FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing the page, Mirror of the Ice Barrier.

Please try to

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Be welcoming

Talk Pages are only for the discussion on how to improve the article. Please post your questions on the Rulings Forum and general discussion on the Forum.

Ice Barrier Template

Why is this considered a "member" of the Ice Barrier archetype? It's not a monster, and it's not even support for Ice Barrier monsters; it's an anti-support against Trishula. So why is it contained in the "member" section? The Pope 16:12, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Like how "Gravekeeper's Servant" is eligible for "Gravekeeper's" monsters support cards when used with "Magical Hats", this is eligible for "Ice Barrier" monsters support cards when used with "Magical Hats". -- Deltaneos (talk) 00:04, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
What does Magical Hats have to do with anything? Also, Gravekeeper's Servant is located in the Related section, which just supports this case. The Pope 01:05, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
I think that was meant to be sarcastic. Anyways, Gladiator Beast War Chariot and Morphtronic Accelerator (first 2 cards I could think of that have the 'archetype name', but are not monsters) both are in 'Support', and not 'Member'.
The reason should be because of the pages like List of "Gladiator Beast" cards, 'Archetypes member' is used when generating that list, and those pages are for monsters only. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 01:11, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Let me explain the Wikia's policy on this.

In this case, Mirror of the Ice Barrier would fall under the Archetype Related category.-- HHTurtle Talk   01:19, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

It has always been done like this, if you want more proof you can look at the Archetype NavBox for Lightsworns, Gadgets, Harpie's Feather Duster for Harpies, Goblins, etc...-- HHTurtle Talk   15:38, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Falzar FZ: I wasn't sarcastic.
The Pope: "Magical Hats" is one (maybe the only way) of using Spell and Trap Cards as monsters. If an "Ice Barrier" card can be used as a monster, it's eligible for "Ice Barrier" monster support cards. "Gravekeeper's Servant" simply being in the related section isn't evidence against this. You need the reason it is for it to be considered evidence. Otherwise one page being vandalised would support that it's right to vandalise another page.
Hide Head Turtle: Where is it stated that that is the wiki's policy on this?
  • "|archsupport1 = " was made for cards that support a specific group of cards. (usually recognised by having a common portion of their name.)
  • "|archetype1 = " was made for cards that are support by the cards covered in "|archsupport1 = " or are connected by reputation (e.g. "Monarch".)
  • After a while we realised it was wrong to call cards like "Spark Blaster" archsupport, since they don't support the whole archetype. (If "Spark Blaster" was counted as archsupport for "Elemental Hero" monsters because it supports 1 "Elemental Hero", then it should have also been considered support for Warrior and LIGHT since it supports 1 member of them.) So "|archrelated1 = " was added for cards like that.
If only monsters count as members of an archetype, then "Speed Spell" and "Fusion" (as mentioned in "Synchro Fusionist") have no members. -- Deltaneos (talk) 22:55, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
Speed Spell is an archetype of spells, whereas Ice Barrier is an archetype of monsters. Completely different. The Pope 17:01, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

I don't get what "Magical Hats" has anything to do here, since the Hats places the monsters in face down. Dark-Shimy (talkcontribs) 19:18, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

@Deltaneos: Ok... then there are quite a few pages that don't follow that.
Try "Magical Hats" + "Desert Sunlight" if you want it to be face-up. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 22:02, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, it seems to me like Hydronic is is the only guy who keeps harping on reverting it back to the way it was. Can someone please slap some sense into that guy? He's refusing to talk on the talk page pretty much because he wants to make an edit war. The Pope 23:19, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

My arguments

As Deltaneos already pointed it out, S/Ts ARE being treated as "members" of Archetypes (Scrap-Iron, Fusion, Polymerisation, Speed Spells...). I just want to add something else, see this page, it DOES list DARK WORLD S/Ts as MEMBERS. What are your responses to THAT?--Hydronic (talkcontribs) 21:39, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

I noticed an "Orly? What if I told you that Deltaneos disagrees with you?..."
Well, in response to that, I'll quote from Deltaneos himself "Don't think of being an admin as having a higher rank or influence over other editors."
Currently, the majority agrees on the method that HHT highlights.
And now the 'List of Monster Cards' are messed up... -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:19, October 3, 2010 (UTC)
Nice try, that was just to bring to attention that the number of those who think the card should be treated as Related to the Ice Barrier Archetype isn't superior to the number of those who think the opposite.--Hydronic (talkcontribs) 16:30, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
Personally, I view it as being related to the archetype, much like how "Harpie's Brother" is related to the "Harpie" archetype without being a member. "Mirror of the Ice Barrier" is not a support card for the archetype, and using "Magical Hats" as an argument is actually very poor, as it is a very unique card with unique rulings, such as the one Del pointed out. DemonGodAsura 17:03, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
Harpie brother doesn't include the japanese for Harpie in its japanese name, AND go see Cobal of DW w/e his name is, he supports "DW Cards", so S/Ts are part of the archetype.--Hydronic (talkcontribs) 17:56, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
I understand the "Harpie's Brother" issue. By definition, Spell Cards cannot be a part of the archetype:
1 - the original pattern or model of which all things of the same type are representations or copies
By definition, only creatures/monsters can be part or, or an, archetype. Spell and Trap Cards do not reflect this. Neither in art nor effect. They are mostly objects, techniques or actions rather than creatures, and therefore cannot follow the pattern or model. This is where it gets difficult. Because a card can support a member of an archetype, that does not mean that it is a part of the card. Spell and Trap Cards that share part of their name with an archetype is called "themed support", not a direct member of the archetype. DemonGodAsura 18:20, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

What does it say at the top of an "Archetype" listing? "List of X Monsters". Is Mirror of the Ice Barrier a monster? No. Does it support the archetype? No. Therefore it is related. The Pope 18:45, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

One of the main ideas of those list pages is so you can find a list of cards that can be affected by an archetypes' support cards. You're after removing all the "Dark World" Spell and Trap Cards when they're all searchable by "Cobal, Excavator of Dark World", who mentions a "Dark World" card, not a "Dark World" monster. The page could have just been renamed List of "Dark World" cards. Also |archetype1 = doesn't exist specifically for those list pages. So it shouldn't be removed from card articles just to fix those lists. If we only wanted the list to show monsters, we could add [[Card Category::Monster Cards]] to the query.
In your edit summaries, you said This supports the "Dark World" archetype; it doesn't belong in the "List of Dark World Monsters". How does being a support card, stop it being a member? "Elemental Hero Necroshade" supports "Elemental Hero" monsters, but is clearly an "Elemental Hero". -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:14, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
Because Necroshade is a monster, whereas those are not. The Pope 20:29, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
Hold on for a second, I want to know who set this stupid rule of Archetype membership being privileged to Monster Cards only.--Hydronic (talkcontribs) 20:36, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
The definition of archetype. DemonGodAsura (talkcontribs) 02:27, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
Clicking on the "members" link on the archetype page leads to "List of Ice Barrier Monsters". I think that speaks for itself.

Sorry, I'm a little late to the party, but still...

If we're defining the archetype by a fundamental card property like the card's name, then I don't see why we should limit it to monsters. Game mechanics don't differentiate between "Ice Barrier" monsters and "Ice Barrier" Spell/Traps. "Axe of Despair" is an Archfiend, so it can be used with "Falling Down" just as well as "Terrorking Archfiend" is; there's no difference. Yes, individual cards may specify "an Archfiend monster", but that shouldn't be enough to exclude it from the archetype. "Gadget Arms" specifies "1 "Morphtronic" Spell or Trap Card", so does that mean that "Morphtronic Boarden" doesn't belong in the "Morphtronics" archetype? "Morphtronic Scopen" only works on Level 4 "Morphtronic" monsters, so does that mean that "Morphtronic Scopen" isn't a "Morphtronic"?

If we're defining the cards by flavour, then I guess that you could make an argument for excluding Spells/Traps, based on how you define the flavour. However, if we're defining things in this way, then "Rinyan, Lightsworn Rogue" wouldn't be a "Lightsworn" (its effect goes against the trend of "get cards into the Graveyard") and "Shadow Tamer" wouldn't be an Archfiend (it takes control of your opponent's Archfiends; how does that fit in?).

About those "List of "Archfiend" monsters" pages, I'd prefer if they said "List of "Archfiend" cards".

Although everyone seems to be over it, if we want to discuss this more, then we should probably take it to the forum. --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 03:18, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

The Archfiend case is a weird exception. That is due to a mistranslation in the TCG. But for the most part, Archetypes are meant to classify the monsters within it, not spells or traps that happen to have their name. That's like putting "Gravekeeper's Servant" in the "Gravekeeper's" Archetype since they share the name. It's not a monster within the archetype, so it's not in the archetype. It doesn't support Gravekeepers, so it's not support. Therefore, it's related, just like this card is.

...though that apparently flew right over Hydronic's head when he went and changed it to an archetype member despite it not being one. The Pope 06:37, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

At any rate, here's a forum discussion. The Pope 06:56, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

You totally ignored Deux Ex Machina's point.--Hydronic (talkcontribs) 13:56, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.