I'm pretty sure these are new avatars, and Dark Ixion and Auroral Alacorn should be regarded as such. Where did this "Monoceros" name come from? --Melios 17:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
From Freelance NPC "Maruna-Kurina": "Current taxonomy teaches us that at presentaru, the monoceros family contains few known specimens. Those that are classified exhibit great horn spire-wires jutting from their majestic heads, and are either born of light, or of darkness.
An influx of eyewitness accounts in recent days all point to the undeniable existence of the beastaru named Dark Ixion. Tempered like a storm and ever wary, both allies and beastman alike tend to keep their distance.
The other is dubbed Auroral Alicorn and exhibits a brilliantaru shade of white and a calm, gentle demeanor. The two couldn't be more dissimilar-wimilar.
Though almost never seen in the wild prior to the war, Auroral Alicorn has recently been sighted in Jugner Forest, some say nursing wounds. "
What, in FFXI, says in any way shape or form that Dark Ixion and Auroral Alicorn are freelances? But, whatever, maybe we should delete Category:Sabotenders, Category:Tonberries, and Category: Pixies since those have been summonable in the past and must therefore be avatars. --Lordshadow 17:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Let's keep a cool head, Lordshadow. Second line sounds way too heated. --User:Charitwo/Sig 22:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Not at all. The best way to point out a flawed argument is to show it in a related, but separate, context.
We should consider them regular mobs (or NMs) until SE reports that it's a new avatar. No sense in getting SMNers excited over nothing. --◄Chrisjander► t/ c 19:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
This page has always seemed to have little meaning to me; I mean if we look at the avatar page they have Odin, Alexander, Phoenix, and Bahamut listed there, but none of those are summonable to begin with either, so there's no problem with listing Dark Ixion and Auroral Alicorn as being avatars either. It would have no reason to excite career Summoners. --Mitsukai-Hawke 13:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
The problem is, in FFXI, there has been nothing AT ALL to hint that Dark Ixion is anything other than a normal NM like Behemoth or Sandworm. Chances are, even, that it falls under "Beasts" on the monster correlation chart. And, as I've said before Tonberry Kinq is not listed as an Avatar, nor are Cactuars. Pixies aren't avatars either, nor are Gigas, nor is the Relic Greatsword Ragnarok Knights of Round is a weaponskill, and I don't see anyone trying to change Chocobo nor Gilgamesh to an Avatar either. Just because you could summon Ixion in FFX, that doesn't mean that Dark Ixion is an avatar in this game at all. --Lordshadow 17:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Oppose: 1. They are identified by Maruna-Kurina as a new family. That alone is reason for a family page. 2. Nowhere is Dark Ixion identified as an avatar - and even if he was that would not undermine #1. 3. A mob family page should not depend on how any particular mob in that family is used by SE. 4. A mob family page is intended to, at least, identify certain common characteristics between mobs in that family. So, while this may not be the most useful page since there are only two currently known mobs in this family, the page serves a purpose, since if/when additional family information is known it can be added here, and if new Monoceros are added in the future players can make some assumptions about how they will behave..--GAHOO t/ c 17:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
If I recall correctly, there was a separate family page for Vampyrs back when the only one in existance, or known to ever exist for that matter, was Count Dracula. If S-E is already adding more monsters to that family, then there is certainly the chance that more will be added to this one. There's no reason to dump this family category now if we'll have to bring it back later when it may be more needed. Additionally, there is little to suggest that Dark Ixion is an avatar, mainly that there is already another separate NM that functions similarly to it. This implies that it is a member of a family. Totema1 00:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Resolution - Do Not Delete: Consensus is to keep, and no compelling reason to delete. --GAHOO t/ c 23:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Elementals?[]
Someone killed Dark Ixion while on Trial 1701, which requires you to kill elementals, and got credit for the trial, so apparently Monoceros are Elementals, similar to Category:Pixies. --Kyrie 19:28, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
So we change the category solely based on hear-say? Proof please. --THD 03:29, June 22, 2011 (UTC)