Talk:Book trick

cleanup
I disagree with the cleanup tag. Cleanup means the article is failing considerably in format or style. I do not think this article is, and yes, I am taking this as a personal insult. :) If you mean it is a stub, that's something else. I don't see the article as needing a "major rewrite." --Karlos 13:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * This article looks a damn sight better than 90% of the others in Category:Slang & Terminology IMO. --Rainith 13:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, it does. I didn't have much time yesterday, so I just flagged it for cleanup... This is what I meant a little more detailled: There should be a more general article, discribing the tactics of using tanks with carried objects as a bait (maybe just expant the already existing paragraph about this in the article Carried Object?). "Book trick", "gear trick" and the like should be redirects to that article. Although undoublty most populat there, this tactic isn't limited to Fow or SF at all. The article, as it is right now, includes half of a walktrough for the Army of Darkness quest, which, in my opinion, shouldn't be there, but rather in the article about that quest. Well, maybe "cleanup" was the wrong flag for an article where I'm unsatisfied with the content, but at least I got your attention, didn't I? ;) --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 14:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll switch it to Stub, since what you're saying is that it needs to be better linked to existing content. I disagree with putting the steps in another article. If you want to put the "general" steps into the "general carried object trick" article, that's fine. But I would be against moving the steps specific to this trick into the quest article. The book trick is not done FOR the Army of Darkness quest. I'll put a reference that before completing the quest, you might want to tuse the Unholy Text for the book trick. But if a tank wants to read how to do the book trick, he should find it in book trick not in Army of Darkness. --Karlos 15:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I've heard this in reference to Sorrow's Furnace farming, the Gates of Kryta mission, and a few other places. in light of this i'm modifing this article to reference the general idea of holding something to concentrate enemy fire, and making the original article a second meaning --Honorable Sarah 12:13, 19 March 2006 (CST)
 * If this becomes a general guide, then I suggest rename it to Bundle trick for generality's sake, and still have Book trick direct over (since the term Book trick does come up in-game as a slang). -24.7.179.183 13:03, 19 March 2006 (CST)

Ritualist ashes
I heard that ritualist ashes have the same function as books/kegs/etc as in all monsters attack the ash carrier. Does this make W/Rt the future tank? 'Bring your own keg to any area!' This could also be used as an advantage for pulling~if this is true and if left as it is. 17:42, 30 March 2006 (CST)


 * My secondary was a Ritualist most of the time and I did use one Ashes spell for some time and my observation was that it was not true. Enemies did not always gor for me and when I moved they would break off of me even if I had the ashes. I did not do it enough times to test it thoroughly, but I also observed this to be true with the other carried items. I carried the supplies in the Kurzick Supply Lines quest and most of the time aggro was on me, but unlike in Prophecies, sometimes enemies broke off me to attack someone else. Not 100% certain of any of this though. Just observations and impressions I had. --Karlos 18:07, 30 March 2006 (CST)


 * I specifically tried this out with a W/Rt, and the results were inconclusive, which is why I've not written anything about them. I think the mob AI has been tweaked somewhat, because I noticed the Dredge Cutters always warping to the monks or the ritualist henchies even though I had sprinted into aggro. On the other hand, the nagas seemed to be much more well behaved and maintained focus on the ash tank. (Ah, edit conflict -- I see Karlos has said some of the same things.) &mdash; Stabber 18:12, 30 March 2006 (CST)


 * So the ashes do work as other carried items, but the general behavior against carried items was changed? 18:37, 30 March 2006 (CST)


 * I am implying the latter, but it was not a well studied observation, just a casual note. --Karlos 18:43, 30 March 2006 (CST)

april 25th update
the april 25th game update has made this obsolete. delete/archive? --Honorable Sarah 12:57, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
 * Has this been confirmed on all types of bundles (books, gears, torches, ashes, etc), or just certain ones? I love the idea of it being fixed on all of them, but was wondering if they've all been tested yet. --161.88.255.140 12:59, 26 April 2006 (CDT)


 * tested and confirmed on several bundles, including Gears and Kegs in SF, but i'm in the americas, and can't get to FOW currently.--Honorable Sarah 13:07, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
 * Wow, glad to hear it, and thanks for testing what you have so far. If it holds true for all of them, then there are a lot of articles to clean-up.  Off the top of my head, there's Bundle tank, Thunderhead Keep (Mission), Noble Intentions, Master gear, and I'm sure there are others. --161.88.255.140 13:12, 26 April 2006 (CDT)


 * stabber has started a factions task list and included this. see here: Community Portal
 * Note: It looks like several articles link to the ones marked for deletion, and those reference the use of bundles for aggro management as well. Even more cleanup ... *sigh* --161.88.255.140 13:20, 26 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Just make a list for now. I don't think the entire active GuildWiki userbase is in support of summary deletion of these historically important articles. &mdash; Stabber &#x270d; 13:22, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
 * I'd like specific confirmstion for sceptor of orr, since that one kinda makes sense to attract aggro -PanSola 23:45, 26 April 2006 (CDT)


 * I was running in Sanctum with hench yesterday earning a few more 0.1% explored. I had a full group of henchmen with me and I rarely got attacked even thou I ran to the enemy groups first. It seems that the Scepter no longer holds aggro. I'll confirm this with human players today. --Gem [[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] 02:27, 28 April 2006 (CDT)

Deletion Discussion
For now, I disagree with the deletion tag. For users who do not regularly view the ArenaNet updates, rumors of using the Book Trick will continue for some time. It would be helpful to have a mention of it for people who come here wondering about it. I still hear it mentioned in outposts from time-to-time, although the person usually gets spammed by info that it's now gone from several people; but the mention of it suggests that there are several people who don't know yet that it's gone. Instead of a deletion, I would rather see a majoy cleanup here that simply says that the Book Trick was removed, and just the briefest hint of what it describes doing (no need for a lot of detail, as it is gone now). --161.88.255.140 15:28, 12 May 2006 (CDT)


 * I see your point. I can accept that route, if all the other articles that deal with this sort of tactic are deleted / cleaned up to remove the reference. Right now, we're linking to bundle tank from this article, while stating that the tactic is invalid -- that doesn't make sense. In short, I can accept a single page decrying an outdated, historical piece of information, to teach old players that it doesn't exist anymore. If we do keep this, I'd like to start a central page for listing all similar historical information, so that we don't have this as an orphaned page. (I'd do the necessary edits myself, but I don't know anything about the tactic in question, and am not sure what to remove.)


 * We have deleted all other no-longer-applicable articles, to my knowledge. I know that, back in the days of Fyren, Biro, and I, I personally removed a few. &mdash;Tanaric 22:02, 12 May 2006 (CDT)