Talk:Skeleton/Archive 2

Archives

• 2010 - 2014
• 2015 - 2019

Skeletons playing noteblock sounds?

I've noticed when hanging about that skeletons make a random noteblock sound in addition to their actual bone rattling. It's feint, but nonetheless there. Basically, I sometimes hear the bone effect, the noteblock, or both. You could probably achieve this by making a brand new creative map and spawning a bunch of skeletons at nighttime. and turn your sound up to hear it.

I hear this while using vanilla Minecraft (1.8.1), vanilla with Optifine, vanilla with my Touhoucraft resource pack, and all three. I did some internet searches and found nothing. Weird. I don't use any mods whatsoever, nor do I use any 3rd party launcher, or have my game file edited. Is this a bug that was never noticed?

Also, I don't have an account since I never bothered so yeah, sorry bout that. Edit : signing this post cuz reasons. That and it was mine anyway. --174.69.96.187 19:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)Bgrmystr2 (talk) at 6:13, 08 January 2015 (UTC).

I would assume that is a bug, if you can reproduce it consistently with a fresh copy of the game, I would report it to the official bug tracker. –KnightMiner ^(t·c) 15:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I made a new folder on my desktop, downloaded a clean file from the site, moved .minecraft from my appdata folder, so it only shows my login and doesn't have any saved data, maps, optifine, mods, or anything else. It's 100% clean vanilla, and it still happens. Tried in creative as well as survival with cheats on it and achieved noteblock skeles each time. I spawned dozens of skeletons individually while in survival mode and creative mode, 8 out of 10 had a feint noteblock sound when they spawned, and the other two made the sounds while standing around or moving. I'll get on the bug tracker about it in a few.

Timestamp works this time! Now I know how to sign things. Yay for messing with preview button. --174.69.96.187 19:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)Bgrmystr2

Edit : Ugh, I dunno how this edit page works. It won't save what I type. Anyway, you said I should do the thing, so I went to the place and made a thing using the thing with the info I had about the thing. You get all that? Good.

https://bugs.mojang.com/browse/MC-76454 Here you go. :) --174.69.96.187 20:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)Bgrmystr2

Update : I'll go ahead and toss the video link here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOW9GBIUXTY

So I posted the information on the official bug report. Within 4 minutes someone took one look at it, marked it as "resolved" and can't reproduce, and insulted me saying I'm hearing things. After I put up a video to prove this completely wrong, I see not a single word from anyone, and it's totally swept under the rug like it was somehow fixed. Such ignorance for an "official" channel. If you have another link where people actually listen to reports instead of ignoring them and insulting the reporter, do let me know. --174.69.96.187 23:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)Bgrmystr2

We cannot help you with issues with the bug tracker, this wiki is unrelated from the tracker apart from sharing parts of the user base. If you disagree with the resolution, the wiki still is not the place to post bugs.

Also, those are the proper sounds (later comments state that as well). –KnightMiner ^(t·c) 01:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I know the skeletons make rattling bone sounds, and that's fine, but why do their bones play the xylophone as well? They play both effects, noteblock and bone rattle, not just one or the other, but the rattling bones are much louder. Skeletons have always done this, and I figured it would be a good idea to report incorrect sound additions. I'm not trying to report the bug here, but when someone other than myself actually has their sound turned up enough to hear the effects that everyone else keeps denying exists, the information will be here for future reference as well as showing the official bug tracker swept it under the rug instead of looked at properly. This was an informative adventure. You guys have a good day. :) --174.69.96.187 14:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)Bgrmystr2

Mapmakers can make skeletons shoot potion tipped arrows?

Upon checking the wiki, it says that you can make Skeletons shoot Tipped Arrows. But I don't know how. I tried making the skeleton hold a tipped arrow in the off-hand slot. But all it only does is put an arrow there. Does someone know how to make them do this? --RobuxShooters (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

There does not seem to be any truth in the statement; a quick check of the source shows no new NBT data for skeletons. I've removed the statement; you'll otherwise have to modify the arrow itself after it's fired. Skylinerw (talk) 20:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Change Skeleton picture on the right side

Should the Skeleton picture on the right side be changed? In 1.9, they have their hands down unless their shooting their bow. -PancakeIdentity (talk) 23:04, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support The picture should change between the idle and attacking states, as other mobs with multiple states do. 131.109.7.222 18:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Spawning with Armor, Enchantments

I think the page should mention that the skeleton has a certain chance to spawn equipped with armor, special bows, etc. Also, I'm currently fighting a naturally-occurring invisible skeleton. I've killed about 500 in 1.9 and this is the first invisible one I've found. I'm playing Vanilla + OptiFine, so it's either a glitch or a rare occurrence. If anyone could look into this, that'd be awesome. I will try to record it but my recording feature is buggy right now. Curdflapper (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Update: I've just killed the skeleton. I have a low-quality recording (via phone) of the skeleton killing two spiders (they were able to hit him a few times), me attacking the skeleton with a sword (I was unable to hit him at all... strange) and me finishing the skeleton with a bow. Should I share it? If so, where can I upload a 57 second video? Curdflapper (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

The info about armor and enchantment, yeah that makes sense to be on the page. It's on the zombie page, anyway.

The bug you're describing, I'd look carefully on the bug tracker to find a ticket describing invisible skeletons that can attack you, and if you can't fine it, make a ticket, and attach your video there, or a short clip that contributes something useful for them to fix it. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 23:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Anomie x, to your knowledge, is the Zombie#Armed zombies section of the Zombie page also true of skeletons? Are there any different numbers we'd need to change before copying that section here? – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 19:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

The only difference is the "Weapon" row in the table: skeletons always get a bow, 100% chance. Everything else is the same. Note though that wither skeletons never have armor or enchantments.

For skeleton trap skeletons, the skeleton first gets generated as a normal spawn, then is given an iron helmet if it doesn't have a helmet, then gets the helmet (no matter if it's the iron one or a different one) and bow enchanted even if they're already enchanted (which can result in MC-93024). Anomie x (talk) 03:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

a skeleton won't pick up weapons and tools except a sword or bow, correct? – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 23:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

A skeleton won't drop its bow to pick up random items, but if you summon a skeleton without a weapon it'll pick up random stuff. The logic of what it prefers is the same as zombies. Anomie x (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Skeletons fighting?

I play Minecraft 1.9.2 and I spawned an iron golem using a command block The golem's range was poor and a skeleton was shooting at it. I spawned a couple of zombies to get the golem out of the pit and at some point, one of the arrows hit a zombie and it turned on the skeleton and started attacking it. Has anyone else seen this? –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 122.166.149.34 (talk) at 11:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Most mobs will attack a mob that attacked them. It typically involves skeletons since they're the most common mob that can accidentally hit another. Anomie x (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result of the discussion was not merged. The situation now is quite a bit different from when this merge proposal, and the support comments, were made two years ago. Since the only way this proposal could get anywhere at this point would be for the supporters to show up and re-argue their support in the face of the current situation, it would be better to simply start a new discussion where the current situation can be addressed from the very start. Therefore I'm closing this discussion as no merge, but with no prejudice for someone making a new merge proposal if they want. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 00:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

---

With a new type of skeletons, the strays, a question of merging the articles about normal skeletons, wither skeletons and strays becomes more feasible. The share the same nature of being bare, alive and armed skeletons; the wither ones differ much greatly, but they are still skeletons, and they even spawn alongside normal ones, the fact which suggests distant relationship between the two. — NickTheRed37 (issues’ wall) 17:41, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support merging all three. To me this is a lot like how Zombies has zombie villagers and babies and jockeys all rolled into it. I think it makes sense. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 17:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I also  Support. I was originally going to support merging the stray and oppose merging the wither skeleton, but decided against that. -BDJP ^(t|c) 18:03, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I  Support, but only if all three types are merged. It makes a lot of sense, especially because strays and wither skeletons both have a lot less information than the skeleton page because they share lots of attributes. -PancakeIdentity (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support merging Stray into Skeleton. Don't care whether Wither Skeleton is merged or not. Anomie x (talk) 20:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support. –LauraFi - talk 20:38, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Is this going to happen? It seems as if we have enough support for it. -PancakeIdentity (talk) 00:55, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

The discussion is only going for less than a day; we have more users who can talk about it. — NickTheRed37 (issues’ wall) 14:41, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support This is definitely a good idea, but it should not be merged with the wither skeleton, as the wither skeleton has very different attack methods, spawn, and appearance. 131.109.7.222 17:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

For spawn, the stray and wither skeleton spawn similarly. In nether fortresses and aboveground snow biomes, skeletons spawn. 80% of them will be wither skeletons or strays, respectively. For appearance, I would argue that strays look more different than wither skeletons. Wither skeletons have genrally the same figure, except black and taller. Strays are blue and have "clothes". For attack, normal skeletons will attack the same way if given a sword. -PancakeIdentity (talk) 21:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

 Agree All we need to do is note that in ice plains, skeletons have an 80% chance of spawning as a stray, and that strays shoot slowness-tipped arrows. The Blobs 02:58, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

If Wither Skeleton is going to merged with Skeleton, then it should probably be merged as well. But I really don't see the point... users are not going to come to this wiki looking for information on all three Skeletons at once. They're much more likely to look for information on a particular Skeleton, but all of the information on the two other variants squashed in the page does little more than making the information you're actually looking for harder to find. -Xbony2 (talk) 11:32, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support All skeletons should be grouped together!Aaronthesplegger (talk) 12:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

 Support Since they all have a savegame id of "Skeleton" TySkyo (Talk•Contribs) 21:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

 Support Since their AI is all same! fakeseth 13:36, 25 September 2016(UTC)

 Oppose as per Talk:Zombie#Split Zombie variants off from this article. - MinecraftPhotos4U (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

 Oppose It makes more sense to have different entities have different pages in general, unless the difference it really minor (which it is not, really). Also, as MinecraftPhotos4U said, the zombie page is being split up as well. FVbico (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

 Strong oppose given that the reasons for merging provided by commenters are... weird, such as referring to technical data or raw personal preference. A one-to-one correspondence between specific in-game concepts and articles would be better for various reasons, such as keeping articles not excessively long and nearly preventing synthetic article titles. On a side note, it would also be a lot better if everyone who supports a proposal given prior opposition asserted that they have reviewed counterarguments to the proposal and deem them all invalid or insubstantial compared to the arguments. Not that this applies to this discussion given the unanimity of initial commenters (which honestly surprises me). --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 18:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

 Oppose as they are separate entities. When this discussion was started in 2016, they were the same entity (split only by NBT), but 1.11 split them off properly (each now has its own ID). The original argument about them being the same no longer works. --Pokechu22 (talk) 18:48, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Merge wither skeleton

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result of the discussion was Do not merge.

---

I've merged the stray with this page, but I held off on the wither skeleton as there doesn't appear to be a clear consensus above. Personally I don't think it should be merged, because although it has the savegameid, it exhibits a completely different behaviour in terms of methods of attack, spawning and appearance and it seems like there are more differences than the few similarities (name seems to be the only similarity that comes to mind). Hence I  Oppose the merge of wither skeleton with this page. –Goandgoo ᐸ Talk
Contribs 07:29, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I oppose this as well, Skeletons and Strays have absolutely no difference with their fighting style, and only have clothes on to make them apart from a Skeleton with tipped arrows. Wither Skeletons are completely different mobs, the only thing they have in common is the name as you've said. Therefore I oppose. NelajandJalen (talk) 11:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I also  Oppose the merge of wither skeleton. -BDJP ^(t|c) 14:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah,  Oppose. –LauraFi - talk 15:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose. By the way, somebody tried merging it without permission, I can't undo it since it won't let me, can someone undo it? -75.179.18.235 10:39, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Add the page link and I will undo it | AndrewAB (talk) 10:41, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely no. The two are so different and have so many different details that we would have to add and specify for the different variants, and this idea has already been dismissed before. I most defiantly  Oppose. TinyGenius (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Wither skeletons spawn differently, attack differently, drop different things, and are a different height. They are two different mobs. The Blobs 01:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I  Oppose because they have different behaviors, spawn in different dimensions, have different attacks, drop different things, etc. They're very different mobs and should have their own pages. Curdflapper (talk) 03:46, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Comment

Jsyk, Dinoguy1000, strays were actually already merged into this article a while back, so I guess the result of the discussion would be to split "skeleton" and "stray," which they haven't been yet.-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 00:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Ehh. I guess just interpret the close as "maintain the current situation, absent a new proposal", then. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 09:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

@Dinoguy1000: By "maintain the current situation," do you mean that you think that even though you closed it as "do not merge," that we should still keep skeleton and stray merged? To me it makes sense that if you closed the discussion as "no merge," we should split the pages. I'm not trying to badger you about having the perfect closure statement or anything, I'm just asking for clarification with what action you think should be taken. :)-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 12:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I mean, leave things as they are now, unless and until someone makes a convincing case for changing them. =) 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 13:07, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Just one more clarification, if you don't mind. =) Skeleton and stray were already merged long before you closed the discussion as "Do not merge." So, am I correct when I say, even though you closed the discussion as "Do not merge," we should still keep them merged? That would be the exact opposite of what you closed the discussion as, but it would be "leaving things as they are now."-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 13:15, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes. I closed the discussion in response to the recent comments on it, which were opposes, and because the discussion itself was two years old and so had run well past its point of usefulness. Admittedly, I didn't read the whole discussion as closely as I should have, nor did I check the current state of the article first, which led us to this. =X 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 14:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for clarifying. :) I might open a new discussion to split Stray and Skeleton when I get the chance.-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 14:26, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Speed Skeletons?

So I was just playing on a fan server laying out some slabs to help with a big project, and was attacked by two skeletons that clearly had speed. All of the beacons are set to speed, because it's a bloody big work site to run around in, but mobs aren't supposed to get beacon effects. The other explanation I can think of is that these skeletons spawned with a potion effect speed the way spiders do with invisibility from time to time. Or...do witches throw speed pots at other mobs? I didn't see any, but that doesn't mean there wasn't one around. Anyone? –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Rashkavar (talk • contribs) at 4:23, 01 June 2016 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

If you're on a server, you're probably not playing vanilla Minecraft. Ask a server admin if one of the plugins used could have caused this. -- Orthotope^talk 05:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Keep in mind also, they did just make skeletons quite a bit faster with the 1.9 release, it may be that. – Sealbudsman ^talk/_contr 06:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

It's Vanilla with Spigot (being used strictly for the editing history log so theft and griefing can be dealt with appropriately and without blame wars), so I don't think it comes with a side of speedy skeletons. It could just be the speed boost that skeletons got - I've seen them dash short distances before, but that was generally over very short distances trying to dodge arrows (quite successfully for the most part), whereas these guys were just charging me like a sprinting speed boosted player. Eh, maybe Spigot screws with that dashing behavior occasionally. Not like it doesn't break a bunch of other stuff (Still bitter about having done the door placing on the iron titan twice before we realized that spigot handles villages differently such that they won't stack nicely. Rashkavar (talk) 08:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

It took me awhile, but I've seen Skeletons "Quickly-move" (it seems to me like it's always to close-with /get-Rapidly closer-to the Player), in two Completely different scenarios. In Vanilla (un-Mod'ded) MC, I've seen them both move at least half a dozen Blocks, "Quickly," in Water (Faster than I think the Player can, possibly even Swimming!).

They do the same on Land. It's not just an: "oh, let's give them a 'Boost' in Water, since Mobs were Slowed-down dramatically some Years back" kind of thing; no, it's Land-completely, too (they seem to kind-of "fly /soar," almost though this was flat[-enough?] land, so it's definitely to make them uniformly-enough more-dangerous, than All I-think other Mobs in this particularly unique way).

The trick is the rarity. It seems on Land they Don't need to "compensate" via this as-much as in-Water, and that it's designed to rapidly-bring themselves /the Player into-Range (but it seems like not usually Too close, a Range..!), so I can only confirm seeing it a few times on Land (as opposed to dozens easily in Water - note this was on the Surface - before as-Undead, they'd Sank [guess it wasn't deep-enough, there?]). Yilante 3 /27 /19 12:16 p.m. 76.209.248.192 19:16, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

This is a nearly-3-year-old section, but I can say that this is actually a bug (MC-104900) or at least tracked as one. There's more info on the ticket. --Pokechu22 (talk) 03:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Split proposal

As can be seen above, the skeleton and stray articles were previously separated, but after the discussion there they were merged. However, long after the articles were merged, Dinoguy closed the discussion as "Do not merge," but then decided that it would be best to just leave it as it is for now and open a new discussion if needed. So, I'm starting a new proposal to split the articles again. As you can see here, this has already been done for the Zombie page. The reasons are mostly the same - avoid cluttering, article currently is confusing and messy, and so that readers can easily look up a stray characteristic without having to scroll through lots of skeleton-exclusive information.-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 13:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support for the reasons provided above. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 13:18, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support as well. Eventhough the different mobs are technically similar as well as similar in behaviour, they are essentially different mobs with different purposes and goals. Already they have a lot of differences. I think it's quite plausible to expect that they could very well at some point become so different they wouldn't be similar anymore at all. – Jack McKalling [ ] 13:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support, the pages can be splitted instead of having this page cluttered, psl85 (profile | talk | contribs | send email) 13:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support too. --Crraftt (talk) 15:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support too. --Pokechu22 (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support for the same reasons as mentioned. FVbico (talk) 16:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support. -BDJP ^(t|c) 16:19, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support. Just to bring something to the discussion I'm going to list some potential reasons who to NOT split and comment on how I don't agree with them.

- "Why waste an extra page when a lot of information is the same" It's not inherently bad to have more pages as long as they have enough info (similar or not). The goal of the wiki is to provide information as best as possible and splitting pages actually helps with this (within reason of course) because the player can more easily find what they want to know.

- "This was merged before, why suddenly split again" In the end I think this just comes down to "be bold". It was discussed and merged, but the beauty of the wiki is that we don't have to just accept that forever. A new discussion can pop up and another decision can be made.

- "Why are we suddenly splitting so much, where do we draw the line" This line is always going to be rather arbitrary. Again, it's the goal to provide information as best as possible. Every situation has to be re-evaluated to see how this can be achieved. Strays and Skeletons, although similar, have quite a few differences (appearance, spawning, drops, shooting effects). But for example a red sheep and a blue sheep differ only slightly by appearance and what they drop (and these two drops are also on one page). This would not be enough for a split, which I think we can all agree on.

--Pepijn (talk) 16:52, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support as well. Well articulated, Pepijn. – Sealbudsman talk | contribs 03:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support. -Sonicwave ^talk 22:34, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support Frisk (Talk page) 23:34, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support -Xbony2 (GRASP) (FTB Wiki Admin) (talk) 01:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps it's good to start splitting? There's no opposing statements, and the proposal has been open for 1 month. FVbico (talk) 13:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Definitely think we've got enough support now. I personally have a lot of tasks on MCW and off MCW I'm currently doing, though, so if somebody else would be willing to split the page that would be much appreciated.-- Madminecrafter12^{Talk to me} 16:34, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

How do you edit the history section?

There's a grammatical error in the Legacy Console section, in the 4:th point it says "it rush", should be "it rushes". Hexalobular (talk) 08:11, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

@Hexalobular: Just edit the whole page, or edit the section as usual. I fixed it. Thanks also for making additional grammar checks on the other articles I've been making present tense. As careful as I try to be, it seems I'm always missing a thing here or there. ~ Amatulic (talk) 14:14, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

@Amatulic I find I can do it if I choose "Edit source" otherwise I just keep going around in circles not knowing what I'm doing.

Yes, I think you need to slow down a bit and do some more proofreading, the iron golems for instance may be one per village but if villages are plural then the golems should be as well, I've now changed them both to singular using the phrasing that you used in the Java history section. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Hexalobular (talk • contribs) at 18:54, 03 July 2019 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

@Hexalobular: Ah, I see. I use the source editor exclusively. I've never used the visual editor; I find it mysterious. I started on Wikipedia 13 years ago before any sort of Wiki visual editor existed, so I got used to it. The downside to the source editor is that proofreading is more difficult, because the sentences are in a fixed-width fonts and are often interrupted by codes. I do proofread, and was honestly surprised (and pleased) to see you come along and find leftover errors I missed.

By the way, you can sign your comments using four tilde characters: ~~~~ — this gets translated into your signature, which you can change in your user preferences. ~ Amatulic (talk) 15:25, 4 July 2019 (UTC)