For The Master's age, I would put him being sired before 1000 AD because Darla was ~400 years old in the first season of Buffy, and she stilled retained all her human looks.

  • That's speculation. No source, no entry. Din's Fire 997 07:10, June 16, 2010 (UTC)
  • Actually, the original math is still quite valid, as 1609 minus 1397 equals 212.  Which means the Mastrer (as a vampire) wasn't even _close_ to middle-aged when he sired Darla!  Hence, the comic book ret-con that made him older than six centuries was completely unnecessary.  But,  that, in itself, can be easily ret-conned by making that backstory part of some elaborate ruse.

Ancient vampires and "vamp-face" issue

Within articles relating to ancient vampires such as the Master, Prince of Lies and Kakistos I have noted we tend to refer to them as being unable to resume a human appearance. However, given that Harmony Kendall reveals that it takes effort to remain in "vamp-mode", maybe the fact is that the Master et al. simply gain the ability to remain in vamp-mode indefinitely, and wear their respective demonic appearances out of pride. This would explain Darla explaining to Angelus centuries ago that the Master had "grown past the curse of human features". Any thoughts? (Lohesh, 18:24, 2/9/10)

  • As far as speculation goes it's alright, but at the end of the day it's just that: speculation. Din's Fire 997 09:33, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
But then saying they're unable to have their human faces is also speculation, just the more accepted kind. The only way to get around speculation would be to say "Visibly they always have their Vampire face on show, whether this is because they are unable to hide it anymore or just don't want to is unknown" or something along those lines. --Lyco499 05:38, January 12, 2011 (UTC)

About The Master turning that slayer...

wasn't that something that was said in a non-canon comic?

19:48, September 4, 2010 (UTC) Skytteflickan88

  • Yes but however she makes cameo appearence in The Chain (season 8) and Tales of the Slayers (both canon) so in a way she is canon.(Aliens1992 02:32, September 7, 2010 (UTC))
  • It's never been completely confirmed that all Tales of the slayers stories are canon, just that it's safe to assume that Antique is, hasn't it? I can't remember the source where I first heared it's canon. Skytteflickan88 05:36, September 7, 2010 (UTC)Skytteflickan88
    • Maybe not all are canon, but the Chain is canon 100% so I guess the Slayer is canon :-), but the whole story of her being sired by the master is of dubious canon at least.(Aliens1992 13:33, September 7, 2010 (UTC))
First of all, both Tales series are canon. It's silly to think that just one story in an anthology would be canon, especially since Joss was involved the series and wrote several of the stories (including the one where Yuki appears, a story which is also referenced in S8). So the character of Yuki is definitely canon, though as Aliens says, that doesn't make her first appearance canon.
Secondly, this wikia doesn't just cover canon info, but the entire Buffyverse franchise. I used to argue that we should only use canonical info in biographies, etc, but with the constant debate over what actually consitutes canon, it becomes a futile argument. If the story is a significant part of the character's history, and doesn't contradict continuity, there's no reason it shouldn't be mentioned. Paul730 15:02, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
    • I wasn't aware that the entire franchise was used as sources. Then I guess it doesn't matter if it's canon or not. But I would like to know why you think it's safe to say that both Tales series are canon. Do you have a good source for this? I've just heard that it's canon, but seen no proof myself. And I strongly disagree that it's silly to think that only one story of a series is canon, since there's no King of Canon or whatever saying it couldn't or shouldn't be. One of the Tales stories, Broken Bottle of Djinn, has Willow opening a portal in early Season 2 (1997) without much preparation, seemingly just using stuff she found in the High School lab, which is a extreme continuity error (since she didn't use magic until 1998, and probably couldn't do advanced spells like that until season 5). So I would actually prefer if just a few or non of the Tales stories are canon. Would make more sense, in a very non-silly way. Skytteflickan88 17:30, September 8, 2010 (UTC)Skytteflickan88
This wiki doesn't really have set-in-stone guidelines due to it's relatively few members, but sources of dubious canonicity seemed to be used in a lot of articles. I think the Angel IDW ongoing series has a lot to do with that, if you use that as a source, it's hard to justify not using others. Personally, I would try to avoid using non-canon sources (ie, the old comics/novels) in main character articles like Buffy, but for relatively minor characters (Kakistos for example) they're good for fleshing out the article. The Master's backstory is fairly unexplored in canon, so a quick mention of Yuki doesn't really interfere with anything. So long as you cite the stories where you're getting the information, the reader can make up their own mind about whether to "count" it.
There is no source I know of that definitively says "all Tales stories are canon", but I think it's safe to assume they are from Joss Whedon's considerable involvement in them (he wrote several stories, including the bridging story in Vampires) and the fact that S8 references them. Tales was very much about the creators of the show reuniting to explore the comic medium together and develop the Buffyverse. They're as canon as Fray is. I think it's a bit extreme to dismiss most or all of the series because of one continuity error in Broken Bottle, it would be like labelling "Fool for Love" non-canon because it contradicts "School Hard".
And regarding Willow's spell; it's not always difficult to open portals in the Buffyverse. Fred did so by accidentally reading from a book. And Willow has shown a natural aptitude for spells, she restored Angel's soul remember. Her opening a portal sometime during the high school seasons doesn't seem like an "extreme" continuity error. But like I said, I haven't read the story. Paul730 22:30, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
  • I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree on the Willow thing. I just don't see her being able to open and control a portal (unlike Fred who opened it by accident and had no control over it) until much later in the series, since she had trouble with the most simple spells even in season 4, but that is my interpretation. I just always assumed that she didn't do a spell until I Only Have Eyes For You. And I know I can't dismiss a story because of a continuity error, I meant that Ireally really hope it's not canon. This is a bit off topic, but how do Fool For Love contradict School Hard? Skytteflickan88 09:17, September 9, 2010 (UTC)Skytteflickan88
Jane Espenson has admitted the Willow thing was a continuity error. From her magic and appearance, it's actually a Season 3 story. (remember, she couldn't actually control where the portal went, so it's not too advanced for her to do in Season 3)-- Noneofyourbusiness 16:25, February 9, 2012 (UTC)
"School Hard" establishes that Angel was Spike's sire, which was decisively retconned in "Fool for Love" when we see Dru sire him instead. It's fanwankable but it's still a retcon/continuity error. Paul730 17:57, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
  • Oh, that. I'm perfectly fine myself with Joss' "fanwank", that the grandsire and other vampires "higher" in the line can be called sires as well. Skytteflickan88 18:09, September 9, 2010 (UTC)Skytteflickan88
Yeah I remember Spike actually calling Angel his 'sire' when they met early on in the series, and then by the end of the same series it's mentioned or alluded to that Drusilla sired Spike, I don't remember definately but I believe it was through a remark that Spike made. I recently rewatched all of Buffy and Angel again and I just remember noting it. Call it what you will, a mistake, a change of heart or the whole 'grand sire' can be called 'sire' thing. Whatever the case I agree that the latter works and isn't as weak an explination as some of the other mess up's, especially since it was such a minor thing, a throw away word used once, early on in the series, which would be petty to go postal over. But yeah, I think if it was a change of heart and Angel was originaly going to be Spike's sire it would've been interesting to see how back stories would have been different. And I'm just thinking of this now but does it seem rare in the Buffyverse, or at least less common for a male vampire to sire another male? Off the top of my very tired head I can only think of male vampire's sireing females and vice versa, I suppose the kill and drinking is almost sexual but I digress and I'm rambleing as usual so I'll shut up now lol.--Lyco499 05:52, January 12, 2011 (UTC)
actually i heard that joss said that any older vampire within the bloodline can be considered sire to the younger especially if they mentored the younger vampire. Mr.Scryer. 18:38, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
He's also said that it was always Drusilla who turned Spike in the writers' minds. -- Noneofyourbusiness 16:25, February 9, 2012 (UTC) 


In what episodes or comic book issues did the Master demonstrate the ability to read minds, move objects with his mind and project his thoughts into people's dreams? OwnerMan (talk) 07:50, April 14, 2013 (UTC)

Was it in "Nightmares"? Or at least that was a nightmare representation of Buffy that was slowly turning into reality because of the boy in coma, where the Master sensed Buffy's fear of dying and being turned into a vampire. FTWinchester (talk) 13:31, July 26, 2013 (UTC) 

I'm not sure if he sensed her fears, but he definitely knew what was going on. I rather think it was just the Hellmouth using the Master to act out her nightmares. If the Master buried Buffy and made her into a vampire purely on his own intent then why didn't he sire her himself? OwnerMan (talk) 15:26, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to defend the statement, I was just thinking that maybe that was the reason why the contributor/editor credited the Master to have those abilities. And maybe he/she thought 'move objects with his mind' applied to when he hypnotized Buffy to remain still, moments before he bit her. Although, since it was described as hypnosis, then the contributor was mistaken. FTWinchester (talk) 16:02, July 26, 2013 (UTC) 

I know. I think someone may have misinterpreted what was going on (for example, the whole dream projection power probably started when somebody assumed the Master was responsible for Buffy's dream in her very first scene, though in fact it was likely to be one of Buffy's prophetic dreams since the Master only learned about her in the next episode). That person was probably a contributor on the Master's page in Wikipedia and since a fair amount of this wiki's pages were copy and pasted from Wikipedia articles (some of them I rewrote) then it explains this misconception. Don't worry, I've been changing a lot of things on this page the past months, including his powers which I've made to only include powers that he actually demonstrated with citations to support it. OwnerMan (talk) 02:32, July 27, 2013 (UTC)


The Master's page mentioned the Eidu and the Eidu amulet. Are these canonical and do we have more info on these? I think they warrant a page. I just don't know the source material of those and exactly what those are. FTWinchester (talk) 13:29, July 26, 2013 (UTC) 

This wiki considers the information as non-canonical but I can't really say. Though, even if it is non-canon, it can still warrent a page. OwnerMan (talk) 15:31, July 26, 2013 (UTC) 

That's what I was thinking, too. I was hoping someone who has read the material could make the pages. FTWinchester (talk) 16:00, July 26, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I read the material and made the pages.OwnerMan (talk) 05:52, October 5, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.