So does that mean that Bomonga’s mask could be used as the standard shape for a Faxon? Or is that something that needs to be confirmed with Greg?
If you want to interpret Greg’s statement’s strictly, then Bomonga’s Faxon is
A) a regional variant, similar to Lhikan’s Hau (Hahli’s faxon is standard shape, just without the tubes and visor)
~or~
B) a different mask that looks similar (similar to the Mask of Charisma being an adaptive Hau Nuva)
6 Likes
Which statement?
Because, from what I can remember, it’s never actually been confirmed (with the exception of the Volitak, because of Mazeka) that the standard shapes of the Mahri’s masks are identical to the base pieces from the sets.
EDIT: I see the link now, but I’m not sure if that makes sense, since Lesovikk’s mask still has the tube and visor which were confirmed in other statements to be non-standard.
The Mahri masks in general.
Specifically the Faxon.
Yeah, I agree that’s odd.
Anyway, the end answer is: we have two shapes for the Faxon. A strict reading of the canon is that Hahli’s is standard shape. You can headcanon that Bomonga’s is standard, if you want, there’s certainly enough ambiguity to do so. Unless, of course, Greg gives a defininitive answer, which is doubtful at this point
1 Like
I am curious to see which side of the line BS01 ends up falling on. As I said elsewhere:
I don’t think it is; BS01 archives canon, but they don’t get to make decisions on it.
Right now, there’s no objectively correct answer; every Greg Quote about the Mahri masks includes something like “as far as I know”, or “at least this many changes”. While it’s possible that the official Faxon piece is the standard shape, it’s also possible that it’s not, and we can’t know unless Greg gives some clarification. He’d probably be more willing to give a definitive answer if there’s an actual alternative to the standard piece, rather than having to say “the parts aren’t standard and I don’t know what is”.
Personally, I’d prefer that the standard Faxon didn’t have sockets for tubes and lightbulbs that aren’t part of the standard mask, but that’s not my decision.
To be fair, the Mask of Psychometry does the same thing.
That’s what I meant when I said “I wonder which side [of Willess’s two proposed interpretations] BS01 [would] fall on.” Strictly speaking they’d have to label it as “an unknown mask,” but I don’t know if they necessarily will do that.
Just to be clear, this is what the standard Faxon looks like. No visor, no breathing tubes/gills, no Barraki eye on top. It still has the sockets obviously, but personally they don’t bother me. I mean, the standard Pakari has sockets on the side of it, and nobody complains about those.
6 Likes
As far as I know, there is no source that confirms that to be a standard Faxon. There is the quote Jerminator posted above that says Lesovikk’s is normal, but his has a visor and a tube on one side.
We hate the standard Bolitak with a hideous filter on mouth.
If I remember correctly, Greg said the part where Mahri’s mask was modified by Ignika was hose part.
(But foolishly, it’s gills.)
2 Likes
The preponderance of evidence does. Greg qualifying his answers with things like “as far as I know” comes from him not knowing what the set designers would be doing a year or two down the line, or what the story team would necessarily be doing and what the needs of the story would be.
It obviously never became an issue with the sets or story.
Therefore: the Mahri masks are the standard form of those masks, sans visors and gills. That’s not just my stance, that’s TTV’s stance as well after considering all the evidence. The fan fiction masks were allowed on the premise that they were variants of the standard shapes that the Inika and Mahri masks represent.
And that’s it. I’m done arguing this because it’s been argued before and there’s nothing else that can be argued for what the standard shapes are.
2 Likes
Unless there’s a source that directly says the picture you posted above is the standard Faxon, it’s not confirmed. Probable, sure, but not confirmed.
I don’t care.
I actually have no strong feelings one way or the other. I would definitely be fine with having that as the standard Faxon, but I also see the possibility of something different being the standard shape.
1 Like
I’m also not a fan of that, but I’ve accepted that other standard masks have done it as well (Volitak, Olmak, etc.)
At the end of the day, I’d be fine with the official piece being standard, as long as it’s confirmed either way.
Do you have a source for that?
Okay so, little poll, just want to know what people think about it. Do we want to Tuyet and/or Nidhiki to be Metru?
Nidhiki
- Metru
- Krakua-like
- Nothing on above
- Doesn’t matter
0 voters
Tuyet
- Metru
- Non-Metru
- Doesn’t matter
0 voters
1 Like
We have 7 metru Toa, 6 Mata, 1 inika, and 2 unique builds (3 if you count Varian). We need more variety.
I put “none of the above” on nidhiki, but I wouldn’t mind a Krakua build.
Technically, we already have 13 metru
Or wait. How do you even count?
There are actually 13 Metru, 7 Mata (of all 5 are Inika now (?)) and 8 Inika (or 13, if we count in AA Nuva)
The Toa Metru don’t count because they were inspired by Lhikan. I’m talking about normal Toa with no/unknown inspiration.
Lesovikk is mutated.
Takanuva is based on the Mata.
Inika are mutated.
All 6 Mahri have no inspiration, and among with unknown inspiration we have Lesovikk and Jovan
Lesovikk is mutated, we have no idea what his build was before. And the inika don’t fall under normal Toa, otherwise they would be Mata build.
Jovan is the only known Inika Toa.
I think a big thing for Nidhiki would also be to take cues from the original set.
Copying designs from Krakua could be pretty neat as well. Maybe not an exact 1:1 replica, but maybe similar feet, or the same chestplate.
2 Likes