|
Post by silavor on May 8, 2016 3:13:32 GMT
This is mostly just a half-baked idea, but I think Thieves are more Active because we almost never see their powers manifest externally. Like Lords and Princes, their powers are quite internalized, and only become visible in the most dire of circumstances. Even then, they only manifest as small beams or a minor emblem in the shape of their aspect to indicate a power is being used. Thief being more Active than Prince might also explain why Thief steal-beams are smaller externally than Prince destruction-beams. As far as we've seen, Caliborn's Lord powers are entirely internalized, with no external manifestations whatsoever.
On the flip side, the largest noticeable Class powers are Calliope's black hole, Jake's hope field, and John's Windy Thing (particularly when it engulfs the entirety of LOWAS during his quest, though that might have been using the pipe organ as an amplifier), all of which come from highly Passive classes.
|
|
|
Post by legendary on May 8, 2016 4:56:53 GMT
My opinions on Witches is that they are highly active but they definitely aren't supposed to start that way! I believe that they tend to start with powerful familiars or similar relationships, and that a big part of their growth is losing that familiar and learning to work without their back-up. I guess maybe a typical culmination of their arc would be to get that back-up back? Jade became Bec, Feferi got to boss HTs around...
|
|
|
Post by amiabletemplar on May 8, 2016 9:59:45 GMT
This is mostly just a half-baked idea, but I think Thieves are more Active because we almost never see their powers manifest externally. Like Lords and Princes, their powers are quite internalized, and only become visible in the most dire of circumstances. Even then, they only manifest as small beams or a minor emblem in the shape of their aspect to indicate a power is being used. Thief being more Active than Prince might also explain why Thief steal-beams are smaller externally than Prince destruction-beams. As far as we've seen, Caliborn's Lord powers are entirely internalized, with no external manifestations whatsoever. On the flip side, the largest noticeable Class powers are Calliope's black hole, Jake's hope field, and John's Windy Thing (particularly when it engulfs the entirety of LOWAS during his quest, though that might have been using the pipe organ as an amplifier), all of which come from highly Passive classes. Really? I feel like a lot of the Thief stuff is externally-oriented. Vriska's "luck" isn't just a thing within herself--we see it specifically affect events external to her person, fixing the results of dice and coins, forcing bad events to happen to her enemies--and she can only have the luck she has by taking it away from external sources, not because she provides it herself. The Condesce's life-extending powers could apply to the life present in other beings, but she couldn't create life on her own--only manipulate it when it existed outside her. Further, when really do we see Jade (or Feferi, or Damara for that matter) doing anything with their aspects when it's not dire circumstances? Spending only a couple of minutes saving her whole session and skedaddling before it gets erased from existence seems pretty dire--and in basically every other circumstance, the only powers she displays are self-teleportation and...smell, I guess? I can't really think of any other specific powers she uses. And Fef's only power use in the whole comic was the God Tier ghost of her, healing WV before he bled to death, which seems pretty dire too (albeit less than Jade's situation).
|
|
|
Post by heirloomairloom on May 8, 2016 12:58:49 GMT
I say that Witches are -6, as it's supposed to be "highly" active, but the next most active space not taken by Lord or Prince is -4, and how can the fourth out of seven be considered "highly" active? It's in the dead center of the scale, so you have to start assuming odd things about the classes' distribution on the scale to justify it being above average.
I use "manipulate" as their verb, on the strength of this foreshadowing: "I borrowed this technology from my grandmother who had quite the way with manipulating space. Legend tells she was something of a witch with the stuff!"
|
|
|
Post by ashercrane on May 8, 2016 15:20:15 GMT
I say that Witches are -6, as it's supposed to be "highly" active, but the next most active space not taken by Lord or Prince is -4, and how can the fourth out of seven be considered "highly" active? It's in the dead center of the scale, so you have to start assuming odd things about the classes' distribution on the scale to justify it being above average. I use "manipulate" as their verb, on the strength of this foreshadowing: "I borrowed this technology from my grandmother who had quite the way with manipulating space. Legend tells she was something of a witch with the stuff!" But then... manipulate is really kind of vague. I mean, it really basically means they can do whatever the heck they want with it as long as it's not destroyed or created, in which case, why would you actually need most other classes?
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 9, 2016 0:36:57 GMT
I tend to put Witches at -6 and Thieves at -4. Although I tend not to worry about it too much, I always felt that the exact ordinal arrangement of classes was one of the lest significant parts of the Classpect system.
As for why I choose these placings: It can certainly be said that the Thieves uphold the 'For self' clause of the Active Paradigm much more so than the Witches, but of course there's much more to being Active than just being a prick. On the Exploitative side, I feel like the Witches pull well ahead. Vriska's power seems somewhat passive(in the dictionary sense). We never see her having to consciously exert or will the Luck to fall in her favour, it just seems to happen as a natural effect. In an actual video game of some kind, it seems comparable to just having a passive perk that grants you a higher chance to land a critical hit, rather than some activatable, skill based ability. The Witches on the other hand, are very purposeful with their powers. Space doesn't just bend around Jade, Jade grabs Space by the family jewels and twists it herself. The same seems to go for Feferi and Damara to various extents. When Vriska gets lucky, she isn't really doing anything impossible. Her luck is extremely unlikely, but the laws of physics themselves don't have to be rewritten or suspended to make her powers work. But when Jade gets her hands on things, she's seemingly able to permanently alter the basic rules of physics that ought to be inviolable. She shrinks down planets to a fraction of their size, yet no issues about gravity or matter compression seem to arise. Similarly for Feferi, we're told several times that the Ghosts of the Dream Bubbles should not be, that Death should in fact be the final chapter, but she went and persuaded eldritch outer gods to suspend that rule. This sort of behaviour, of outright messing with otherwise hard rules/laws males the Witches highly exploitative to me, enough to put them ahead of the Thieves.
|
|
|
Post by amiabletemplar on May 10, 2016 13:12:39 GMT
I tend to put Witches at -6 and Thieves at -4. Although I tend not to worry about it too much, I always felt that the exact ordinal arrangement of classes was one of the lest significant parts of the Classpect system. Though it does contain one of the few bits where we actually CAN say "no, those classes can't be paired" or "no, that theory can't work." Because paired classes need "significant disparity." So if someone thinks (say) Seer is +2, then whatever class it's paired with must be pretty highly active, I wouldn't really accept anything smaller than -3 myself and probably more like -4. I don't deny that it can be a rather tedious topic to discuss, but it's very useful. In fact, most of our solid facts about classes, that aren't specifically pairing-related, have something to do with the ordinal scale. All well-argued, and I agree with you. Don't really have anything to say beyond that!
|
|
loading
Raise of the Conductor's Baton
Posts: 435
|
Post by loading on May 10, 2016 13:24:04 GMT
May I point out that Vriska actively stole luck against the chess piece on the meteor? Still, I don't think that a single counterpoint disproves that.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 11, 2016 4:52:26 GMT
May I point out that Vriska actively stole luck against the chess piece on the meteor? Still, I don't think that a single counterpoint disproves that. We can't say for sure that she actually did a deliberate act right there and then. It could be that the flashing words are just there to inform the reader about what's happening.
|
|
|
Post by heirloomairloom on May 11, 2016 12:02:03 GMT
I say that Witches are -6, as it's supposed to be "highly" active, but the next most active space not taken by Lord or Prince is -4, and how can the fourth out of seven be considered "highly" active? It's in the dead center of the scale, so you have to start assuming odd things about the classes' distribution on the scale to justify it being above average. I use "manipulate" as their verb, on the strength of this foreshadowing: "I borrowed this technology from my grandmother who had quite the way with manipulating space. Legend tells she was something of a witch with the stuff!" But then... manipulate is really kind of vague. I mean, it really basically means they can do whatever the heck they want with it as long as it's not destroyed or created, in which case, why would you actually need most other classes? It could, but you can infer the limits of what counts as manipulation by looking at the other verbs. So, for example, the fact that "steal" is a verb means that a sample of an Aspect's location or ownership aren't normally the things being manipulated. (Jade is an outlier here. She can manipulate an object's location by manipulating Space, because location falls under Space.) It obviously doesn't overlap with understanding either, which leaves only the Knight/Page verb as possibly having its niche being infringed upon by manipulate. But, like with steal, there are plenty of verbs that have conceptual space of their own separate from manipulation. May I point out that Vriska actively stole luck against the chess piece on the meteor? Still, I don't think that a single counterpoint disproves that. We can't say for sure that she actually did a deliberate act right there and then. It could be that the flashing words are just there to inform the reader about what's happening. Though I broadly agree with the original point about Witches being more active than Thieves, we get plenty of confirmation that Vriska controls her powers. p=005671 "The Thief used her abilities to steal the fortune of her opponent, and forced the flip to yield what she regarded as the most favorable outcome." p=005674 "This was to be seen as an implicit dare to the Thief to allow the flip to fall fairly..." The dare doesn't work if Vriska is incapable of choosing when she does and doesn't steal, as there's no way for her to allow the coin to fall fairly otherwise. Further, in Collide, Vriska sits still to strike a pose while a Light symbol appears around her eye during her fight with Hussie, after which a memory of Maplehoof falls on him. This was presumably to show her drawing on her store of stolen luck, and she has no reason to stop fighting if the ability activates itself without her input.
|
|
|
Post by amiabletemplar on May 11, 2016 17:29:02 GMT
It could, but you can infer the limits of what counts as manipulation by looking at the other verbs. So, for example, the fact that "steal" is a verb means that a sample of an Aspect's location or ownership aren't normally the things being manipulated. (Jade is an outlier here. She can manipulate an object's location by manipulating Space, because location falls under Space.) It obviously doesn't overlap with understanding either, which leaves only the Knight/Page verb as possibly having its niche being infringed upon by manipulate. But, like with steal, there are plenty of verbs that have conceptual space of their own separate from manipulation. Color me unconvinced. Verbs that can do everything, but JUST SO HAPPEN to be limited by the game so they can't step on anyone else's toes, strike me as still bad verbs. You shouldn't need to carefully prune obviously over-general verbs until they no longer make a particular class completely overpowered, nor should you need to add extremely metaphorical/reaching definitions of a verb until it no longer makes a particular class completely useless. The definition of "manipulate," excluding the relatively obscure medical definition, is: 1. to manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner: to manipulate people's feelings.2. to handle, manage, or use, especially with skill, in some process of treatment or performance: to manipulate a large tractor.3. to adapt or change (accounts, figures, etc.) to suit one's purpose or advantage. By definition, stealing something is managing influencing it skillfully--influencing ownership, influencing property. There literally isn't an action you cannot define as either manipulating a situation or manipulating one's aspect to produce a particular situation. Even "destruction," since clearly it requires skill for a Prince to use his powers effectively (Eridan only became "good" at destroying with Hope once he had a focus for his talents, for example). So, no, I don't accept the argument that you can just prune away all the other class definitions. Even if it doesn't end up stepping on any particular class's toes, it's still "I can do everything, except the narrow selection of things I'm arbitrarily not allowed to do." And it certainly doesn't actually tell us anything about the character's "narrative role" or the like, since manipulating situations, or manipulating one's aspect, is what everyone does--just with specific goals, instead of an open-ended "everything but what other people do" goal.
|
|
|
Post by Neptz on May 11, 2016 17:37:47 GMT
I kinda hope a classpect document/book comes out so this thread will burst with activity. I like classpect
|
|
|
Post by heirloomairloom on May 11, 2016 23:24:44 GMT
Color me unconvinced. Verbs that can do everything, but JUST SO HAPPEN to be limited by the game so they can't step on anyone else's toes, strike me as still bad verbs. You shouldn't need to carefully prune obviously over-general verbs until they no longer make a particular class completely overpowered, nor should you need to add extremely metaphorical/reaching definitions of a verb until it no longer makes a particular class completely useless. The definition of "manipulate," excluding the relatively obscure medical definition, is: 1. to manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner: to manipulate people's feelings.2. to handle, manage, or use, especially with skill, in some process of treatment or performance: to manipulate a large tractor.3. to adapt or change (accounts, figures, etc.) to suit one's purpose or advantage. By definition, stealing something is managing influencing it skillfully--influencing ownership, influencing property. There literally isn't an action you cannot define as either manipulating a situation or manipulating one's aspect to produce a particular situation. Even "destruction," since clearly it requires skill for a Prince to use his powers effectively (Eridan only became "good" at destroying with Hope once he had a focus for his talents, for example). So, no, I don't accept the argument that you can just prune away all the other class definitions. Even if it doesn't end up stepping on any particular class's toes, it's still "I can do everything, except the narrow selection of things I'm arbitrarily not allowed to do." And it certainly doesn't actually tell us anything about the character's "narrative role" or the like, since manipulating situations, or manipulating one's aspect, is what everyone does--just with specific goals, instead of an open-ended "everything but what other people do" goal. Yeah, I should have clarified. Obviously the first two definitions are just more synonyms of use/exploit that aren't valid as class verbs. I meant only the third, putting Witches in charge of changing/modifying/adjusting features of instances of their Aspect that already exist (contrasted with Princes who can break apart or remove examples of their Aspect entirely or Maids who can create them ex nihilo.) I think that gives them roughly the same amount of latitude as Thieves, who move their Aspect around without changing it. Also, they must be restricted to only manipulating their Aspect, instead of manipulating with it, as that would also make them generic to the point of covering everything. That ability can safely go to the other Manipulators, Sylphs, because with them it is heavily constrained by their focus on healing.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 12, 2016 2:28:34 GMT
Also, they must be restricted to only manipulating their Aspect, instead of manipulating with it, as that would also make them generic to the point of covering everything. That ability can safely go to the other Manipulators, Sylphs, because with them it is heavily constrained by their focus on healing. So is your Sylph "One who uses Aspect to Manipulate, but arbitrarily restricted to Healing"? Isn't that needlessly complicated? Would it not just be simpler to describe them as "One who heals" or some variation upon that theme? Not to mention that it seems like a bit of a stretch to pair them with the Witch this way where you say the Witch 'Manipulates' for a certain meaning of that word, and the Sylph is a Healer, which is another kind of Manipulation. By this logic we could pair anything with anything.
|
|
thecrystalship
Mr. Snoozyprince Mcsleepypants
sushi guro
Posts: 174
Pronouns: she/her/hers
|
Post by thecrystalship on May 12, 2016 3:11:57 GMT
These days I tend to just go with the "obvious" pairings again (Seer/Mage, Page/Knight, Heir/Maid, Sylph/Witch), but since it would be a bit awkward for healers to be female-exclusive and there are a few other reasons why Heirs seem like healers to me, I would also go with Heir/Sylph and Maid/Witch. Either of those configurations seem right to me.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 12, 2016 3:29:04 GMT
These days I tend to just go with the "obvious" pairings again (Seer/Mage, Page/Knight, Heir/Maid, Sylph/Witch), but since it would be a bit awkward for healers to be female-exclusive and there are a few other reasons why Heirs seem like healers to me, I would also go with Heir/Sylph and Maid/Witch. Either of those configurations seem right to me. Considering that the Destroyers are exclusively male, not only do I think that it's possible for the healers/creators to be female exclusive, I also feel that it has a tinge of appropriateness, if only for the sake of pattern. (Note that I'm not saying that it's ideal or 'proper' for healers to be female in general, just that the Classpect System has set a precedent for correlation between role and gender) Also, I've never seen Maid/Heir as an "obvious" pair. In fact I can only think of one other person who had it, and they had actually had -Heir/+Maid as "One who is made of Aspect". Maid/Sylph and Witch/Heir are far more common. (I'm laying out my pairs as Active/Passive, in case it wasn't obvious)
|
|
|
Post by heirloomairloom on May 12, 2016 12:00:50 GMT
Also, they must be restricted to only manipulating their Aspect, instead of manipulating with it, as that would also make them generic to the point of covering everything. That ability can safely go to the other Manipulators, Sylphs, because with them it is heavily constrained by their focus on healing. So is your Sylph "One who uses Aspect to Manipulate, but arbitrarily restricted to Healing"? Isn't that needlessly complicated? Would it not just be simpler to describe them as "One who heals" or some variation upon that theme? Not to mention that it seems like a bit of a stretch to pair them with the Witch this way where you say the Witch 'Manipulates' for a certain meaning of that word, and the Sylph is a Healer, which is another kind of Manipulation. By this logic we could pair anything with anything. It isn't very elegant, I agree. However, we can't just assign each class whatever arbitrary definition best fits it, because the classpect system is structured. If Sylph's verb is heal, then some other class must share it, and there are no good candidates. The closest one is Heir, which doesn't really work and which has been near-universally rejected by the thread when it's come up in the past. Witches, Seers, Maids, Knights, and Pages have all done things blatantly unrelated to healing. That leaves only Mages, and only because we see so little of them that we can't conclusively say there's any definition that couldn't apply to them. I guess Sollux was healed by undeath once (when the creation of Erisolsprite fixed his eyes). But I'm hesitant to define a class as "one who is healed by Aspect," as all of the other classes are defined by things they do, or at least allow, so it's odd to have one designated for people based solely on what happens to them. (Mage/Slyph also directly implies Witch/Maid and either Knight/Seer and Page/Heir or Page/Seer and Knight/Heir, so isn't viable for anyone who isn't willing to endorse those exact pairs.) These days I tend to just go with the "obvious" pairings again (Seer/Mage, Page/Knight, Heir/Maid, Sylph/Witch), but since it would be a bit awkward for healers to be female-exclusive and there are a few other reasons why Heirs seem like healers to me, I would also go with Heir/Sylph and Maid/Witch. Either of those configurations seem right to me. The fact that the classpect system is sexist is brought up in the comic itself. Porrim critiqued Sgrub for it, and, given that the Beforus trolls are an extended contemporary internet metaphor, the real awkward thing would be to introduce a feminist character claiming a video game is sexist only for it to turn out she's wrong.
|
|
|
Post by alleywaycreeper on May 12, 2016 14:55:59 GMT
However, we can't just assign each class whatever arbitrary definition best fits it, because the classpect system is structured. If Sylph's verb is heal, then some other class must share it, and there are no good candidates. The closest one is Heir, which doesn't really work and which has been near-universally rejected by the thread when it's come up in the past. So because the most logical verb for Sylph to have is heal, and there doesn't appear to you to be any other class that could share that verb, you want to use one that could be applied to basically every classpect? I'm honestly just making sure I've got that right.
|
|
thecrystalship
Mr. Snoozyprince Mcsleepypants
sushi guro
Posts: 174
Pronouns: she/her/hers
|
Post by thecrystalship on May 12, 2016 19:00:55 GMT
Considering that the Destroyers are exclusively male, not only do I think that it's possible for the healers/creators to be female exclusive, I also feel that it has a tinge of appropriateness, if only for the sake of pattern. (Note that I'm not saying that it's ideal or 'proper' for healers to be female in general, just that the Classpect System has set a precedent for correlation between role and gender) Also, I've never seen Maid/Heir as an "obvious" pair. In fact I can only think of one other person who had it, and they had actually had -Heir/+Maid as "One who is made of Aspect". Maid/Sylph and Witch/Heir are far more common. (I'm laying out my pairs as Active/Passive, in case it wasn't obvious) The fact that the classpect system is sexist is brought up in the comic itself. Porrim critiqued Sgrub for it, and, given that the Beforus trolls are an extended contemporary internet metaphor, the real awkward thing would be to introduce a feminist character claiming a video game is sexist only for it to turn out she's wrong. This is true, but also remember that in the Mother series of games, which Homestuck obviously takes a lot of inspiration from, the male protagonist is always the primary healer of the party. So even when it comes to JRPGs, the genre from which many of these gendered tropes are born, it's by no means a hard and fast rule.
|
|
loading
Raise of the Conductor's Baton
Posts: 435
|
Post by loading on May 12, 2016 19:02:44 GMT
To be fair, "one who is healed through" is a pretty weird class description.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 12, 2016 20:22:35 GMT
It isn't very elegant, I agree. However, we can't just assign each class whatever arbitrary definition best fits it, because the classpect system is structured. If Sylph's verb is heal, then some other class must share it, and there are no good candidates. The closest one is Heir, which doesn't really work and which has been near-universally rejected by the thread when it's come up in the past. Witches, Seers, Maids, Knights, and Pages have all done things blatantly unrelated to healing. That leaves only Mages, and only because we see so little of them that we can't conclusively say there's any definition that couldn't apply to them. I guess Sollux was healed by undeath once (when the creation of Erisolsprite fixed his eyes). But I'm hesitant to define a class as "one who is healed by Aspect," as all of the other classes are defined by things they do, or at least allow, so it's odd to have one designated for people based solely on what happens to them. What is wrong with the Maid? In Jane's case, obviously one could speculate that it's just Life that giver her healing, but it could also be said that Aradia spent the entire session healing/fixing the timeline, from all the mistakes her comrades made. Besides that, some make the argument that 'Healing' is a Passive form of Creation i.e. reactionary Creation that attempts to maintain the status quo of things existing. In that case the Maid much more better fits as a Creator if you're not satisfied with them as a Healer.
|
|
|
Post by ashercrane on May 12, 2016 21:00:43 GMT
It isn't very elegant, I agree. However, we can't just assign each class whatever arbitrary definition best fits it, because the classpect system is structured. If Sylph's verb is heal, then some other class must share it, and there are no good candidates. The closest one is Heir, which doesn't really work and which has been near-universally rejected by the thread when it's come up in the past. Witches, Seers, Maids, Knights, and Pages have all done things blatantly unrelated to healing. That leaves only Mages, and only because we see so little of them that we can't conclusively say there's any definition that couldn't apply to them. I guess Sollux was healed by undeath once (when the creation of Erisolsprite fixed his eyes). But I'm hesitant to define a class as "one who is healed by Aspect," as all of the other classes are defined by things they do, or at least allow, so it's odd to have one designated for people based solely on what happens to them. What is wrong with the Maid? In Jane's case, obviously one could speculate that it's just Life that giver her healing, but it could also be said that Aradia spent the entire session healing/fixing the timeline, from all the mistakes her comrades made. Besides that, some make the argument that 'Healing' is a Passive form of Creation i.e. reactionary Creation that attempts to maintain the status quo of things existing. In that case the Maid much more better fits as a Creator if you're not satisfied with them as a Healer. On the other hand, isn't that more or less the role of Time players in general, to fix places where the timline is messed up ? Dave went back to fix John's death, does thay make him a healer? I feel like it's probably closet to Aradia's role being a bit more nebulous, and so harder to figure out, so it's easy to just throw it into where we have it.
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 12, 2016 21:03:22 GMT
What is wrong with the Maid? In Jane's case, obviously one could speculate that it's just Life that giver her healing, but it could also be said that Aradia spent the entire session healing/fixing the timeline, from all the mistakes her comrades made. Besides that, some make the argument that 'Healing' is a Passive form of Creation i.e. reactionary Creation that attempts to maintain the status quo of things existing. In that case the Maid much more better fits as a Creator if you're not satisfied with them as a Healer. On the other hand, isn't that more or less the role of Time players in general, to fix places where the timline is messed up ? Dave went back to fix John's death, does thay make him a healer? I feel like it's probably closet to Aradia's role being a bit more nebulous, and so harder to figure out, so it's easy to just throw it into where we have it. Dave did that once, and didn't like the way that it left extra Dave's around. Since then he dedicated his efforts to a more preventative approach where he exploited Time Travel to do things right the first time, rather than fixing what had broken, so I'd say his role with respect to the Timeline is fairly distinct from Aradia's.
|
|
|
Post by heirloomairloom on May 12, 2016 23:02:56 GMT
So because the most logical verb for Sylph to have is heal, and there doesn't appear to you to be any other class that could share that verb, you want to use one that could be applied to basically every classpect? I'm honestly just making sure I've got that right. Technically, the two aren't related. I assigned Manipulate to Witch, so Sylph must share it because they are paired. I want to use a verb "that could be applied to every classpect" because the comic itself used it as part of a hint about Jade being a Witch, in relation to something (the growing/shrinking rays she made) that was later repeated by her class powers. I also provided a defense of why changing the qualities of examples of your Aspect does not significantly overlap with destroy/stealing/understanding/making your Aspect. What is wrong with the Maid? In Jane's case, obviously one could speculate that it's just Life that giver her healing, but it could also be said that Aradia spent the entire session healing/fixing the timeline, from all the mistakes her comrades made. Besides that, some make the argument that 'Healing' is a Passive form of Creation i.e. reactionary Creation that attempts to maintain the status quo of things existing. In that case the Maid much more better fits as a Creator if you're not satisfied with them as a Healer. Aradia's power to freeze people in time is unrelated to healing. Jane has the opposite problem. While she has to power to resurrect people, she never heals anyone or anything except through her powers, nor could she have replaced any of her power usages with more mundane means. Though, to be fair, Life needs to have some kind of non-obvious features for her to have done anything with it, and I'm sure that there's something we could choose to add to it that she "healed" through kicking off Trickster mode. But if Maid/Sylph are a pair of Healers, then what is the disctinction between them? It can't be self vs. others centered, because Aradia and Jane both heal for the good of others. It also can't be using their Aspect to heal vs. allowing their Aspect to heal, because Kanaya takes an active hand in repairing her species's reproductive cycle. Why is Aranea a Sylph instead of a Maid, or Jane a Maid instead of a Sylph? Changing to "create" fixes some of this, but it undermines your original objection. How is "one who creates, except they're only capable of creating for the purpose of healing because that returns things to the status quo" any less arbitrary than "one who manipulates, but is incabale of manipulating except for the purpose of healing, because that returns things to the status quo"?
|
|
|
Post by obsidalicious on May 12, 2016 23:31:42 GMT
Technically, the two aren't related. I assigned Manipulate to Witch, so Sylph must share it because they are paired. I want to use a verb "that could be applied to every classpect" because the comic itself used it as part of a hint about Jade being a Witch, in relation to something (the growing/shrinking rays she made) that was later repeated by her class powers. I also provided a defense of why changing the qualities of examples of your Aspect does not significantly overlap with destroy/stealing/understanding/making your Aspect. So wait, are you pairing Witch and Sylph on a whim and then looking for ways that they could actually function as a pair? That seems backwards. I'm fairly sure we ought to be looking at each class's individual behaviours, then pairing them together based on the similarities of those behaviours, not the other way around. Aradia's timestop fits well with Creating Time, as does her other goal of delaying Bec Noir to let the Meteor get ahead. In Jane's case, what's wrong with using powers? Why does that nullify it as evidence? Besides that, it could be argued that her baking skills provide a mundane healing through nourishment. We can describe Healing as Passive Creation through the process of Allowing. I.e. Allowing things to be Created by themselves instead of Creating it by hand yourself. E.g. if we apply a bandage to a cut etc., we are not Creating new skin, but we are Allowing the body to Create its own new skin as it heals. It might be helpful to consider the term "Nurture", which better encapsulates the idea of Allowing Creation, while also retaining a clear link to Healing.
|
|