Why Class pairings will never make sense
Hello everyone, today I'll be talking about Class pairings and why, in my opinion, there is no satisfying answer to the question "What Class is X Class paired with?"
Part 1: Explanation
To begin, Classes are stated to be paired in groups of 2, with 1 of said Classes being Active and the other being Passive. Being told this, most people naturally tried to figure out which Classes are paired with which, myself included. In my previous post, Beginner's Guide 2, I did my best to pair these Classes with each other based on my own analyses of canon and my own interpretation. That, however, is the problem: Interpretation.
Part 2: What we don't know
Despite the community's best efforts to analyze and interpret the 14 Classes, we still are told very, very little in explicit detail. Allow me quantify it. There are 3 main elements of each Class that we can know about. These 3 are:
Function (What they do to and with their Aspect)
Alignment (Active or Passive)
Pairing (Which Active or Passive counterpart their Class is paired with)
Based on what exactly we're explicitly told in canon, the following is what we can say for sure:
Classes of which we know all 3 of these elements: Thief (-) and Rogue (+) - Steal Prince (-) and Bard (+) - Destroy Total: 4
Classes of which we know only 2 of these elements: Lord (-) and Muse (+) Seer (+) - Know Total: 3
Classes of which we know only 1 of these elements: Witch (-) Heir (+) Total: 2
Classes of which we know none of these elements: Maid Sylph Mage Knight Page Total: 5
Out of 14 Classes, there are only 4 Classes which we know the Functions, Alignments and Pairings of. Just to visualize it better, here's a pie chart:
Additionally, you may notice that 5 of the Classes are completely unknown. We're given hints, sure, but we are never told in explicit detail what any of their Functions are, what their Alignments are, or how they are Paired with other Classes. You'll also notice that out of the remaining 9 partially unconfirmed Classes, only 1 of them has a known Function, that being Seer. All in all, this really goes to show how little we're actually told and how much we take for granted the generally accepted Functions, Alignments and Pairings of each Class.
Part 3: Interpretation
As I said, we largely take what's generally accepted about the Classes for granted. I personally came to the same conclusion most people believe through my own analysis, but I'd be lying if I said there was absolutely no bias there. It's likely that I leaned more towards certain Pairings and Alignments just because they're what most people believe. The point here is that many people assume that the Classes are Paired in a certain way, without actually looking into it themselves. I'm certainly guilty of doing this and it often leads to people interpreting Classes in very reductive ways. For example, many people see the Function of Bard being "One who allows destruction of their Aspect or invites destruction through their Aspect" and then apply that definition to all Passive Classes. The reason this is reductive is that most people will do this by taking the Function of the Class's Active counterpart and apply it to the Passive counterpart. For example, some people define Maid's Function as "One who creates their Aspect or creates through their Aspect" and then pair it with Sylph, defining Sylph's Function as "One who allows creation of their Aspect or invites creation through their Aspect". By analyzing canon, we can clearly see differences between Classes we assume to be paired. Trying to force the Active/Passive counterparts to have the exact same Function, only performed slightly differently, is incredibly reductive and is often in direct contradiction to canon examples. Let's look at the Sylph Class for a second. We don't know any of the 3 elements of Sylph. It's Function is unknown, it's Alignment is unknown and it's Pairing is unknown. The generally accepted Function of a Sylph is "One who heals their Aspect or heals through their Aspect" and is often paired as the Passive counterpart to Maid. This is the conclusion I came to in my previous post, but there's a case to be made that this isn't correct. Firstly, we're taking the idea of Sylphs 'healing' from one single source. The source in question, Aranea Serket, is a Sylph herself and is a Light player, therefore it's a fair assumption to make that she knows what she's talking about. However, she is not an oracle. There are certainly things she doesn't know and it's preferable to not 100% trust a single source on matters like this. Feferi Peixes, the Witch of Life, did several things that seemed much more indicative of healing rather than manipulation, such as healing wounds. This lends credence to the idea that Sylph might be the Passive counterpart to Witch and have a Function more closely related to manipulation. This is often backed up by Kanaya Maryam, the Sylph of Space describing Sylph as being "Like a Witch, but more magical". However, this isn't nearly as conclusive as it seems on the surface. First off, what on earth does being "magical" mean? Does it mean anything? Second, Kanaya is talking to Jade Harley, the Witch of Space in this page. Her reason for linking Sylph to Witch isn't necessarily that they're similar or paired, but that she's trying to relate her role as a Space player to Jade, who is much less familiar with the game. She only brings up Witch because Jade is one. Third, she later refers to her description of Sylph as facetious.
Facetious
adjective
1. Treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant. "a facetious remark"
This would imply that she was joking when using the word "magical" and throws any comparison she draws in her earlier conversation with Jade into question. This doesn't stop many people from quoting Kanaya in their analyses and using it to justify pairing Witch and Sylph. Taking a canon quote out of context to justify your pairing is a bad look and significantly reduces the odds that anybody is going to take your interpretation seriously. Regardless, there is still a case to be made for Witch and Sylph being paired. It would fit with canon examples and I see no reason that it can't possibly be true, with maybe one exception. That being, it would throw the other Class pairings into question. If we keep using the generally accepted pairings, Maid would then be the Active counterpart to Heir. Some people roll with this idea, other people have even more unusual pairings and often have plenty of good ideas to justify them. The through-line here is that all of this is up to interpretation. Some people see Sylph as the Passive counterpart to Maid. Some see it as the counterpart to Witch. Other still see it as the counterpart to Mage. Every single person is going to interpret canon differently simply because everything is so vague.
Part 4: Meaningless
Pairing Classes is an idea that makes sense. We're explicitly told that Classes are, in fact, paired up, and most are left up to interpretation. The problem is that things were simply left up in the air far too much. We can all interpret Classes and their elements however we like, but at the end of the day, there's no way we can all agree on how exactly each Class works and we're unlikely to get any meaningful elaboration from Andrew Hussie. This is the core reason why Class pairings will never make sense. We simply don't know enough to make a good call. We can try, but at the end of the day, does it really matter? Sure, the Alignments and Functions matter a lot, but does the Pairing really make much of a difference? All it really does is enforce the Alignments of Classes within each pair; and even then, it doesn't solve the problem. Maid and Sylph are often paired, but what are their Alignments? Most people say that Maid is Active and Sylph is Passive, but it could just as easily be the other way around. At the end of the day, my point is this: Pairings are meaningless. I mean it. We worry so much about the exact Pairing of all the Classes, but what does it change? Does Sylph being paired with Witch change the way you view Sylph or it's Function? It shouldn't. Your interpretation of Sylph's Function should be the reason why you think it pairs with Witch, not the other way around.
Part 5: Conclusion
Bottom line: Don't worry so much about Class Pairings, it really doesn't matter in the end. Thanks for reading. -Crowe