm not sure how to add it. Delete the entire Rogue speculation segment? Awkwardly shove it in the middle? Put it after the speculation?
- If you're not sure, you could
strikethroughthe speculation section, put the new info before, and then let other authors figure out what to do with the old info. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 07:12, August 26, 2013 (UTC)
The link leading to tumblr page persumably explaining witch being an active class is broken. I have no idea how to find it and what to do about it. I just wanted it to be noticed-I continue to not have an account
- Yeah Hussie deleted his Tumblr Q&As awhile ago, there were three other broken Q&A links aside from the Witch one, I fixed all four with our archived versions. - The Light6 (talk) 17:02, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
Seer is one syllable? Edit
- I don't know how you're pronouncing it but it is one syllable. For the record; seer and sear are homophones, i.e. they are pronounced the same way. - The Light6 (talk) 22:32, June 17, 2014 (UTC)
- It depends on your dialect. Personally, I pronounce it as two syllables like "skier" instead of one syllable like "beer" or "fear", but I'm guessing that Andrew Hussie probably intended it to be one syllable, since he's from the Boston area and New England dialects tend to be smoother with syllables and phonemes. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:20, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I personally pronounce it with two syllables, but I see how it could be one. Ylimegirl (talk) 15:22, June 18, 2014 (UTC)
So the latest incident of someone adding that a class of unconfirmed gender alignment is confirmed gender exclusive has motivated me to replace things like "possibly female exclusive" or whatever variation with the actual pure chance as a percentage, that way people are less likely to be confused about what is going on.
- Chance that Maid is female exclusive: 66.6%
- Chance that Witch is female exclusive: 66.6%
- Chance that Sylph is female exclusive: 66.6%
Simple enough, right? But there is still the issue of Heir and Page though.
- Chance that Heir is male exclusive: 37.5%
- Chance that Page is male exclusive: 37.5%
- Chance that neither Heir nor Page is male exclusive: 25%
There is a slight complication here as the null choice is calculated from the left over probabilities more than being an actual choice, eg. 50% chance of Heir exposition before Page > 50/50 chance of Heir being exclusive or not > if not, than 50/50 chance of Page being exclusive or not = 12.5% chance of neither being non-exclusive > repeat for 50% chance Page exposition comes first > add probabilities = 25% of neither being exclusive.
This complicates the female exclusive percentages, because those chances are for both Heir and Page being non exclusive when there is a 75% chance that is not the case. Which means the percentages are more like this:
- Chance that Maid is female exclusive: 91.6%
- Chance that Witch is female exclusive: 91.6%
- Chance that Sylph is female exclusive: 91.6%
Directly, and to the point:
Hussie has stated that the two most passive standard classes are male exclusive. However, since both Lord and Prince are active, these two classes must be Bard and another male exclusive class, raising the total to four. This means that Maid, Witch, and Sylph are all female exclusive, and either Heir or Page is male exclusive.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed odd to me that nobody else had commented on this. 184.108.40.206 00:28, July 20, 2015 (UTC)
As was requested with the banner on the top of the page, I removed all the speculation on the page. This will likely cause some anger so I would recommend that an article be made purely for speculation separate from this article. _☮__ƒelinoel___ 15:44, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
- Please don't just put the speculation back on the page without talking about it first. It specifically requested the speculation be removed, so I removed it. _☮__ƒelinoel___ 15:52, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
- Cleanup does not mean complete removal, Aepokk could have done that themselves instead of adding the banner if that is what they had meant. As per the banner he mention it should be made more objective if possible first and removed if not possible. Especially since you removed all points regardless of whether they were interpretative or inductive. - The Light6 (talk) 15:57, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
- As I said, I only removed the speculation. The banner itself said that removing the speculation was fine if there was no fact that could replace it. You are literally putting nothing but speculation itself into the article. Again, the only points I removed were speculative, if something is implied it is not fact. _☮__ƒelinoel___ 16:00, November 19, 2014 (UTC)
rogue/thief speculation Edit
I noticed all other classes have separate "speculation" sections within them, but with Rogue and Thief the speculation is mixed with other things. Should Rogue and Thief be given a speculation section as well for consistency and clarity (what is speculation and what is confirmed)? 220.127.116.11 23:55, March 7, 2015 (UTC)
The Muse outfit has several images posted in canon by this point. Are any of them going to be on this page, or are none of them good enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ConnorDemos (talk • contribs)
- I personally found them difficult to work with, but there certainly is the matter of people expecting templates by now.... I'll see what I can do. Aepokk ∀ulpex 21:47, June 2, 2015 (UTC)
I noticed on the templates that the Lord class was there. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Calibord was just wearing the cape in that frame. You'll also notice what is currently listed as the Lord god tier outfit is just Caliborn's usual attire but with a cape. Should this be changed?
Sylph Sprite Edit
So where did we get the Sylph sprite standing from? Because all I ever saw in Collide was shots of Kanaya with one leg forwad like she is walking. 18.104.22.168 07:05, April 23, 2016 (UTC)
- The sprites were posted on Tumblr by the artist who made them. We could never rip any from the Flash itself; video compression ruins the clarity -- Sorceror Nobody, 12:32, April 23, 2016 (UTC)
Possible page division? Edit
This page has gotten quite long and difficult to navigate. I'd like to propose creating twelve subpages for the individual classes, and only including short summaries on this page, linking to the full pages using Template:Main. There's already a precedent on this wiki, as the "Adventures" section of the MS Paint Adventures page has a similar structure despite using a different template. I'm also proposing modifying the Aspect page in the same way.
Amateur classes Edit
I don't think amateur is the right name either. "In his Formspring, Andrew Hussie has said that Fedorafreak's mythological role was the Gent of Piss while Nicolas Cage was the Nick of Time. Andrew himself is the Waste of Space." Mamaopapaya (talk) 03:44, October 12, 2017 (UTC)
- Those are largely considered to be joke classes and shouldn't be included in the total count. Ylimegirl – Hero of Hope – 05:25, October 12, 2017 (UTC)
Alright, so this page needs some serious work. The first thing I think should be addressed are the "Speculation" sections below every class. Are those really necissary? I feel that wikis should be, primarily, purely factual. Fanon and assumption aren't allowed anywhere else on the wiki (that I've seen) so it doesn't make much sense to me that it would be allowed here. If someone wanted to speculate and share their views and opinions on classes, they could go to a forum or Tumblr or something. Even if we do clearly separate the specualtion from the factual information, those sections seem largely unneeded. I think it'd be best if we just kept the top section, and modelded it like the Thief/Rogue and Heir sections, for instance. Give examples of how the characters belonging to the class interacted with their aspect in canon, and exactly how they interacted with it. If we know for a fact what the class does (this only pertains to Prince/Bard and Thief/Rogue, I think) we can then say "this class does yadayadayada" in confidence.
Maid Information Edit
In the first paragraph under "Maid", the statement "...Jane (the Maid of Life) was able to heal herself after being stabbed, and is able to bring people back from the dead, although according to Jade, that ability is limited to one use per person."
This wording is a bit strange, for one thing--is Jane only able to bring one person back to life in total? Is she only able to do it once to every individual? Also, can someone please include some kind of link citing the page where this is mentioned?
I would correct this myself since it's so small, but I genuinely cannot recall any mention of this sort of limitation on Jane's powers. Perhaps remove this bit entirely? It seems to be a bit unrelated to the subject of class anyways.
Split this page into Classes and Class SpeculationEdit
I motion we cut our losses and separate the speculation to a separate page, link from this article to that page, and make it so this article exclusively documents the classes since this wiki is supposed to favor documentation first. We can keep the speculation for those interested, but it should be split or this page is never going to not be considered 'inexcusable'. Anyone else feel this too? We can clean up this page much more easily once we separate the fat from the meat. Epyc Wynn (talk) 04:11, June 23, 2019 (UTC)Epyc Wynn
Inconsistency in Gendering of Maid Class Edit
I would like to point out an inconsistency within the article regarding the gender alignment of the Maid class. The Gendered Alignment section of the article claims that the Maid class is female-exclusive, but the Maid section says that "all known Maids have been female, however ... the class is not confirmed as being exclusively female." If memory serves, I believe the former claim is true, and the Maid class has not been proven female-exclusive in canon; the rest of the article seems to reflect this. Could we have some proof, maybe, to clear this up?