Talk:Crusader class series

Memo to the next person who stops by and cares: First class renamed "Crusader." --Hinoa 00:10, 5 December 2010 (CST)

This is a difficult one... Far as I can tell from how far I've played into Dark Dawn (gotten the ship FYI), certain categories of Golden Sundom like characters and equipment are carried over and preserved cleanly enough that existing pages on these can be updated with Dark Dawn information and the directory templates on their pages would only need an additional Dark Dawn segment within them. Some other pages, like Psynergy series, can work with containing both GBA and DS information in the same pages, but it would be necessary for the Psynergy directly templates to be divided into full GBA and DS collections, whether as separate segments in the same template or as actual separate templates (so that lots of TLA-only Trainer's Whip Psynergy would not clutter people looking for Dark Dawn-centric content, for example). And monster lines are different enough between platforms (example: DD Slimes are colored like GBA Oozes and DD Oozes are colored like GBA Slime Beasts) that in their case, all coverage on the Dark Dawn monsters should be on their own separate pages with (Dark Dawn) added to the title, all existing monster line pages should probably be moved from [page title] to [page title] (GBA), and these two independent sets of pages are connected by their own independent directory templates.

I don't know how much classes are changed in both naming and content terms, but should the existing class series pages be marked with (GBA) while new ones with (Dark Dawn) be created, at least at first? After all, there seems to be several series altered in both gameplay and name terms, several series added, and several series removed. Erik the Appreciator 01:40, 5 December 2010 (CST)

A cursory glance shows that it hasn't changed much - the only change I saw was this one, at least in the multielemental ones. The item-based classes are gone outright, though. I'll make sure to take another look through, especially with classes containing Frost.

On the other hand, this should be done for the Dark Dawn Squire, Guard, Wind Seer, and Water Seer classes, because those are fairly different from their counterparts in the first 2 games. Except maybe Squire; I'll have another look. --Hinoa 01:49, 5 December 2010 (CST)

Hmm, I figure that it should either be all one or the other to avoid any chance of contorted awkwardness. Erik the Appreciator 01:56, 5 December 2010 (CST)

Apart from one class (Brute), the Psynergies remain the same in every multielemental class. The Brute's Blast series got replaced by the Fireball series (we'll need a new page for that, I think). What would be the point? --Hinoa 02:16, 5 December 2010 (CST)

In that case I'll leave it to you to fill up and move the whole class series section of the wiki as you see fit. Erik the Appreciator 02:24, 5 December 2010 (CST)

Regarding the above: Well, shit. I found a new class. This, I think, means we may need to separate the classes more, possibly into two templates. The problem with this, however, is that, um, the classes from the previous games appear as well, with the minor modifications I've already mentioned. Does this mean we have to do what we did with the Character template (subheadings of GBA and DS)? --Hinoa 15:15, 5 December 2010 (CST)

Sure, when I was writing the above I figured that whether pages on class series themselves stay stay uniform and have GBA and DD information together in them or not, there would end up being separated sections covering the GBA and Dark Dawn perspectives individually, whether within the same Class series template or as two separate Class series templates. Unlike with the character template covering both GBA and DD, where I divided the names between who is introduced as important in GBA from who is introduced as important in DD (so that no names are repeated), I'd think that the separate sections/templates for the class series should have the complete collections from both perspectives even though many names would be repeated this way. Part of why I think this is that we may end up moving Swordsman (Venus) class series to Crusader class series, and the Dark Dawn-centric class series template would point to it with that exact name, but the GBA template/section of the template pointing to the same page will still have the class series' name be outwardly Swordsman (Venus) class series, just so that the existing GBA perspective is retained for the audience in case they need it.

Umm... I'm hoping any of this answered your question. XD Erik the Appreciator 15:32, 5 December 2010 (CST)

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you two on this one. First of all, I think the main reason they changed the class name from "Swordsman" to "Crusader" is to avoid confusing the two Swordsman classes. In fact, I'm surprised they didn't give more classes the same treatment! Generally speaking, I think that we should be using the most up-to-date names, while also mentioning that the name has been changed. As for the "new versions" of certain classes, I've already discussed that on the "new Brute" talk page. The only differences between the old and new versions of these classes are a single Psynergy series each; remaining Psynergies and all stat boosts remain the same. Not enough of a difference to warrant separate pages. Third, we currently have two separate class templates. However, aside from "default" classes, there are only a few new classes in DD and only a few old classes that don't return (the item-dependant ones). Again, to me, this isn't enough to justify separate templates (other things, like Djinn and equipment, have lots of old material missing from DD). I can understand adding separate sections to the template for things like "Mono-elemental (GBA)" and "Mono-elemental (DD)", and maybe a section for character-specific classes like Curse Mage and Scrapper, but beyond that the class system is just too stable. Besides, we already have categories for GBA classes and DD classes. HungryPaperweight 18:23, 25 January 2011 (CST)

Class Name

I'm going to propose that we rename this page to Crusader class series, to reflect the rename. My proposal is to handle it similarly to the Fireball page: update to Dark Dawn, and mention the rename, but use the Swordsman class when discussing the class's benefits in GS and TLA. For the moment, however, I've just edited the page to mention the rename. Any objections? --Sippyjuice 18:48, 28 February 2012 (CST)

Well, if you read the paragraph above, you'll already know my opinion. For those of you who don't want to wade through that wall of text: I'm with Sippy on this one. The World's Hungriest Paperweight 23:18, 28 February 2012 (CST)

Agreed. It's so much more cumbersome this way when we could be simplifying things. Although I think the real reason for the change was because the initial class name sounds odd with a female character. TheOthin 16:11, 29 February 2012 (CST)

Haven't seen any objections, so I'll go ahead and move and edit. --Sippyjuice 16:35, 1 March 2012 (CST)