Talk:Spider Jockey

Can someone confirm the necessity of this page? I've read elsewhere that spiders riding skeletons do not spawn, but are instead created when skeletons and spiders spawn separately and meet up. Some players claim to have seen it. Is there any confirmation that they spawn as a single entity, and is there any basis at all to the one in one hundred claim?JohnnyMadhouse 03:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * it can be necessary, but it is definately crossing the border. I am still tempted to remove it. I'll wait until Quatroking is online.
 * Someone analysed the mob spawning code and seen that when a spider spawns the program will generate another random number. If the number is above a certain value then a skeleton will be placed on top of the spider. So they don't spawn separately and then meet up. I think the page needs to stay, because lots of people make "wow, a skeleton riding a spider, has anyone else seen this?" posts to forums. Oh, and I saw a skeleton on a spider the other night in my game :-) DannyF1966 08:33, 10 November 2010 (CST)
 * Ohh that makes sense. This page should stay :D --Scykei 14:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

What happens to this mob when the sun comes up? Skeletons burn, but Spiders don't. I've only seen one of these, and when the sun was beginning to rise the Spider just vanished, leaving the skeleton to wander around on his own. JaffaCakeLover 16:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * the skeleton is set on fire/can die. the spider is unharmed and roams as per usual after the skeleton's death.--Kizzycocoa 16:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

This mob does not appear to climb walls. I was standing on the edge of my house, shooting arrows at one of these guys, and he just kept running into the wall.

Title
Guys, I'm almost certain that the title should be "Spider Mounted Skeleton". We have mounted police, not police mounted. Mounted is an adjective in this case, and should come before the noun it modifies: in this case it's skeleton. If we say Skeleton Mounted on a Spider, then mounted is a verb and modifies the noun it's after (unless we're pulling a Yoda). The hyphen looks pretty and all, but that just reinforces the fact that "skeleton-mounted" is a compound modifier and more strongly says that this is a spider riding a skeleton. I believe this so strongly that I am now going to change the title. Fight me if you want, but hopefully grammar will prevail (and not that dirty skeleton-riding spider)(yes, skeleton-riding spider means that it's a spider riding a skeleton). --DaMavster 08:28, 11 November 2010 (CST)
 * Yeah. I can't figure out how to rename the article. And I don't want to correct all of the text on the page if the title's staying wrong too. Kizzycocoa? You seem like a decent fellow (and wiki-savvy). Would you mind fixing this?


 * Also, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compound_modifier and check out such examples as "man-eating shark". A man eating shark might mean a man literally chewing on a shark, but the hyphen removes doubt and says no, this is a shark that eats men. Likewise, we need a Spider-mounted Skeleton. A skeleton-mounted spider is a spider riding a skeleton, and that's just against the laws of nature. =P --DaMavster 14:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm leaving this page until we have a definitive answer


 * it's simply too annoying to move it every half hour.--Kizzycocoa 08:37, 11 November 2010 (CST)


 * WTF? You're getting it wrong, DaMavster. Just using your example, "man-eating shark". We know that we are talking about a shark who is being man-eating. Likewise, A "skeleton-mounted spider" means a spider who is being mounted by a skeleton, so the current title is correct.
 * So look, a "mounted spider" makes sense and a "mounted skeleton" doesn't, right? I dunno? --Scykei 14:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * "Mounted police" or "mounted horse"? The Royal Canadian Mounted Police agree with me. Mounted in this case is used as an adjective. Besides, what if there were multiple spiders/skeletons? Would we say skeleton-mounted spiders? Or spider-mounted skeletons? "Man-eating sharks"? Or "Shark-eating men"? To clarify, I'm arguing that spider-mounted skeletons and man-eating sharks are correct (unless we really are talking about spiders riding skeletons and people that eat sharks)--DaMavster 09:21, 11 November 2010 (CST)


 * I've been thinking about this title all day and sometimes I think it should be one way and sometimes I think it should be the other! H'mm... "Spider-riding Skeleton" makes sense because the hyphen makes it clear that the Skeleton is spider-riding. Following that logic, the article should be called "Spider-mounted Skeleton". I do feel strongly that the article title should have a hyphen in it, to make it clear which mob is mounted. Changing it to "Spider-riding Skeleton" would probably make it clear what the mob actually is. --DannyF1966 15:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm with Danny in that we need to rethink using the word "mounted". It has too many connotations. "Spider-riding Skeleton" also is more clear, but I worry that we might run into the same issue with 'mounted'. Could we make it, "Skeleton Riding a Spider"? --DaMavster 09:33, 11 November 2010 (CST)


 * And then hope that no-one comes along and says it should be "Spider carrying a Skeleton" instead! --DannyF1966 15:37, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Let's just call it a "Skider" and be done with it! =P  --DaMavster 09:39, 11 November 2010 (CST)


 * The issue here is that thw word "mounted" is both a transitive verb (it takes a direct object) and a passive participle (an adjective). It can be "Horse-mounted", meaning mounted on top of a horse, i.e. riding it, or it can be "Man-mounted", meaning that the subject is in a state of having been mounted by a man.  Seeing as "Horse-mounted" is used much more than "Man-mounted", my opinion is that the same logic should be extended to "Spider-mounted Skeleton".  Hope you understood this complicated grammar explanation :) Jaeil 15:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So both are valid? Then I think we should just move away from this particular construction and call it something else, something  that's less ambiguous. LordAndrew 16:25, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ♪Spider-Rider♫ and the dead sherriffs (shoot, shoot) =D Jokes aside, i also feel we should move away from using "mounted". Skider doesnt sound too bad. BlueLegion 17:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Jaeil for articulating it much better than I was. Although, I thought the hyphen in this case indicated that 'mounted' was being used as a passive participle. Can it also be used with the transitive verb 'mounted'? --DaMavster 16:37, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I just tried to think this out and I've gone and confuzzled myself... A "horse-mounted man" could be read as a man who was mounted by a horse.  It could also be read as a man who is mounted upon a horse.  We would tend to think the latter way first, since the former is absurd.  It makes a difference which way you do it; the man in the example is the subject while the horse is an afterthought.  Either way, the man is the thing we are talking about.  I suppose ambiguities like this are just what makes English such a difficult and interesting language to use.  Either way, the new title is more concise.  That's good enough for me. Jaeil 03:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

We could just set it to Mounted Skeleton. That's clear enough. Bushmango 18:00, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

New title - Spider Jockeys
I think you nailed it with this title, Kizzy. ;) This page would also now work for other mobs riding spiders (I don't think each would need its own page). --XipXoom 12:53, 11 November 2010 (CST)
 * Seconded completely. --BlueLegion 20:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * As the other mobs are listed as singulars, shouldn't it be Spider Jockey? Yes, I disappoint myself in pointing this out. Nevertheless, it's a clever solution to the above naming palaver. JaffaCakeLover 15:27, 13 November 2010 (CST)