Talk:Wight

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Wight.
This page is for discussing how to improve the page. For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum. To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum. To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Please try to Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

Skull Servants or Wights?

Should this be kept under "Skull Servants"? The proper term in the OCG is "Wight". In the past, and quite recently, cards that belong to an Archetype and do not follow the requirement (having "..." in the name) have had their name changed. Examples would be "Amazoness Archer", "Wattkid", and "Karakuri Spider". The main point is that "Wight" is easier to say and I have seen its use compared to a "Skull Servant Deck" at tornaments recently. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 04:54, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

It has been close to a full year since I posted the above. There has been no discussion from anyone. I still support the entirety of above, with addition of saying in the last year that only time I have heard "Skull Servant Deck" is on this Wikia. With me having one of these Decks in the Tournaments, you can say that I have heard "Wight Deck" quite a lot over the past year. :P What about a name change? --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 11:49, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

King of the Skull Servants says "Skull Servant" cards, which means "Skull Servant" archetype.

and "Skull Servant Deck" "Yu-Gi-Oh!" vs. "Wight Deck" "Yu-Gi-Oh!" in Google says: About 12,200 results (0.18 seconds) vs. About 672 results (0.15 seconds)

-Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 11:58, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

"King" says "The original ATK of this card becomes the number of 'King of the Skull Servants' and 'Skull Servant' cards in your Graveyard X 1000 points." This would have just said "The original ATK of this card becomes the number of "Skull Servant" cards in your Graveyard X 1000 points." If that was intended to be an Archetype name. Since that card was made, three other cards have been made with that archetype and granted that one of them doesn't exactly work well, Tri-Wight Zone, The other two also have "Wight" in their names. It is misleading to say that these are the "Skull Servants" when only two of the cards have that specific phrase in their names. Additionally, if the Japanese translation is correct, "Wight" is in both "King of the Skull Servants'" name and "Skull Servant" was originally called "Wight". --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 12:31, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE! Thank you User:Dinoguy1000! --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 00:58, November 1, 2011 (UTC)

Plaguespreader Zombie

...does not seem to be related to this archetype. It does not, as the page suggests, benefit from a full Graveyard, though it benefits from being milled there. What are your thoughts?

Designless Square (talk • contribs) 01:33, December 30, 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean that "Plaguespreader Zombie" does not benefit the Wights well, however the Wights benefit "Plaguespreader Zombie" EXTREMEly well. With "Archfiend Zombie-Skull", It protects all Zombies (such as "King of the Skull Servants") from card effects. With "King"'s effect to revive from battle destruction, the best way to get rid of a High Attack King is to kill it with a card effect. Additionally, Archfiend Zombie-Skull requires Plaguespreader Zombie and two other Zombies whose total level equals a mere 6 Levels. Minus the two for Plaguespreader and the total is 4 Levels from at least two Zombies. In this deck, The Lady in Wight can be combined with any other wight card and make this possible easily.

This is not really a case in how does this card boost this deck best, just how well can this card benefit from the surrounding cards. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 18:14, December 30, 2010 (UTC)

November 15th 2011 revert to "Skull Servants"

Hello, I was wondering why the page, (Wight) was reverted back to this page. There was a discussion (left above) that ended with no one complaining, at least on this page or anywhere else I was aware of. I seek to return this page to Wight. Comments? --01:02, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, the page has been returned to Wight. If there are any who disagree that this page, the Family of "Wight" or "Skull Servant" cards should be under "Skull Servant", please say your opinion and reasons why below. --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 02:49, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

For the record, the user who reverted to "Skull Servants" has a history of moving pages without comment and against consensus; I've warned them about it before. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 05:47, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

December 3rd way of displaying the Deck

I was looking at the recent changes to this page and saw that the "Basic "Wight" Deck" section is horribly bunched up now due to the spoiler thing added. It causes the Spell card section to be pushed down farther than many computer screens can show. What does anyone think about instead using a system like seen on the Frog page that shows all the cards but also shows reasons on why they are in the deck while also not changing so radically depending on which spoilers are open? --LordGeovanni- (Talk To Me) *Kupo* 01:54, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

I'd prefer to remove the in-list reasons, actually; the description of the deck build should give reasoning on why various cards are or aren't good ideas (within reason, of course). 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 03:03, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

The reason lists look sloppy in parenthesis. However, I love the system on the "Frog" page, with everything in the tables. Very concrete and it should definitely help cut down on edit warring over card additions. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:18, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't actually looked at the Frog page before, but now that I have, I agree. The main reason I put the list into {{Decklist}} on this page was to get rid of excessive headers, which the table also accomplishes. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 03:35, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

cards that could be added or removed

i play a wight deck and thought of some cards that could be added to his article:

Doomsday Horror because it returns all wights to the grave,Soul-Absorbing Bone Tower because if king gets destroyed it cost your opponent 2 cards and little stall with lady in the wight,Mask of Restrict you dont tribute in this deck so could be handy in side at least,Wolf in Sheep's Clothing for in your first turn or after a big wipe(including your own dark hole and darkdust spirit),Megamorph could be really handy if you deliberately put wights in attack pos(and probably wont be destroyed because lady in the wight) to comeback with a 16000 king.

i hope this helps players with wight decks! Dark Elwin (talk • contribs) 15:18, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

done it myself + updated forbidden Dark Elwin (talk • contribs) 17:37, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

Other Cards

There are a few members of the archetype missing: Fire Reaper, The Wandering Doomed, The 13th Grave, Graceful Revival, Flame Ghost, and Zombie Warrior, to name a few. I think they should be added to the archetype box.. Shinigami CHOP!

• They aren't part of the archetype, though. They're just counterparts. And FYI, cards like "Graceful Revival" who simply have the monster in question in the art are considered neither part of the archetype, nor a counterpart.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 20:01, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

Right, archetypes are defined by their Japanese names. If a card does not have "ワイト" in its Japanese name, it is not a member of this archetype. They don't receive support from this archetype's support cards. And they shouldn't be listed in related either. That's not what the relation category is for. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:03, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

There are 13 cards which contain "ワイト" in their name, but are not listed. However, I just noticed that none of the support say "「ワイト」と名のついたモンスター". The support is just for the listed cards, not for any card with "ワイト" in the name. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 09:09, July 13, 2012 (UTC)