Latest comment: 18 March 202410 comments5 people in discussion
Hi, can somebody load the 1.21 datapack and tell me if the copper blocks contained in the trial chamber are waxed or not ? I just want to be sure since some blocks are oxidized and others not. It's for Trial Chamber/Structure. ---Sharky- (talk) 11:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Simanelix After looking through each trial chamber structure, nearly everything is waxed, with only 37 unwaxed oxidised cut copper, 33 unwaxed oxidised trapdoors, and 1 unwaxed oxidised chiseled copper. This count is the total from every piece of the structure btw, not from a single trial chamber. The only way this count would be off is if there are any unwaxed blocks which jigsaw blocks are set to turn into on generation (which is possible, might check this out later). 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 01:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Now that we have access to the chambers in game I can confirm that, yes, there is a trial_chambers/decor/empty_pot structure piece which does generate in some places in the trial chambers. 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 01:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
User:Misode I agree with you about subheadings. Turns out around half of structure pages have them and half don't. However, on the ones that do, there is a different subheading for each loot table (instead of for each type of container). Do you think that should be done here? Or should that be a sub-sub-heading or something? Plighting Engineerd (talk) 17:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Re-add list of blocks that generate in the structure
Latest comment: 25 November 20233 comments3 people in discussion
Hey, I noticed that the list of blocks section was removed without anyone saying anything. It's important to have the list of blocks, because it's more descriptive than saying "mostly made of copper and tuff." Please correct this. This article needs more attention. CelesteMC (talk)
It was moved to the structure file, you can view it by clicking the "show" button after the "consists of". EnderVexer (talk) 9:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 February 20244 comments3 people in discussion
The second sentence says that there is always 1 trial chamber in each 32×32 chunk region. 2 questions: 1, is this the case in bedrock too, and 2, is mentioning the Region file format correct? The wiki page for it says it hasn't been used since 1.2. Ping @Windwend since you added the information. 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 13:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing it out. For 1, I just checked the Bedrock distribution and seems that trial chambers generate much less frequently than in Java. I have no idea why this is the case, perhaps it's worth reporting to the bug tracker. For 2, I think you made a really good point, The Anvil file format is used instead now, although the 32x32 chunk regions are still used. I don't know of a good way to describe the trial spawner's distribution, so if you can think of a better description and add it there, I would greatly appreciate. Windwend (talk) 16:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
After checking some seeds in Bedrock it seems that trial chambers are generated only in some biomes, and the game also checks if there are no lush caves or dripstone caves underground. Megasys (talk) 14:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Bedrock generates one Trial Chamber in each 34x34 chunk region, but only where biome conditions are met. Region sizes used for structure generation are not always 32x32, for example Java Edition uses 40x40 chunk regions for Ruined Portals and 24x24 chunk regions for Shipwrecks. Megasys (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Structures don't "spawn", they "generate". Also, there is already an {{info needed}} tag, asking which biomes trial chambers try not to generate under in Bedrock Edition. In Java Edition, trial chambers don't care which biome they are in or under, and the game generates them very consistently. Please read Trial_Chambers § Generation. – Unsigned comment added by Simanelix (talk • contribs) at 19:55 15 February 2024 (UTC). Sign comments with ~~~~
As of Preview 1.20.70.24, they generate the same as in Java Edition, that is, consistently across all biomes.
If you're playing an earlier version of Bedrock Edition, there is only speculation for the generation requirements (see above reply) but anecdotally they seem to mostly generate near the borders of lush/dripstone caves.
Latest comment: 11 April 20245 comments3 people in discussion
If you go to Woodland Mansion, there is a table template with each room listed with their name, a cross-section view, and a list of the blocks included. The cross-sections and names of the rooms are already in the "gallery" section of this page, meaning that the only necessary addition would be the list of blocks. Without this table, the abundance of text-only descriptions in the "components" section of this page makes it difficult to comprehend. Should a template like this be added? GameCatastrophe (talk) 04:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
There is no reason not to do this. I'm pretty sure that kind of info does not go on Trial_Chambers/Structure, and in fact does go in Trial_Chambers § components. It will take a while, but feel free to add more descriptions for any rooms. There already is quite a bit of basic description, but more is welcome. --Simanelix(T|C)04:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Better topic titles instead of the long one you wrote:
Trial chambers could have more detailed descriptions like Woodland mansions do
👁 Image Support Yes. We should probably do this right now, since the chambers won't be getting changed very much in the near future, and the previews have finally started coming out. I think it's time to make blueprints for the trial chambers. --Simanelix(T|C)12:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 March 20247 comments4 people in discussion
Question: Can the render for the original chamber_9 be put in development images? Or is that only for Mojang-provided images? --WillChill (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't believe it belongs in development images (I could be wrong), but in general I'm of the opinion that it should remain on the page in some form. It still has that layout in the current release versions (well, with the addition of vaults), there's no alternative render yet, and it's historical information. ✿ShadowMistress✿t+c16:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I agree that it should be represented somewhere on the page, but not in development images. It could go in history, but it would probably be too small to see in the actual history table. I saw one history section one time that included a gallery under the normal history table as part of the history section - not sure if that's proper formatting though. Alternatively we could have a subheading in the gallery section (like is done on Vault) 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 19:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Maybe that first idea can be added to the formatting rules as proper formatting. It seems unintrusive and gives historical images a proper place to be displayed. --WillChill (talk) 05:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
👁 Image Bad idea: Chamber 9 is from a valid version of the game and should therefore be in the main gallery. We can put it in "Development version screenshots", or "Screenshots from beta versions". In fact, I will put it there right now, since it's just not very intrusive. --Simanelix(T|C)12:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Hang on, let's reach a consensus first. I don't know if it's the best idea to oppose all previous suggestions and put your own into effect. For the record, I do support adding a subheading for the galllery section, like I said in my original response. 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm actually pretty interested in exploring the first idea generally speaking (a gallery subsection in History), but for the purposes of this discussion I support a "Before 24w11a/1.20.80.22" subheading like we've been using on all of the other 1.21/1.20.5/1.20.80 content pages. ✿ShadowMistress✿t+c16:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 11 April 202416 comments6 people in discussion
I think we should cut down on the number of images quite a bit, as there are currently 35 in the gallery. Here's the current gallery, as I'll be referencing image numbers quite a bit in this post:
Above and below these images, there are renders and development images. I have no problem with these. The issue I do have is that we have too many images here of too low quality. The majority are very dark, 1 has UI in the image, duplicate images highlighting the vault, duplicate images with monster rooms, and there are 4 separate images of geodes intersecting with trial chambers. How did that even happen?
I suggest splitting off the odd generation images, and removing the second, fourth, seventh, eighth, and ninth images to create a gallery that looks like this:
In addition, images for specific parts of the trial chambers (like the vaults or atrium) could be moved up to the part of the article describing them, but that doesn't have to happen.
👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
I agree with this. Also, I appreciate you deciding to keep the two images I uploaded (the atrium and vault pedestal images). --WillChill (talk) 03:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
If the 2 images you uploaded are so relevant, then what about the rest? Wouldn't they be relevant for the same reason(s)? --Simanelix(T|C)12:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
@Simanelix: I was only showing my gratitude to plighting_engineerd for deciding to keep them and not removing them. It gave me confirmation that I followed the guidelines correctly, as these are the first files I have ever uploaded to the wiki. To answer your question, ALL of the images in the gallery are relevant. As plighting_engineerd explained earlier though, some are poorly captured and MANY are duplicates highlighting the same features. --WillChill (talk) 17:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
👁 Image Support. I was thinking we should make a subpage or a few, for various screenshots, if we get even more images. My logic was that the Trial Chambers is a huge structure with a lot of things for people to do.
However, there are a lot of rooms and we don't have any blueprints for any of them yet. --Simanelix(T|C)12:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
@Simanelix - I'm a little confused by this; the screenshots I suggested to remove were just duplicates of other screenshots. No information would be lost by removing the images. Blueprints of specific rooms probably shouldn't be made yet because they are changing and adding to the trial chambers every single snapshot at this point. Also, that point doesn't have much to do with the images? If you have a specific reason for not removing the suggested images, I'd be happy to hear it but your points are a bit vague. 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
👁 Image Oppose - I'd rather not have an "odd generation" subheading. No other page has this, and honestly, it's pointless. All other galleries do not have one, and this one has literally three images. There's already so few images that its just unnecessary to divide it as if its some novelty. - BD (talk) 00:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
@BD - I was copying what is done on oak and birch pages, as well as I feel like I saw it on other pages as well (it may have been removed since then). Looking through the edit history of the trial chambers page, it looks like Harristic added an odd generation section in February, then you removed it a week later. I think a bit more discussion about whether this subheading is warranted or not is needed. I 👁 Image Soft support having the subsection to split them out of the normal screenshots to make the screenshots more readable, but it's not a big deal either way imo. 👁 Image plighting_engineerd (talk) 00:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think non-structures are the best precedent for this kind of thing, but either way, I don't see why odd generation would be novel enough to get its own subsection. Most of the time, screenshots on pages are documenting peculiarities. Look at any mob page - let's take zombies for example - a lot of the screenshots there are not normal. They're documenting strange occurrences for the sake of having that on the wiki. Yet, they're not arbitrarily spaced into their own section. I don't think odd generation needs to be treated as special, in a randomly-generated game its just normal, honestly. I would barely even consider the screenshots there odd to begin with, sculk veins and monster rooms in trial chambers are extremely common. - BD (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I added an odd generation section because I specifically remembered the monster room page having this same section. I think the section is a good idea, odd generation is inherently interesting and while these are just screenshots, they have the distinct purpose of showcasing odd generation so it’s easy to draw a line between regular screenshots and odd generation screenshots. I think it’s also a good idea to make it clear to readers via the section title that what the screenshot shows is irregular in the game. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 00:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Beyond my disagreements on the usefulness of such a section, in this particular example, its not really warranted to separate it. There are three "odd generation" screenshots - monster rooms in a trial chamber, sculk veins in a trial chamber, and various structures converging into a trial chamber. I can only agree that ONE of these is an example of irregularity - sculk veins are a guarantee if it generates in a deep dark, which it does very often. Monster rooms, on the other hand, are often placed in trial chambers since they're giant underground structures. In this instance, since there's only one case of irregular generation, I think we'd be better off noting this particular image as an irregular example in the description, rather than separating it into its own section. BD (talk) 02:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 11 April 20243 comments2 people in discussion
I have several screenshots of the different murals found inside the trial chambers. There are probably more murals that I have not discovered yet. Let me know if they are of any value to be in the gallery or if they are unnecessary.
The first of which is gigantic, it is super large and the second looks like the old one, but the tree’s logs is now cactus, it has sand and there are empty chests
Latest comment: 27 May 20242 comments1 person in discussion
Do trial chambers generate in existing chunks in worlds created before 1.21.0? If anyone knows this, it would be useful to add that to the generation section! I'll do it myself if I get the chance to test, but maybe someone knows already. Kzthc23 (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I answered my own question and updated the page, the behavior is not unusual or unexpected but worth documenting imo. Kzthc23 (talk) 22:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 June 20241 comment1 person in discussion
The loot tables seem to currently only list enchanted iron axes as being available in trial chamber chests on Bedrock, but I have found several on unmodded Java 1.21. They have been damaged, and seem to have a single random enchantment. Are the tables correct/up-to-date? CrCl3 (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Although by formal definition "chamber" usually means a single room, it can also refer to an enclosed space, possibly consisting of multiple rooms, which matches the trial chamber structure.
I imagine the article ended up with a plural name because people use the plural more often when talking about them and because we generally don't see the whole structure "from the outside" like we do other structures, so we don't develop a strong sense of a trial chamber being something you can count. But I think that will change as we gain more experience with them and notice the awkwardness of phrases like "let's go find A trial chamberS". So I suggest we rename this article. Auldrick (talk) 19:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
It’s called “Trial Chambers” in-game. Which makes sense, the structure is not one chamber, a “chamber” is an individual combat room, so the structure is multiple chambers. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 19:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Did you read what I wrote? "Chamber" is not necessarily an individual room, and Mojang uses it to refer to the entire structure, so since you didn't give evidence that it was called "trial chambers" in the game your argument is void. Auldrick (talk) 19:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Data values or other technical data is not "in-game". In-game is something you see while playing the game. If technical data were in-game, Bottle o' Enchanting should be named something like "Experience bottle". Auldrick (talk) 19:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Difference is that Bottle o’ Enchanting has a display name. A technical name that is shown in-game is an in-game name. Trial chambers is an official name, and while trial chamber kind of is too, it also doesn’t make any sense, so we should use trial chambers. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 19:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Where is this technical name shown "in-game"? You keep saying it's official, but you don't offer evidence. And how does "trial chamber" not make sense? I think you're generalizing your personal opinion to make it sound universal. That's the very signature of an unsupportable argument. Auldrick (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
We had a big blowup about that when you-know-who put that in without discussion. It was wrong from the beginning (violates the non-favoritism principle that was accepted by consensus) and was put in specifically to snub Bedrock Edition, but I stopped when he left the wiki because I felt the controversy needed to end. If you insist on justifying your position based on that very flawed rule, I will resurrect the argument over it and we will have a consensus discussion. Auldrick (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Your criticism of the rule is based on it favouring java, which is wholly irrelevant to this discussion because the java and bedrock identifiers for trial chambers are the same. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 19:51, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
What? Only one part of the rule is bad according to you, and that part is not being used to justify anything here. It's irrelevant, that's it. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 20:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Locate command shows the name in-game, commonly used command might I add. Why would a term used in the game not be official? Trial chamber doesn’t make sense because the individual combat rooms are called chambers, the identifiers for the combat rooms call them chambers. So the structure is a collection of chambers. You think identifiers are not official names, but you need to explain why that’s the case, because as far as I can tell it is not the consensus. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 19:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
At last, a fact-based argument! Very well, I accept that there is evidence for your position, but I still disagree because I don't think it's strong enough evidence and I'm dead set against saying "Let's go find A trial chamberS" (and "Let's go find SOME trail chambers" is too vague)! I hope others will offer their opinions. Auldrick (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
My arguments have been fact throughout. If your evidence is that you have a personal dislike for the vagueness of "let's go find some trial chambers" as a phrase that you say to friends, then, well that's not actually evidence is it. Your other argument is that social media stuff like articles sometimes say trial chamber, but you need to explain why something written by a non-dev would take priority over the name chosen by the actual developers developing the structure. You could apply this exact same situation to trail ruins. You could probably go and find an instance of an article saying "trail ruin", but does that really mean we change the name? I think no. - Harristic / Talk👁 Image 20:25, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
My mistake, I meant evidence-based — though without evidence, not everyone has to agree that they're facts. But enough, we're not arguing the merits any more, we're arguing the argument style, which won't help resolve the issue. Auldrick (talk) 20:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Merits of "Trial chamber:
-Some Mojang posts use it.
-You consider the plural form awkward.
Merits of "Trial chambers":
-Is the name actually used in game.
-Also used in some Mojang posts.
-Better fits the usual "formal definition" of the word.
Personally, I have difficulty seeing the relevance of factors like awkwardness in use or dictionary definitions, if Mojang had chosen to name the structure "pinecone-4-öajkhqiöas", then that's what the article should be called, if they named it "trial chambers", then that's what it should be called, and the in-game name being "trial chambers" seems like pretty conclusive evidence that they in fact chose to name it "trial chambers". CrCl3 (talk) 17:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Except that the supposed in-game name isn't "trial chambers", it's "trial_chambers" with an underscore. So I guess your position amounts to "it's better to follow a 'rule' having no consensus, even if it's offensive, ambiguous, and prescribes an outcome that then has to be transformed into English prose, than to adopt the officially published, ordinary English usage of Mojang themselves". Well, that certainly makes my argument look silly!/s. Auldrick (talk) 03:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Thats an unnecessary level of pettiness. The in-game ID is the closest thing we'd have to the official name of the structure absent a display name, that's what we always do for subjects without a display name. The only thing silly here is you letting this discussion get to the level of needing over 12 indentation colons and arguing on this page the merits of the style guideline. NixinovaTC09:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
We have no consensus covering the absence of a 'display name'. And I find it ironic that you added another level of indentation to accuse me of being silly for the same thing. Which, btw, is a personal attack and I it resent very much. I thought bureaucrats were expected to show more restraint. Auldrick (talk) 14:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Oh, come on. You called Harri obtuse not even a page scroll up and you're making a fuss about being called silly? I'm not gonna respond further, you can keep going at it as much as you are for the holy trophy of removing one letter from the title I guess. NixinovaTC14:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Now I realized there apparently is an advancement that uses the "Trial chamber" form, so it's also used in-game on Java, so I guess there does exist an actual argument for using it after all. CrCl3 (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
I see I neglected to address your question, which was sincerely asked and deserved a reply, so let me do so now. I confess that I was put off by your initial replies, which I felt were blunt and dismissed my arguments without due consideration, but I've had time to settle down and I promise to be civil. I sincerely apologize for being hot-headed.
As far as I'm aware, we don't have a definition of "official name" and I'm not sure we have a consensus as to its meaning. To me, "official name" in this context should mean "a name designated by Mojang as the identifier of a feature, to be used in the common parlance of players". The ultimate authority for it comes from Mojang's intent that it be the common identifier used by players, which is most obviously demonstrated by what we've been calling the "display name" (which to me means a name displayed in the HUD, including interfaces for crafting/smelting/etc.). That covers almost everything—blocks, items, enchantments, status effects, non-mob entities, and mobs (via their spawn eggs). When there is no display name, I think it makes more sense to fall back on that ultimate authority, as demonstrated in direct communications to the public, than on names assigned in the "plumbing" (essentially, internal-use names) and incidentally exposed in commands, debug interfaces, and the like. If the latter were meant as canon, why would they be written in such a non-standard-English way? I believe some editors choose to call them official only to solve the problem of there being no display name in a way that avoids having to search for consensus. But consensus is the very blood of a wiki; it should not be bypassed when it's needed. It's very telling that that so-called "rule" was inserted in the Style Guide without consensus, either before or after its insertion.
I acknowledge that there is validity to the argument that Mojang hasn't been entirely consistent in their use of terms. I think that's because while English uses the same definite article for both singular and plural, it doesn't allow the indefinite article with a plural at all; instead, it has to be expressed phrasally. Mojang started out with the plural term, and when the need for a singular form arose in public communication, they (as least sometimes) adopted "a trial chamber" in favor of wordier phrases like "an instance of trial chambers" or, as this article itself uses, "a trial chambers structure" (surely an ambiguous term). It can be validly argued that this is the speaker/writer's ad hoc solution, so it's not official to the same degree as a display name. But I'd counter that the so-called "rule" of elevating an internal name is likewise an ad hoc solution, as well as unreliable in the abstract because there's no guarantee of consistency across editions. Besides which, it leaves players with the same problem in speaking/writing that Mojang has, and I think it is very likely that they're usually going to solve it the same way, notwithstanding how the wiki decides to title the article. I simply argue that reflecting this IRL usage makes more sense than inventing an obvious kludge and canonizing it as a rule, especially when it cements Java (or any other) bias into our product. Remember wp:IAR. (Although this isn't Wikipedia, I think every wiki ought to adopt it.) Auldrick (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
While not pointed at me, I appreciate your apology here and feel that it should be recognized.
When objectively looking at any evidence presented that the name of structure is intended to be singular, it’s difficult to justify any other perspective. In the meantime I have created a bug report on Mojira (MCPE-183225) about the command not grammar-ing. -BrianGLHF (talk) 15:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Well then, if you find Mojang's official publication calling it "a trial chamber" unconvincing, maybe you'd like to hear it straight from the designers (specifically, Game Designer Brandon Pearce): "So when you first find a trial chamber..."[1]. Auldrick (talk) 03:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
👁 Image Support I have come across quite a few instances when the structure is referred to by Mojang specifically in a singular manner in multiple articles, posts and videos where it is specifically called a Trial Chamber with no S. I feel it's enough usage that this page should be renamed to Trial Chamber to follow the Style Guide.
👁 Image Weak support for changing the article name to singular. The plural form for a single structure doesn't make much sense to me. I get the argument that a "trial chamber" is one of the rooms in the structure, but that feels unnatural. And with Mojang's inconsistent use (Java Edition advancement, Bedrock Edition translated name, and mentions outside of the game), there is not much left to go on. -- mschae23 (M_S_72 | talk) 10:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
👁 Image Oppose due to the inconsistent plural and singular usage in-game, as well as per Harristic's points regarding the plural usage. BDJP(t|c)07:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I disagree that the usage is inconsistent. At least in the majority of cases I see, "trial chambers" (with no article) is used in generalizations that apply to all such structures, which is vanilla usage. There are some examples of "the trial chambers" (with the definite article) where if you're predisposed to thinking of "trial chambers" as a plural form with singular denotation, that could sound like conflicting usage, but for me, if you purposefully set aside that bias they can equally well be read as regular plurals too, in which case there's no inconsistency. Can you point to an example of "the trial chambers" used where it's indisputably meant to refer to a single structure? Or an example of "a trial chambers" being used consistently enough to refute an explanation that it was just a typo? — Auldrick (talk) 05:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you, but it looks like to me that you want a case of "the trial chambers" used to refer to one structure, without question. Well, this may not for perfectly but here's an example: Me and my father are playing legitimate set seed survival. We are testing out this seed, while I teach him how to play. On chunkbase, we have observed the seed to deduce that it should be easy to play on. There is a trial chamber under the bank of the nearest river. We have also copied the world and gone into spectator mode (that's not cheating!) and seen the chamber in question. When I review our plans, I say, "so, once we get netherite, we'll upgrade our gear and go to the trial chambers". Nerdyguy2000 (talk) 14:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I would just like to note that in your own explanation that you yourself just referred to the singular structure in a singular manner when you said "There is a trial chamber under the bank of the nearest river" :) -BrianGLHF (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 July 20245 comments2 people in discussion
Addition of a graphical represented list for the 'Components' section instead of the detailed description as in Ancient City. This should have been done long before when the 1.21 officially released but is still pending. -👁 Image StizzurpXDD(talk)08:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
One would just have to copy tables from Trial Chambers/Structure and make them collapsed. It has not been done yet because these renders were quickly made after the update was released, addon renders are still missing (although these most likely won't go on the main page) and some renders need to be rotated. Though feel free to add them to the main page. - Zamburger (talk) 11:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
The "Consists of" cannot be added for Trial Chambers due to how chambers generate (chambers use a random combination of addons when they generate, thus they will never consist of the same blocks). - Zamburger (talk) 12:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Particular chambers can be consists of same blocks if the addons are not included and all the addons would be mentioned separately. -👁 Image StizzurpXDD(talk)12:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Latest comment: 26 July 20242 comments2 people in discussion
I was playing on a Hypixel SMP and looting a chamber when i noticed every time a key dropped, two would. Is this a result of clearing with multiple players, or are we just lucky? 108.243.12.10705:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Please retest this on a vanilla server (no modificafions) as soon as relatively possible. BDJP(t|c)05:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Do trial chambers generate in the deep dark or not? The infobox says that they don't, but the history section says "far less frequently". I'd have corrected it, but I don't know which is right. So, which is correct and which isn't? -~-Nerdyguy2000TalkEdits20:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Hey! The origin point of the structure coridor_end cannot generate within a deep dark biome. However, other parts of it can theoretically intersect a deep dark biome. This is a very niche case, hence why the 24w21a changelog used "far less frequently".
A nice way of understanding it: see trial chambers as trees - while the roots (coridor_end) will never generate within deep dark biomes, nothing prevents the trunks (corridors), branches (hallways) and leaves (chambers) to do so. :)
Ok! I like the metaphor you put it as, by the way! (And, yeah, I'm pretty sure the gallery section has a picture of sculk veins in a trial chamber. I've seen it myself, too.) -~-Nerdyguy2000TalkEdits20:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
In Java Edition 24w33a, new randomized beds are added in the structure in all colors. Please add the following things in the file structure:
black_bed.not
blue_bed.net
brown_bed.nbt
cyan_bed.nbt
gray_bed.nbt
green_bed.nbt
light_blue_bed.net
light_gray_bed.nbt
lime_bed.nbt
magenta_bed.nbt
orange_bed.nbt
pink_bed.nbt
purple_bed.nbt
white_bed.nbt
yellow_bed.nbt
Also please make a new section for the intersection called "Bed Decor" and add all the beds I assigned for you (including the description, the blocks, and the images) 👁 Image Prenesh25 (talk to me) 11:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
In this “rubble” piece, for example, the perspective of the shadows on the faces of the chest was very unrelated to the rest of the building. This is corrected version. Cıva i ile yazılmaz (talk) 11:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Latest comment: 27 November 202510 comments4 people in discussion
I just found out that regular diamond ore can replace the stone blocks that generate under the Spider spawner. I dont know how rare that is but maybe it should be added to the list of blocks you can obtain. If anyone has any idea how rare that is, please let me know because i just found this. Mangolate (talk) 21:28, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
this is more of a quirk of how ore features are generated (replacing any block with the #stone_ore_replaceables tag regardless of their location) rather than an intentional part of trial chambers, i would not add them to the list mariberry-hearn! (talk) 02:17, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
i don't really agree with including this even as trivia because it's a fact intrinsic to the stone block rather than the actual trial chamber structure - and per style guide suggestion this would be better detailed in Obtaining#Natural generation of Stone rather than trivia anyway mariberry-hearn! (talk) 05:15, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
Tridents can sometimes be found in two hallway loot chests: trial_chambers/hallway/rubble and trial_chambers/hallway/rubble_chamber. They have the same loot table as vaults (loot_tables/chests/trial_chambers/reward). There is a note in the description for those pieces, but it should probably also be stated in the chest loot section. Rampage455 (talk) 22:49, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
Latest comment: 24 April1 comment1 person in discussion
Unresolved
Where are the unwaxed copper blocks' locations in the structure? I also couldn't find the unwaxed oxidized copper blocks in this structure as well. Is it Bedrock specific?
It's an unused piece that sort of looks like a chamber_4 section. It hasn't been put in the Components subsection because it cannot generate and doesn't fit anywhere, it was meant to be put in a history subpage since it was only relevant in a snapshot and is a leftover IIRC. - Zamburger (talk) 09:26, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
Latest comment: 19 May2 comments2 people in discussion
I'd like some information added on a strategy for locating trial chambers. They're always encased in (the relevant type of) stone, so if they get near a large cave it can be very obvious that there's a chamber. I want to make sure there's no reason it shouldn't be added before I make that kind of edit, though.
If I get the go-ahead, I can look more into how the stone encasement generates, since it looks like at least noodle caves can cut through the stone and expose chamber walls.
Actual advice would be tutorial-like info, which is disallowed per the style guide, but you can just mention that during its generation (in the Generation section), the relevant type stone will be used to cover up the chamber after generation. ‑‑MinecraftExp123(talk|contribs)01:23, 19 May 2026 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13:482 comments2 people in discussion
Resolved
I noticed this article says that the music disc "Precipice" can only be obtained via vaults. But I've seen it a couple times in some of the loot chests that spawn inside the trial chambers? I was curious whether that should be added to this article. (This is Bedrock)
Here is an example:
Version: 26.30
Seed: 0
Coordinates: -460 -8 -760
In Trial Chambers § Vaults and reward chests (which used to be § Vaults, I only just renamed it so it's less misleading) it says "each trial chambers vault and reward chest".
I cannot find where it says it can only be obtained via vaults in this page; I'm assuming the section name was the issue. - Zamburger (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
![👁 An Ominous Vault.[1]](https://minecraft.wiki/images/thumb/Ominous_Tweet_Image.jpeg/120px-Ominous_Tweet_Image.jpeg?b6794){kind=link}
