Talk:Rune

Sup Absorption Prices
Holy crap, how did the price of Sup Absorption runes drop by almost 98k in 2 months? It was at 100k in April, and it's about 2k! --Rapta 23:00, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

I currently get offered 25 from selling my superior absorption runes to the rune trader (800 before quote). The trader doesn't even have them for sale. While questing, I've received perhaps 4 or 5 superioor absorption and about as many other elite runes in the last week or so. Is this a silent change gone awry? --83.176.210.17 09:11, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Well it no longer has a global effect. It no longer reduces all damage (physical only).  Thus it matters a lot less to a lot of warriors. - 09:24, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * It no longer has a global effect? Are you absolutely sure of this? I'm aware of the fact that this is true for all individual pieces of Knight/Ascalon-gear, but I was under the impression that, like shields, the runes still gave a global effect. Can you show me some crunched numbers on this, PanSola? --Black Ark 09:43, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * The patch notes only say that knight's/Ascalon armor is local. They don't say runes became local.  I haven't tested to see if they were silently changed.  --68.142.14.19 09:54, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * The relevant change is:
 * "Updated shields, armors, and runes with damage reduction abilities so that they only reduce physical damage. "
 * The change isn't global to local (per armor piece), the change here was from the rune originally shielding against all damage types to now only having an effect against physical damage. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:55, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I was pointing out that "Warrior Ascalon and Knight's Armor sets so that the damage reduction applies only when the corresponding location of the body is struck" does not mention anything but the armor. --68.142.14.19 11:09, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Sorry for the confusion; my reply was actually directed towards Black Ark's question. My interpretation of PanSola's comment was that in the context of where he used the word "Global", I read it in relation to damage types (physical vs all), instead of armor pieces; although I could be mistaken.  Different interpretations of PanSola's use of the word "Global"; but from what I can see, the reference of runes in regard to being applied to all pieces vs one piece is an irrelevant topic brought into this by a misunderstanding - it doesn't look to me like anyone actually ever claimed that part of runes had changed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 12:02, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Oh, well. Good. I was planning on having two more sets of warrior-armour crafted, and having to swallow the fact that only physical defense is reduced now is bitter enough. Having to find out that you'd effectively need to slap a rune of superior absorption on each individual piece would be even worse. Of course, now there's the matter of actually finding those runes at the rune-trader, they seem to be permanently out as of late... --Black Ark 12:29, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Back in April, the drop rate also increased. --68.142.14.19 09:30, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * remember these were 40+ just a few days ago, prior to the physical damage change that barek sited. they now only protect against the 3 types of damage warriors already have extra protection against. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 11:03, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * About a month ago, superior absorption was essentially worthless. I gave away one I had rather than sell it to the trader for a few hundred (or a player for maybe a couple thousand).  --68.142.14.19 11:09, 24 July 2006 (CDT)

Pictures
It would be nice if we could get pictures of the icons to place in the types section. I could take screenshots, I guess. Are there pictures in the fan site pack? I couldn't find any in the uploaded images page for the wiki. --Fyren 10:58, 29 Jun 2005 (EST)

Rune of holding?
Should the Rune of Holding be mentioned here? It fits the description. -- Serps 11:12, 17 October 2005 (EST)

From Talk:Rune listing
Since runes are items, maybe each rune should have its own page? Something like...

Category:Items | +-Category:Upgrade Items |   +-Category:Runes |     +- Minor Rune of Healing Prayers

Dunno if that's over the top or anything :) -LordBiro

top! :)

I like it, anyone wanna start on it? ;p Nunix

Since the items category is strating to take off I'm going to start splitting this up into seperate sections. Might need to have subcategories in order to sort these out... 21:09, 17 Jun 2005 (EST)

"Absorbtion" is mispelled. It should be "Absorption", but I don't have time to create new article, relink everything that is pointing to the old article, and mark it for deletion. For all the good of Wiki, it has its flaws.--Jackel 09:41, 13 Jul 2005 (EST)

What's with superior absorption doing -4 dmg? Isn't it 3? --Midk 14:32, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * I'm pretty sure it's Minor -2, major -3, and superior -4, but I could be mistaken.--Talrath Stormcrush 15:10, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

The rune page has the same info, just not explicitly listed out. --Fyren 18:25, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

So which page is right? Actually, the rune page needs to be edited, it says minor was +20 health and major was +30... Still not sure what the correct values are. I'll fill in 30, 41, and 50 for now.. still not sure about the -1, -2, -4. I'll switch it to -4 for now, because I've never heard of such an idea, only -1, -2, -3... --Midk 20:08, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

I hadn't noticed a discrepency between the pages, but there does seem to be something wrong with the explanation of the values in rune, specifically the amount of health they provide. 20:17, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Actually the reason I hadn't nticed a discrepency is because they were, I thought, correct, but it's Midk's new change that I think looks wrong :P A minor rune provides more health than a major rune? 20:23, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * The values above for vigor are correct. I edited Rune to fix the major.  I don't know which value for superior absorption is correct. --Fyren 20:50, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

My bad, that was a typo.. no idea how it got in there. :) --Midk 09:24, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

This page and Runes are redudant in a way. That article tries to list the runes too. --Karlos 17:08, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * I said that yesterday! I think we should axe this one.  --Fyren 19:26, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * Amen. :) --Karlos 19:40, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

So, anyone mind if I delete this page and change the main page to link to rune? --Fyren 07:24, 11 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * I'm all for it. Merge the content of Rune and Rune listing and then get rid of Rune listing. It is definetly redundant. --Tetris L 17:10, 2 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * P.S.: Now that this is a Candidate for Deletion, before we delete it we might add the listing to the bottom of the Rune article. It won't hurt. We might even add images for all the runes. --Tetris L 19:22, 2 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I know what the government will say. If you think this content is worth keeping they'll remove the delete tag and tell you to move the content first. :) --Karlos 19:24, 2 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I don't think the list is worth keeping, but I did ask for pictures for the different rune icons/sizes on the rune talk page... two months ago. --Fyren 19:29, 2 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Huh? How would you arrange the pictures of the runes without a list? --Tetris L 19:35, 2 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Not of every rune. Just of each icon and size, so only six images.  --Fyren 23:39, 5 Sep 2005 (EST)

This looks familiar
http://home.iprimus.com.au/ianclark/dinew/guides/rune.htm is that allowed? Skuld &Dagger; 01:15, 18 October 2005 (EST)
 * Yep, that's the nature of wikis, free to use and copy, provided that the user/copier also allows free use of the information. - Jersyko the Insane 06:53, 3 November 2005 (EST)
 * Yes but with the licsence(sp) i think karlos siad they avhe to l ink back or soemthing 07:36, 3 November 2005 (EST)


 * Actually, provided the user references his source, allows free distribution and does not sell the info. I have been trying to contact them and failing. --Karlos 09:07, 3 November 2005 (EST)

of Holding
isn't it weird that a "Rune of Holding" is not a rune? o_O""" -PanSola 13:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * How is it not a rune?? 19:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's "not" a rune by the way this article "Rune" defines and characterizes runes. -PanSola 22:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Remember that this site does not define the game. it's the other way around... if you are saying it should be added to the article, then go ahead and add it.  03:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No. It's this site's user's intepretations of the game that defines the site.  The game might internally define what "Undead" is, but if we can't tell what the game defined the Smoke Phantom is, we will use our own interprations when writing the Undead and the Smoke Phantom articles.  And that's why we have talk pages, to sort out interprations.  I was trying to solicit other people's opinions over a month ago, and with no response and other more important issues to care about, left this along.  What do *you* think about the article? -PanSola 03:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Nothing in perticular. I would think a page named *rune*s should contain the Rune of Holding, but as you said, players interpetation of *runes* does not contain it, I would guess that this is mainly because the Rune of Holding does not being traded by Rune Traders, or drop. 03:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Superior = 100% recovery
An anonymous user posted that salvaging customized armor with a superior kit will yield the runes at a 100% clip. I find that highly questionable. Please provide any evidence to this (or to the contrary) here. Thanks. --Karlos 12:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Never heard that. I doubt it's true. When ANet made the salvage chance of runes from salvage items 100% they said that there is still a small chance of destroying a rune when trying to salvage it back from armor. At that point the SSK didn't exists yet, but I'm 99% sure that the SSK does the exact same as an ESK. -- 16:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

A superior will "almost always" recover the rune:

Well, so will an expert kit. Based on my attempts, it has a better than 75% chance of recovering the rune (I may have been luck, I have only done this 10 times or so). To prove that the superior kit does better (or even different) than an expert kit. You'd need to buy like 5 pieces of armor and 50 minor runes and try to salvage 25 with an expert kit and 25 with a superior kit and see if you get different results. Otherwise it is gossip. If there's a forum link on some other site, please post it here. --Karlos 11:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

With the update I've never not had one salvaged, with either kit. It doesn't make any sense, ity's been stated it's just a bigger expert {user:skuld/sig}} 212.158.245.101 04:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I've got a dumb question here- Can you stack the effects of multiple Runes of Absorption? About a week ago, I overheard a heated argument in a public channel about this subject. Somebody pointed out that Absorption runes didn't have the same 'non-stacking' text that Vigor or Attribute runes did. Are they stackable? (ie- if you planted a Superior Absorption rune in each of 5 worn pieces of armor, you would have a -15 received damage?) Or is this just a typo? ~Ereshki Gal
 * I'm 99% sure that the answer is "No." You should have one rune of absorption and one peice of damage-reducing armor, at most. --130.58 01:47, 27 February 2006 (CST)
 * I would like to point out that the Absorption runes doesn't have the same 'stacking' text that headgears do. IMHO, this whole "stacking" vs "non-stacking" textual update created as much confusion as it solved. -PanSola 03:11, 27 February 2006 (CST)
 * You know what I thikn would be EXTREMELY funny.. If it turned out they only apply to the piece they are worn on. i.e. they are neither stacking nor non-stacking. They simply deduct 3 dmg from the piece they are on :) That would bring their price down, tremendously :) --Karlos 18:10, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * That has been what I have heard for the longest time. I thought there was even discussion about it here, but maybe it was on other boards.  "If you get an absorbtion rune, use it on your chest armor as that is where it will do the most good."  --Rainith 18:19, 27 February 2006 (CST)


 * I believe that the absorbtion rune only applies to the piece that it covers. Why? The Energy Burn from the Forgotten in the Dragons Lair consistently drain 10 energy and deal 80 damage, while the major absorbtion is stuck on the helmet. The only time it ever does a different amount is when my shield activates to take 1 less damage (5%), for a total of 79 damage instead.


 * Actually, that is because the absorption runes only reduce physical damage.


 * Sorry, I have to correct myself here. Absorption seems to reduce damage from all attacks, whether elemental or physical.

That is pretty funny. I'm really glad I've always planted them on my chest piece now. Thanks guys. ~Ereshki Gal

Superior from purple?
The article says you can't get a superior rune from purple salvage items, but right now I have a purple Ettin's Pauldron of Superior Hammer Mastery in my inventory. Anybody else got a superior rune from a purple item before?
 * yeah, I got one too. maybe it was just changed in the update. 01:18, 24 March 2006 (CST)
 * I think it was changed as my firend got one too today. Nice! (Or is the color bugged?) 01:21, 24 March 2006 (CST)

It's probably bugged, and probably already fixed. See Talk:Game_updates/20060323. --JoDiamonds 06:31, 24 March 2006 (CST)


 * It´s still not fixed.
 * I got 2 purple superiors today on 1 small farm run today(3 zone changes), including 1 purple sup vigor.
 * The bug of gold armors without a rune is most probably fixed..
 * Kong 03:52, 31 March 2006 (CST)


 * Still, all we have is official word that the runes changed so that blue = minor, purple = major or minor and Superior = superior or major. Can you provide screen shots? If so, we will pu a note saying that this issue is bugged at the moment. --Karlos 07:08, 31 March 2006 (CST)

Factions runes
I sold my minor dagger mastery for 160 to the rune guy, can't buy them back though :s is this cos it'll be wiped 02:15, 26 March 2006 (CST)
 * Traders trade what they buy and don´t create runes.The factions runes are popular, i guess someone else bought your rune. Kong 04:00, 31 March 2006 (CST)

Runes in pre
I saw someone selling runes in pre, I found it hard to believe so I opened trade with the guy, and there were 3 runes sittin there. Anyone know how this happens? Perhaps there is a small chance to get a rune with a normal salvage kit? like 15% or something. If anyone has any info to confirm or disprove this, let me know please
 * He probably got them when there was the bug which allowed you to transfer items from post- into pre-. This involved going into observer mode (from pre-searing), then going to your guild hall and getting stuff from a guildmate then leaving your guild hall which would take you back to pre-.  --Rainith 03:06, 8 April 2006 (CDT)
 * Hunting Charr north of the wall can yield Rune drops in Pre-Searing Ascalon.
 * You can't buy expert salvage kits in Pre-Searing. --adeyke 22:10, 18 April 2006 (CDT)

Can't salvage out of starting armor
Starting armor can't be salvaged so you can't salvage the rune out. Might be worth a mention.

Ditto runes bought and applied to pvp armour.

Absorption runes
Why do absorption runes have a separate section in the picture grid? They are warrior runes, and if you look at the pictures they have exactly the same appearance. You cannot apply absorption runes to non-warrior armor -- they do not deserve their own special category. Delia Rashesh 17:10, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
 * Probably either because the wording in-game of the Absorption runes are very slightly different than other warrior runes (which has triggered debates as to if there's any significance to it), or because the original creator of the image gave this one, and no one has gotten around to creating a new one. Everyone is allowed to participate by submitting corrections, feel free to create a new image and upload it if you feel the current one is misleading. --161.88.255.140 17:19, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
 * I believe the original Absorption Runes could be used by any character class. That might explain the difference in wording and be the reason they are in a different section.

If you start a new character with a Sup Rune, make sure to buy him new armor first, because if you decide to place the Sup Rune on a starting armor, and want to salvage it later into a better armor, you realize that starting armor cant be salaveged. And you realize that 15 will be the most pointds you can get with that character unless you want to spend more gold on another rune. I know from experience.

Factions Runes
Starting a repository for Assassin/Ritualist rune images:
 * [[Image:Rune Assassin Minor.jpg]] [[Image:Rune Assassin Major.jpg]] [[Image:Rune Assassin Sup.jpg]]
 * [[Image:Rune Ritualist Minor.jpg]] [[Image:Rune Ritualist Major.jpg]] [[Image:Rune Ritualist Sup.jpg]]

These will need to be added into the table in the article when this is complete. If you upload missing ones, please make sure that they are square images (originals are 42x42px, mine will be 50x50px), and set the JPEG quality to high as they are small images. --Rainith 23:28, 18 May 2006 (CDT)

Unlocking Runes
Are there certain Runes you can't unlock with a Priest of Balthazar? I'm trying to unlock a Rune of Superior Expertise but it doesn't show up on the menu.--Spawn 13:00, 23 May 2006 (CDT)
 * You need to unlock the lower level runes first I believe. - 13:02, 23 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Cheers for the quick answer. Unfortunately I haven't even unlocked a minor rune of expertise yet, let alone a major. Thanks again anyway--Spawn 13:18, 23 May 2006 (CDT)

Expert/Superior salvage now auto-ID's?
Maybe it was just a 1-time thing, but I salvaged an unidentified armor, and got an identified rune out of it. Anyone else? - Greven 01:27, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Hey, saves us 16 gold! ;-) --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 03:22, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * That's not good news. I wanted to sell some unidentified runes. -- Dashface [[Image:User_Dashface_Sig.png]] 07:53, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * It didn't happen to me when I salvaged a major rune today. I suppose Greven had a glitch. --84-175 (talk) 07:57, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Yep, I just tried it on both minor and superior vestments, and I got unidentified runes for each. -- Dashface [[Image:User_Dashface_Sig.png]] 07:23, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Salvaging major runes from your armor
If salvaging -50hp runes from major armor, do you get the old rune, or one with -35hp? -- Dashface  07:55, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Not actually sure what you mean, since there are no -35hp runes, but say you have a major rune(-50hp) on a piece of armor, you can expert salvage the armor to retrieve the rune, however there is always a chance that you will get materials instead of the rune. Not a big deal with Major Runes, but try to salvage off a Superior Vigor rune from armor and get a few Steel Ingots, that stings. --Gares Redstorm 08:46, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Gares: As off today's update there are -35hp runes! Major runes have been changed from -50 to -35. But that doesn't apply to runes that dropped before the update. So I assume Dashface is asking about a Salvage Item that dropped before the update, but hasn't been salvaged or even identified yet. I don't know the answer. Just try! --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 10:17, 2 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Actually, I'm guessing the question is, "If you salvage your character's armor with an old (-50hp) Major Rune, and you manage to salvage the rune from it, does the rune come out as -50hp or as the new -35hp." That's something I'm curious about too.  --Rainith 11:08, 5 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I just tried it. The rune comes out as a useless -50 one if it started as a useless -50 one. No way to convert -50 runes to -35 via application and salvage. -- Dashface [[Image:Dashface.png]] 05:56, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

Rune Images changed
The rune images were changed; which is somewhat good in that the newer ones are cleaner; but, the newer ones are also larger and .png format so they scale horribly. Because they can't be cleanly scaled, we can't reduce the size of the chart without mucking up the image quality to even worse that what the original images looked. So, I'm reverting it back to the original .jpg images for now. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:16, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * I think I prefer the larger chart with the new images over the smaller chart with the old images. --68.142.14.40 07:20, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * The newer .png images should be converted to .jpg. If done to high quality setting.  The .jpg format just works better for scaling issues. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:21, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * That's not really relevant to this article. The old JPGs are still there and the iamges on this page aren't scaled.  So why revert?  --68.142.14.40 07:24, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Actually, if we keep the larger images, then I think they should be scaled down. The larger table is bulky on an 800x600 screen.  Still usable, but I would prefer to scale the images.  (my desktop is 1280x1040, but my older laptop is 800x600). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:29, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Actually, playing with it, it's not hugely different. Might as well revert back to the newer .png for now.  Although I can see needing the .jpg versions at some point (ref: GW:IMAGE). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:30, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Unlocking Runes
How exactly does unlocking the different rune levels work and how do I find out which I've unlocked? I checked with the Priest of Balthazar for which runes I still needed to buy but a lot of them said minor even though I know I've unlocked major or superior version. I'm assuming this is because i have to unlock the lower levels before I can access the higher levels. However, if I ID a superior rune before the minor, will it still be unlocked if I unlock the minor and major later on? Finally, is there a way to find which major and superior runes I've unlocked if I havent unlocked the lower levels yet? -- Prod 10:32, 24 June 2006 (CDT)


 * As you guessed, the priest only shows the lowest level rune you haven't unlocked. To see what you've really unlocked you have to go through the PvP character creator to where you can pick runes for your armor.  IOf course, this will only show runes for one profession at a time.  Also, nothing can "undo" an unlock.  --68.142.14.40 10:38, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Absorbs stack?
Anon added this: This seemed like a pretty subjective point of view and while I do agree that the runes don't explicitly say (Non-stacking) like the Knight's armor does, I'm not sure this still works. Discuss/verify? --Vortexsam 22:45, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * ""NOTE" ALL Absorb runes add up tograther if you apply them to each piece of armor (excipt Knights armor they will not work on that because it already has reduced damage) if you dont think so ask all the hard core pvp players that use warriors."


 * Unless it's a recent silent change by Anet, there were numerous confirmations and reconfirmations that absorption runes do NOT stack. Thus, in the absense of indication that the anon has performed a recent test that shows otherwise, I am going to assume the anon had no idea what s/he's talking about, despite good intentions. - 22:55, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Plus the fact that it would be quite overpowered. :P --Rapta 22:58, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Hmm, yeah I figured as much. Thanks for the comments. --Vortexsam 23:03, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Absorption runes also only absorb physical?
I am aware the latest patch made the absorption from Knight's Armor only to be applied to physical damage, but nowhere do I see any sign of it also applying to absorption runes. I am going to verify this as soon as I'm not the only one in my guild online. >.> &mdash; Galil  07:40, 14 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Nvm, I just saw the description of absorption runes. &mdash; Galil  07:49, 14 July 2006 (CDT)

Runes only dropping from monsters of the same profession?
While soloing wardens and undegrowths in Pongmei Valley to level pets, I noticed that I only got ranger runes. This looks like it could use more research. -- Gordon Ecker 00:50, 24 July 2006 (CDT)