Talk:Mob

History Section
Should there be a history section? There is one for blocks and one for items so i don't see how you can't do the same for mobs, it is not that important, but it would be nice to see – Unsigned comment added by UltraCatalyst007 (talk • contribs) at 19:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC). Sign comments with
 * Im about this, but i will ask some others to see if this is okay. James Haydon (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * . It would be consistent with the block and item pages, and would be pretty useful to have. AlienAgent124 (talk) 16:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay has already made plans to add it and they are testing such an idea in their sand box. James Haydon (talk) 17:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This has been completed by me and Dlljs and is now published. NoNcLaNKing (talk) 00:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Adding the Warden to this page
Since the Warden is a confirmed upcoming addition in 1.17, I really think it ought to be listed here. While it's not technically an "upcoming" mob by the definition of the style guide, since it isn't in a snapshot yet, keep in mind, this page also lists mobs that are not confirmed to be added at any known time, mobs that are confirmed to never be added anytime in the foreseeable future, mobs that have only been confirmed in the form of 2D concept art, and even the Red Dragon, a mob without even a single official image associated with it. Meanwhile, the Warden has appeared in numerous official screenshots and video clips, and is confirmed to be coming to the game within a known release window. It doesn't really make sense to me that it shouldn't be allowed to be listed here, when mobs that probably won't ever even be added can be listed here. There really ought to be some agreement reached in which there is a standard for documenting known upcoming mobs that are not yet in snapshots. AlienAgent124 (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * But it still has not appeared in any snapshot yet, therefore we need to wait before we add it. See MCW:FUTURE for more info. James Haydon (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I know what the style guide says, but the issue is that MCW:FUTURE only takes into account features that are in development versions, and says to exclude known confirmed features that are not yet in development versions. My opinion is that confirmed features not yet in development versions should also be listed here as well, but under a different label, such as "planned". Otherwise, under the current system, known confirmed information is being neglected, while information about content that is not confirmed to ever be added is not. AlienAgent124 (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you want a rule in the style guide to be changed to something you agree with, then you should post said request in the Style guide's talk page. James Haydon (talk) 17:18, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I this, it could just stay in mentioned mobs until it gets a snapshot, then it could move to upcoming mobs until caves and cliffs releases UltraCatalyst007 (talk) 17:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay but the snapshots with the warden will come eventually, you don't have to wait until its release to see them. So lets just wait until said snapshot is released. James Haydon (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What happens when more future mobs are announced though? This same problem will happen again, with announced mobs not being listed because they're not in snapshots yet, even while mentioned and scrapped mobs do get to be listed. This isn't just about the Warden specifically, it's about the rules regarding which mobs are allowed to be mentioned here. AlienAgent124 (talk) 18:38, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Because most of the mentioned mobs are most likely not going to be added unlike the Warden. James Haydon (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * But that's exactly my point. If mobs unlikely to be added can be on the list of mobs, why can't mobs that are definitely going to be added soon? AlienAgent124 (talk) 18:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it could go to the Mentioned mobs category, because as AlienAgent124 said above, mobs that aren't included on the game are there, redirecting to the Mentioned features articles. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 23:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * See the MCT:Style guide discussion for a main discussion related to this change. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 20:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Possible Category Changes (and also discussion about the Pufferfish)
The Pufferfish have a problem. First, they do NOT belong in Passive, they attack you if you get close to them like any hostile mob, however, they are not hostile, technically they COULD be hostile, but... no, they fit best in neutral, but even that does not seem right. Personally I think Pufferfish should get their own category, Like Defensive or something. And it not just the Pufferfish, There just seems to be a problem with the categories in general, Just as a quick list of the things i would change (if i knew how to edit pages with images).


 * PASSIVE: add the Glow Squid, I just think the upcoming category should just be removed, if something gets a snapshot, it is very much in the game and available to everyone. And a minor thing, swap strider and squid, it would look better.


 * DEFENSIVE: I already explained why pufferfish should be here.


 * NEUTRAL: If Upcoming was removed, goat goes here, swap piglin and panda for alphabetical reason, and remove baby mobs, they are 1 mob, piglins are the same as baby piglins, there are not baby zombies seperated from zombies, so make it consistant.


 * HOSTILE: No real problems, just change the order for the zoglin, zombie, and zombie villager to zombie villager, zombie, and zoglin.


 * COMPOUND/COMBINATION ETC.: Jockeys are in included in the list, but not all of them, they should have a seperate category for the cave spider jockey, chicken jockey, hoglin jockey, ravager rider, skeleton horseman, spider jockey, and strider jockey. Just name the category any word that means combination


 * TAMEABLE: This would include every mob that gives the player the advancement "Best Friends Forever" when tamed, this includes Axolotls(1.17), cats, donkeys, horses, llamas, mules, parrots, skeleton horses, trader llamas(llamas spawned with wandering trader, i count as different mob), and wolves. This does not apply to ocelots anymore, or foxes? im not sure about foxes though.


 * TRUSTABLE: Ocelots and Foxes.


 * UTILITY/GOLEMS: Not sure if this one would be good, but iron/snow golems could have seperate category.


 * CREATIVE ONLY: Zombie Horses have spawn eggs in creative, so not unused.


 * COMMANDS ONLY: This would include the other unused mobs, also swap illusioner and killer bunny for alphabetical reason, and add the elder guardian ghost, they are also unused/command only.


 * JOKE MOBS: Alphebetize them and change pink wither to friendly wither.


 * UNIMPLEMENTED: Combine with mentioned mobs and move pigman here because they where never available to the public unlike rana and human

etc.

Overall, Categories for this page are broken and need to be fixed.UltraCatalyst007 (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Pufferfish are passive, not neutral or hostile. Hostile means that they can chase you, while pufferfish can't chase you. Their attacks are defensive. TheGreatSpring (talk) 08:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well there is no such thing as a "defensive" mob, i think it should be referred to as a neutral mob. James Haydon (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that we need to settle this to decide how we need to categorize mobs. I like the idea of defensive, trustable and tameable, but their behaviors are still either passive or neutral, so we shouldn't be changing that. However, Some changes are needed, so I'll list how mobs could be classified:


 * Proposal 1:


 * Passive: Mobs that never attack the player, nor cause damage intentionally (Pufferfish never attacks, but activates a poison aura).


 * Neutral: Mobs that attack the player if they attack first, or the player doesn't meet the requirements to avoid being attacked by these mobs, leading to the first line (this one) be the requirement to being attacked. (For example, piglins attack even if a player has gold armor when attacked, or spiders attack even at high light levels when attacked).


 * Hostile: Mobs that always attack the player intentionally, hunting it, even if there are ways to make them to not attack the player. (For example, hoglins always want to attack the player, but don't do that when near warped fungus or nether portals).


 * Boss mobs: Mobs that have a visual health bar, don't spawn randomly and are confronted intentionally.


 * Compound mobs: Compund mobs that consist of a mob riding another mob.


 * Unused mobs: Mobs that don't spawn naturally but can be found on the Creative menu or be summoned with the command.


 * Joke mobs: Mobs that only existed on April Fools versions.


 * Implemented upcoming mobs: Mobs that aren't on a full release, but are confirmed to be added and exist on the latest snapshot/beta at the time.


 * Unimplemented upcoming mobs: Mobs that doesn't exist on a full release, nor on a snapshot/beta, but are mentioned and confirmed to be added. Their links redirect to the Mentioned features articles. (It's the current "Mentioned mobs", but without the Moobloom and the Iceologer, and the Warden could go here too)


 * Concept mobs: Mobs that only existed as concepts, but never were implemented nor fully announced. (I's the current "Unimplemented mobs" renamed to be more precise, also including the Moobloom and Iceologer, as they were concepts too)


 * Removed mobs: Mobs that no longer exist in current versions of the game.


 * Education Edition mobs: Mobs that only exist on Education Edition.


 * Proposal 2:


 * Passive: Mobs that never attack the player, nor cause damage intentionally (Pufferfish never attacks, but activates a poison aura).


 * Neutral: Mobs that attack the player if they attack first, or the player doesn't meet the requirements to avoid being attacked by these mobs, leading to the first line (this one) be the requirement to being attacked. (For example, piglins attack even if a player has gold armor when attacked, or spiders attack even at high light levels when attacked).


 * Hostile: Mobs that always attack the player intentionally, hunting it, even if there are ways to make them to not attack the player. (For example, hoglins always want to attack the player, but don't do that when near warped fungus or nether portals).


 * Boss mobs: Mobs that have a visual health bar, don't spawn randomly and are confronted intentionally.


 * Compound mobs: Compund mobs that consist of a mob riding another mob.


 * Unused mobs: Mobs that don't spawn naturally but can be found on the Creative menu or be summoned with the command.


 * Joke mobs: Mobs that only existed on April Fools versions.


 * Planned mobs: Mobs that doesn't exist on a full release, nor on a snapshot/beta, but are mentioned and confirmed to be added. Their links redirect to the Mentioned features articles. (It's the current "Mentioned mobs", but without the Moobloom and the Iceologer, and the Warden could go here too)


 * Concept mobs: Mobs that only existed as concepts, but never were implemented nor fully announced. (I's the current "Unimplemented mobs" renamed to be more precise, also including the Moobloom and Iceologer, as they were concepts too)


 * Removed mobs: Mobs that no longer exist in current versions of the game.


 * Education Edition mobs: Mobs that only exist on Education Edition.


 * As you see, we don't need Tameable, deffensive or trustable, nor utility. Also I splitted "Upcoming mobs" on the first proposal to be more specific and not cause any confussion. I added a second proposal to decide which is better, and on the second proposal the mobs that are on development versions go to their final category with an upcoming template. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * There has been a prior decision against proliferation of categories, which is why I'm against your suggestion. Having too many categories makes the system needlessly unclear.


 * I'm especially against "compound mobs". They are two (or multiple) mobs, and should not be included in a list of (single) mobs. That's like saying a group of people is a hair color.


 * Other than that, categories should be exclusive. A mob should not fit multiple categories, so because e.g. "trustable mobs" are also passive, trustable must either not exist or be a subcategory of passive. For this reason, "utility mobs" can't exist, because it has both neutral and passive mobs in it, and cannot be a subcategory of both.


 * Regarding the pufferfish, I have made my views regarding whether pufferfish attack clear before on this page. Your only reason to object to them being hostile is that it does not feel correct to classify them as such, but I don't see that as a valid reason. Furthermore, you claim to have explained why pufferfish should be defensive, but you have in fact not done so, because you have not explained why they should not be neutral: a neutral mob is by definition one that is neither passive nor hostile; you claim pufferfish are not passive and not hostile; thus, they would be neutral. Blue Banana whotookthisname (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes exactly, they only attack when you approach them to defend themselves, not to hurt you, therefore they are a neutral mob. Passive mobs cant damage you in any way, and hostile mobs will follow you and attempt to attack you repeatedly. James Haydon (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I understand, we need to reclassify the list making it clearer but not full of many categories. Also, the reasoning of why pufferfish are passive is that they never attack the player (this means, chase it to perform an attack). They activate a poison cloud near players, but never perform an actual attack. That's why we discussed that on Talk:Pufferfish. We didn't get a clear concensus, but I think that they are passive because they don't chase you. Also, on another perspective, in real life an animal may not be agressive but can damage you unintentionally because its skin can have poisonous toxins. That's why they are passive.


 * Now, about categories, I completely agree with compound mobs. We need to get rid of these on the list, as they are unnecesary. I'll show you another proposal, now updated to fit a shorter categorization.


 * Proposal 3:


 * Passive: Mobs that never attack the player, nor cause damage intentionally (Pufferfish never attacks, but activates a poison aura).


 * Neutral: Mobs that attack the player if they attack first, or the player doesn't meet the requirements to avoid being attacked by these mobs, leading to the first line (this one) be the requirement to being attacked. (For example, piglins attack even if a player has gold armor when attacked, or spiders attack even at high light levels when attacked).


 * Hostile: Mobs that always attack the player intentionally, hunting it, even if there are ways to make them to not attack the player. (For example, hoglins always want to attack the player, but don't do that when near warped fungus or nether portals).


 * Boss mobs: Mobs that have a visual health bar, don't spawn randomly and are confronted intentionally.


 * Joke mobs: Mobs that only existed on April Fools versions.


 * Planned mobs: Mobs that doesn't exist on a full release, nor on a snapshot/beta, but are mentioned and confirmed to be added. Their links redirect to the Mentioned features articles. (It's the current "Mentioned mobs", but without the Moobloom and the Iceologer, and the Warden could go here too)


 * Concept mobs: Mobs that only existed as concepts, but never were implemented nor fully announced. (I's the current "Unimplemented mobs" renamed to be more precise, also including the Moobloom and Iceologer, as they were concepts too)


 * Removed mobs: Mobs that no longer exist in current versions of the game.


 * Education Edition mobs: Mobs that only exist on Education Edition.


 * Note: Currently upcoming mobs that are implemented either on a snapshot or beta now would go to their final category, marked with an Upcoming mark.
 * Note 2: Unused mobs just waste space. They do exist and can be summoned with the . That they don't spawn naturally doesn't mean that they should be separated from the others.


 * Finally I made a concise and understandable list. I think that this third proposal will fit perfectly how mobs should be categorized. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 15:21, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Mobs in 1.17
Hey why are we adding Glow Squids, Axolotl, and Goats? If were adding them, then why not add the Warden to the list. It was showcased in Minecraft Live 2020. Witherbeam (talk) 22:57, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , the Warden is not in dev snapshots yet. Look at the style guide for more info.Humiebeetalk contribs 22:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Size Comparison
I think there should be a picture of a size comparison on the page showing the sizes of the mobs in Minecraft, either via hitboxes or visual size Mikail the lizard 16:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

No shulker in history section
I looked at the history, but there's no 1.9--86.136.184.199 14:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I added that section there. James Haydon (talk) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Split Hostile Mobs and Compound Mobs?
Currently, compound mobs are listed under the hostile mob category. There are a few reasons why I think it might be better to list them separately in their own category underneath:

1: Compound mobs are each two mobs together, rather than one, which makes them fundamentally different from other mob types.

2: While the rider in each of the naturally generated compound mobs is hostile, in only 1 of these 4 cases is the ridden mob hostile, and in the other 3 cases it’s either passive or neutral, and so doesn’t really belong in the hostile mobs category.

3: Because a compound mob is made up of two other mobs, at least one of which is also a hostile mob, each hostile mob which is part of a compound mob ends up getting listed twice within the same category.

4: Since all of the compound mobs have similar looking icons with half of one mob’s face and half of another’s, they’d look better if they were all next to each other. AlienAgent124 (talk) 02:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Spawning
It mentions that "Most mobs never spawn on transparent blocks, in water (except fish, dolphins, turtles, and other aquatic creatures), in lava (except for striders), on bedrock, or on blocks less than a full block tall (such as slabs placed on the bottom half). The exception is monster spawners, from which monsters can spawn naturally on any block including air."

This is something that needs to be massively expanded. I'm sure 10 year veterans have no difficulty with this, but relatively new players (like me) find this uselessly vague. What exactly is the full list of blocks that guarantees that they do not spawn? GMRE (talk) 18:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Illusioner
Will the illusioner have a spawn egg and be in the next updates of Java and bedrock editions? – Unsigned comment added by Zachbarbo (talk • contribs) at 16:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC). Sign comments with
 * Maybe 105.184.81.27 16:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Zombie Horse
Will zombie horses be in survival mode in the next updates of Java and bedrock editions? – Unsigned comment added by Zachbarbo (talk • contribs) at 17:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC). Sign comments with
 * Maybe 105.184.81.27 17:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The herobrine glitch
Today i was playing a minecraft server but a huge chunk of mining class was gone repeatedly 3 times then it didn't teleport me i was stuck and then there was 1x1 tunnels next everyone froze but i can do everything illegal break block i not supposed to. I left the server and never play it again. – Unsigned comment added by 172.58.187.199 (talk) at 07:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC). Sign comments with
 * I don't think it's a "Herobrine" glitch, a huge chunk is missing, everyone is frozen, can do everything illegal like breaking blocks you're not supposed to, it's a lag, normal glitch. Maybe your internet or the server is lagging. NexaForX (𝓣𝓪𝓵𝓴 ''' 00:48, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Warden
Can as separate page be made for the warden? Currently it Redirects you to Caves and Cliffs. 69.160.255.183 18:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Not until it gets added in a development version of the game. An article does exist, but it has a redirect on it. The redirect will be removed if it ever gets added. James Haydon (talk) 18:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Drop Rates
Most mobs have a "Drops" section in their respective pages, however this section is not very useful when it comes to figuring out the drop rates per mob. For example, the fact that guardians drop 0-2 prismarine shards doesn't imply the number of shards the guardian will drop on average. I would suggest adding a table to each "Drops" section (unless there are no drops) with columns for each level of looting including no looting and rows for each drop type, with each entry in the table corresponding to the average number of that drop per mob. Note that this suggestion would have no effect on this page, but I thought this was the best place to suggest it since it would effect most mob's respective pages.--Smugless (talk) 06:13, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Illusioners are exclusive to Java Edition
This page lists illusioners in the illager classification, however, it does not say that they are exclusive to Java Edition.--136.36.85.214 19:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Question on the unimplemented mobs
So there are some mobs listed in unimplemented mobs which are mentioned features. I noticed not all of them are on the list (Soul Fire Blazes, tree animals, and the Pigman Bodyguard.) Is there a criteria for the list or were they just overlooked? I'm pretty sure Herobrine was mentioned by Jeb as being a far future possibility. If Hamsters are on there which were more of a jest, then shouldn't he be on there too? Yekulten (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Upcoming mob!
Minecraft just made a new video, and currently, we know "The Glare" is coming for Minecraft's 1.18 mob vote! – Unsigned comment added by Dragonlord187 (talk • contribs) at 15:35, 11 October 2021 (UTC). Sign comments with

The China Edition 'Mob Vote'
In the Mob Vote section, the page reads:

"Before the second vote, the China Edition also had a mob vote, the winner of which was the Panda."

I believe that this is inaccurate, and that mistranslation has lead to a misunderstanding of what the poll in question was about.

Rather than a "mob vote" (which I would understand to mean a vote as to which mob to add to the game) it seems it was more a popularity poll to hype Chinese players up for the addition of Pandas, something along the lines of 'A national treasure is getting added to Minecraft! Which would you choose!?'. As such I don't believe that the information regarding the Chinese poll belongs on this page.

The tweet is now missing, but apparently Aubrey Norris, then Minecraft community manager, denied that pandas were added due to the poll:

"According to Aubrey Norris, this vote did not cause the Panda to be added. So now I wonder about the significance of the vote.

https://twitter.com/Chupacaubrey/status/1047338541728948224 "

Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZkuL2lavYs&lc=Ugwaa5wUKnfhDypzkCJ4AaABAg

Backing this up is this YouTube Commenter claiming that the page for the poll had been mistranslated, and supplying their own translation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZkuL2lavYs&lc=Ugwaa5wUKnfhDypzkCJ4AaABAg.8lvm97nvubZ8lwGaDk8tB3

I have some question?
All mobs can be attacked and hurt (from falling, attacked by a player or another mob, falling into the void, hit by an arrow, etc), and have some form of voluntary movement. This is how the wiki say. But is not true for giant. It just stands still and not do anything. It's have the same AI as armor stand. So why giant is considered a mob while armor stand is not? Player can be attack, hurt, move and have AI, so why player is not a mob? -Brain180-talk/contr
 * Does Giant is a mob?
 * Why player is not considered a mob?


 * "Mob" simply means "mobile entity". Giants are mobile. They can move when they respond to damage. Mobs are controlled by the game. Players are not. Amatulic (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Jockeys are not considered mobs
Chicken Jockeys, Spider Jockeys, Skeleton Horsemen and Killer Bunnys are listed on the hostile section of this page even though they are not mobs (no unique id or entity) but rather in-game phenomenons, so I'd like to remove the links (which can be accessed from the respective mob's page) since they actively mislead players into thinking them to be unique mobs... Uniimog (talk) 19:10 13 May 2022 (CEST)
 * It was proposed above in to move them to a separate section, which I'd still agree with. It is worth briefly mentioning the occurrence and behavior of jockeys as they spawn naturally, but they should not be treated like separate mobs as they are currently. – Sonicwave  talk  04:30, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually I don't think that'd be necessary since the links can already be found on the Mobs' Pages.. Still I'd be fine to change it that way but, according to this logic wouldn't we need entries for Hoglin Jockeys, Ravager Jockeys, and Strider Jockeys, and basically every Mob from Bedrock (for Babie Zombie Riders) as well? Uniimog (talk) 12:11 14 May 2022 (CEST)

Mob icon innovation
DISCLAIMER: This conversation was originally discussed at the Dolphin's Face's talk page. It has been recommended by an admin that the topic would be explained here as well. Please read with an open mind and give suggestions. Only constructive criticism please.

The Dolphin mob in Minecraft is composed of 8 primary cubes and 7 primary bones. 1 of those bones is tagged with the name "body". In this bone there is included the cube to which the Dolphin's face is textured on (aka it's head) and the ending of the Dolphin's torso. The tail is a completely separate bone and cube so judging by the real model it is safe to say that the Dolphin's head is much larger than the current face icon and that the current design does not do it any justice. Although the real head has been proven to be oversized for the mob faces in the page Mob, it does not mean that we should "improvise" to much on the design choice. Things like the Witch's hat, the Hoglin's hair, half of the Goat's beard, the list goes on. I am surprised at how the Warden's ears were (fankfully) included. So I propose a better system that might be extremely controversial but I think it might be worth trying. Now yes I know I should write this on the Mob talk page however I started writing here so just deal with it. I propose we instead of doing 2d faces that only fit one size in a small grid of images, we should instead use 3d pre-rendered isometric renders of only the mob's head. I think this will not only look better but also work extremely well no matter the size the renders will never look weird or out of "pixel size". I have here some examples of this:



Of course the heads are not all the same size here but that is just for demonstration purposes. What do you people think? Is it a good idea? Should it be used or scrapped? Thank you. Witheremperor2006 (talk) 00:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Loved this idea, in my opinion they are much better looking and will even be consistent with pages like Blocks, which also use 3d pre-rendered isometric renders. Rogerio980Pizzaa (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I also support your proposed innovation. Though I do believe that the mob icons should all be the same size before you enact your proposal. Despite support your proposed innovation, I will remain firmly in opposition to you enacting your proposal, at least until the mob icons are all the same size. Drour1234 (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They are supposed to be the exact same size. The images above are just for demonstration purposes. The size matter was about pixels in 2d icons. But they will all fit in a balanced grid. Thank you for the suggestions though. Witheremperor2006 (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * In that case, as long as you do not make a mistake when you enact your proposed innovation, I will support it. Drour1234 (talk) 19:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is one big problem thought, the jockeys. How are you going to make an icon of them? Have a large rider's head and a small mount's head similar to the Chicken Jockey from Minecraft Dungeons? T AncientMobIcon ChickenJockey.png Rogerio980Pizzaa (talk) 21:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * While Im into concept of showing the mob heads in their true form, I don't think isometric view is fitting for the group list. How about keeping them facing front, but with all the head features? Take it as extension/imrovement of the current sprite style. Oakar567 (talk) 21:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)