Forum:Classifying titanic things

Forums: Village pump → Classifying titanic things
(This topic is archived. Please do not edit this page!)

A standing and open question that has been floating around with no real anwser is 'how do we at Wowpedia classify various titanic things'? This bugs me. At Wowpedia, or any wiki, page need names for the content to go under, but sometimes the name-content relationship gets messed up a bit. I wish to fix this.

• The "Titanmale" model includes entities such Loken, Jotun (which according to his skin name and looks, is made of stone), and (to a lesser extent) Aman.

• The "Titanfemale" model includes entities such as Ironaya and Myzrael.

• The "Stonekeeper" model includes entities such as Archaedas and Creteus.

• Algalon the Observer's "race" is unknown. Currently, he is unique, so this is a non-issue.

• A model called "Uldumwatcher" includes three actual models (differentiated by hat/crown) that includes Anraphet and Akma'hat.

• The four Uldum guys/watchers each have a unique model.

• Freya, Hodir, and Thorim each have a unique model. Mimiron is a mechagnome, but comparable in power to Freya, Hodir, and Thorim.

• The Anubisaths (and the Horusath(s)) are mentioned here for completeness. Their models are based off some of the above, and based on their feet and revelations about the tol'vir, they may actually be a retooled version of one of the above.

Now, the male and female "titan" models may or may not be actual titans, even lesser ones. If not, then what are they? The "Stonekeeper" model seems to represent both stone keepers and stone watchers (artificial non-titan servants of the titans). The "titan" models may be stone keepers and watchers as well. Whatever is decided for the "titanmale" model should be applied to Freya, Hodir, Thorim, and (possibly) Mimiron due to their similarities and their positions within their command structure. I would assume that this would apply to the female version of the "titan" model as well, but they seem to be consistently weaker. The four 'watchers' from Uldum are similar, and yet specifically said to be constructs.

In short: Have we seen an actual 'titan' yet? If so, which of the above are titans? Are titans 'constructed' rather than 'born'? Are "watcher" and "keeper" short for "stone watcher/keeper," or can titans have that title?

Does anyone have any insight? Watcher (titanic) is currently a vague catch-all that is largely uncited anyway. (See also: Talk:Titan)--SWM2448 05:26, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's been no true clear indication or definition as to what Titans are as a race/species. It has been said that not all Titans are as powerful as the Pantheon, so the Titans of legend (Aman'thul, Eonar, Sargeras, etc.) would be of the highest caste, while Thorim, Loken, Freya, etc. are the lesser Titans. Think of Malfurion compared to a novice druid. Big difference, but same race. I think the named bosses of Ulduar might be lesser Titans, while Uldum might lack any. Which would make sense, given the Tol'vir seem in a sense cut off from the Titans as the dwarves, gnomes, and vrykul are. Freya was stated to be the daughter of the Titans, probably the child of Aman'thul and Eonar given her nature persona, but since they're mineral-based beings, there's nothing stating if she was constructed or if she was somehow birthed. So for the time being, the answer in short is: We don't know for certain. Myrlen Midnightstar (talk) 23:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm almost certain that the titans in Uldum and Ulduar are not Titans, but rather Titanic Watchers. Essentially beings empowered by the Titans to guard their facilities. Very similar in nature to how the Dragon Aspects safeguard the various aspects of the world, these watchers were created and imbued with the powers of their masters. Think of them as artificial middle managers. They have their pre-programmed purpose, but have been imbued with sentience to have the decision-making capacity to adapt and pass their purpose into their creations.

Blacktouch (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Is "Titanic Watcher" a type of thing, or is it short for "titanic stone watcher"? What says either option?--SWM2448 21:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Some are outright called a Titanic Watcher, like Ironaya and we don't know enough about them to call them something other than what blizzard give us a watcher of titanic origin, not all of them are implied to be made of stone trough.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Only one, Ironaya, was called a "Titanic Watcher".--SWM2448 01:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Still is the only definition we have "a watcher of titanic origin" is what blizzard has given us--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

So... what? Are you saying she is a "Titanic Watcher" or "a watcher of titanic origin" or what? I suppose that we could say that everything with her model is a "Titanic Watcher" even though that term came about after WoWWiki/Wowpedia misused it (unless I am missing some big pre-cataclysm source).--SWM2448 01:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the name was interpreted, the name if i remember exactly came from the need of classifying this group, and a Titanic watcher fits because it means same as "A watcher of titanic origin".--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Umm... I was talking about the meaning of this quest. Not whether an arbitrary label fits or not.--SWM2448 02:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't take a great mind to find out what that a label means or not, it also doesn't need to used arbitrarily--Ashbear160 (talk) 02:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I do not think that everything of titan origin that is called variations of "Watcher" deserves to be a shown as a member of a single group. If you are for or against this, then please start making an coherent argument.--SWM2448 02:14, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Well i think they need to be listed and some might agree with me, some don't, because the blizzard usually just uses the term watchers to reference them, however there are also totally unrelated things that are listed as watchers to and must be distinguished, since you changed the name of the article to Watchers (titanic) i don't see much of a problem(and please don't fuse all the watcher articles into one, that usually just creates a bigger mess)--Ashbear160 (talk) 02:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Break 1

So, some work has been done recently on various pages related to this. After I tried to sort them by model here, Gourra did some work and sorted them like this. Maybe the things I listed should be split, with some overlap, into four pages: Watcher, Keeper, Stone watcher, and Stone keeper (and possibly Titan too) based on what they are literally called. I am starting to doubt if there is a 'model = one type of thing' arrangement (it seems more like arbitrary jobs or ranks). We could have pages for the models too (which will likely end up as THIS IS THEIR RACE LOL eventually somehow), if there is a desire for it. However, while it would make statements like "This guy is a <thing>" more accurate, I wonder what would actually go on the pages besides guesswork. Also, I am wondering if there is an existing umbrella term for those four pages. My ideas are Stone guardian (based on one promising line in Monster Guide), and Stone giant (mostly due to the argument on Talk:Stone giant, which has its merits).--SWM2448 17:58, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Well i think you could stuff stone watchers and stone keepers under stone guardians, however i don't think that would work for stone giants since stone giants are inside the mountain giant thing, although if you're problem is the name of the categories we could use titanic construct as another catch all name...--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Are you basing your argument on existing uncited categories or navigation templates? I could make up a name that makes sense for a catch-all name, like titanic constructs or titanic creations, but I want to avoid that for now. Does anyone else care? There has to be a best-fit based on what we already know.--SWM2448 19:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking of citing each instance that a titan-related individual is called a watcher or keeper (noting both separately), and then ditching the rest off of the watcher page, even if they share a watcher/keeper's model. Would that gain us anything? Do we need pages for the models to try and eke out "race" pages, as things called those terms seem very varied?--SWM2448 05:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Uldum watchers

The constructs known as "Uldumwatcher" which includes the three models (differentiated by hat/crown) are interesting... According to the encounter journal Anraphet is a maintenance unit... would we consider all those with that look a maintenance unit. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 21:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I think so but they also have combat programs so we can't disregard they are multi purpose--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It seems clear to me that the Uldum watchers are artificial constructs. They are animated statues. Some are actual statues, and some require a controller to function. I'm still not sure what they are called, or if they are stone watchers/keepers (though they are stone and called watchers). Meh.--SWM2448 05:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I call them titanic guardians because there are a lot of different mobs using that models that have that name.--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

There are two that I saw. Phasing might make it seem like there are more.--SWM2448 16:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I counted by wowhead list of things that share the same model--Ashbear160 (talk) 16:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)