Talk:Run

Article creation
I've put in some more general information, especially for less typical runners (not W/Mo, for instance). I hope this is useful for some players; personally, after my first character went through the game, I challenged myself by trying to run many other characters through some sections of the game (without having any amazing skills). Surpsingly, some odd character combinations can do fairly well. (Distortion is amazing for Elementalist/Mesmers, for instance, while R/W can mostly just pretend to be W/Mo. Necromancers are tough, though.  They have lousy skills for running.  Rambleamblebamble...) Some of this information may be diffusing the focus of the article as it was. Reorganizing the page or breaking it up might be useful. --JoDiamonds 15:58, 26 October 2005 (EST)

Did you know almost all this info exists in Running? Would you like to consolidate? --Karlos 21:23, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)

Doh! I did a brief search before I wrote the article, but must have missed it. The two articles should definetly be merged. --Tetris L 22:17, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Go for it. However, I'd rather everything be moved here, and running be removed, as you can link here using running .  Whoever's interested (I always do the merges, I want somebody else to for a change), make sure all information that exists about this topic in now in run, check the "What links here" on running and change all links to run, and tag running for deletion.  Merging is fun! :) &mdash;Tanaric 22:25, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Karlos and Jackel wrote most of the running article. They were first and I don't wanna offend them, so I'd prefer if one of them does the merging. --Tetris L 22:28, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Welcome to wiki. Do the work yourself.  It'll be good for you. :) &mdash;Tanaric 22:30, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Stepped on somebody's toe once when I edited "his" article. Since that I'm a bit careful. At least give them a chance to comment before you cut'n'dice their stuff. ;) --Tetris L 22:33, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Pfft, I own all articles! MWAHAHAHAHAHA!  But more seriously, this is a clear-cut case of verb conjugation; we always use the infinitive form of a verb, it's just good practice.  Suppose we should codify that somewhere.  Anyway, I guess it's up to you; since I want somebody else to merge something for a change, it's not really fair for me to dictate how you do it, despite how painful it is sitting and watching my opportunity to cut'n'dice somebody's writing pass me by.  :)  &mdash;Tanaric 22:40, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Not to suggest that you need it, you have my blessing to merge any useful info from running to this article, then delete that article. I agree that "run" is a better conjugation for an encyclopedia, I just used what existed at the time.--Jackel 01:08, 19 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * Ouch! My toes! Get off my toes!! :) Done. Please review. I added a list of popular runs, not sure how much people here will like that. It could get pretty controversial. The Ascalon City to Sardelac Sanitarium run!! :)
 * Oh, and you definitely did not need any permission from any of us. If I had issue with any edit you make, trust me, I would not ask for your permission. :) I would either edit away or let you know on the talk page. --Karlos 15:35, 19 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * I'm happy with the result. :) --Tetris L 17:01, 19 Aug 2005 (EST)

Well, you're close. But a lot of stuff still links to running, so deleting it would be inappropriate. I'm deleting your deletion notice, and putting in a redirect for now. If you go back and change all the links from running to run, put a delete notice back up, and I'll delete. &mdash;Tanaric 00:08, 20 Aug 2005 (EST)

The original article spoke disparagingly of running and seemed to indicate that the only two running skills are Sprint and Charge. I mentioned that running is a good way to quickly do the "go get me that item" quests and added on a section where various profession's running skills can be added. Every profession (except maybe monk?), seems to have two "move faster" skills. I also mentioned how I've used my E/R skills to run around. By the way, nothing links to Running anymore.

Mesmer running
Not to say that a Mesmer can't run.. But Illusion of Haste causes Crippling for FIFTEEN seconds. No one woul even be able to make it out of Lornar's pass with that. Then Distortion and Illusion of Weakness are defensive/escape tactics, not running skills. They do not actually increase your speed. --Karlos 15:30, 23 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * 14 in Illusion with a +20% enchantment item means you are crippled for less than a second before recasting (which removes the cripple)


 * I am not sure about this as I have never used this spell in my E/Me specifically, but are you sure? The skill description on this site and EVERY site I just checked says that you become crippled for 15 seconds. They do not say it varies. Currently, ANet's servers are down (at least the ones in my nech of the woods), so I can't go look at my E/Me's skill list.
 * On another note, if you have more than 8 illusion, you can just keep spamming the spell (since it removes crippling), still to be crippled in between casts seems crazy to me. --Karlos 16:45, 23 Sep 2005 (EST)
 * It is possible to run with a mesmer (but I would not do it). The crippling effect of ilusion of haste is not that much of a problem as it gets removed (as does any monster inflicted cripple, think of the Grasping Ghouls on the way to TotA). The problem is rather the recast time. I tried to run with spells with recast time and never got happy with it. However IF you run with spells with recast time, Mesmer is not a bad choice, since you get distortion and hex breaker, stopping you from losing health gradually due to archers and Life Siphon. --Xeeron 19:42, 23 Sep 2005 (EST)

Shout/Skill/Stance
I was looking at this and didn't like how i had to read each skill to see what was a stance and what was a skill (hence, what could be used in conjunction with what). It turns out that all ranger movement boosts are stances, as are all warrior movement boosts except Charge!. I changed the article to reflect this. I also edited the article for clarity, moved the defensive skills to be right next to the miscellaneous defensive skills and added a note on Echo.

Warrior Health
And I quote: "These characters can use "Charge!", have more hitpoints than any other profession"

Warriors have more health (I refuse to call them hit points :P) than other classes? I thought that all professions had the same health progression (i.e., a level 10 Monk has the same base health as a level 10 Warrior). And all classes can use Vigor Runes, and I can't think of a class that doesn't have a weapon upgrade to improve health. I can obviously see the absorption runes and better armor, but not sure about the health issue. I think it's wrong, but I could be wrong that it's wrong. --Nkuvu 00:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I changed it to say "have better armor" instead of "have more hitpoints." Warriors do get endure and defy pain, though, which might have been the point trying to be made.  Dunno.  --Fyren 00:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Other GW Definition of "Run"
I would suggest that we move this to Run (Transportation) or something like that and make Run a disambiguation page between running as a form of transportation and "running" a build.--chrislee149 16:23, 21 April 2006 (CDT)
 * I really don't see a need for the second definition in GW. Walking around the environment is such a basic low-level function that if they can't figure that out, they likely wouldn't be able to find their way to this wiki.  We're a guide, not an all-encompassing encyclopedia.  --161.88.255.140 16:33, 21 April 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't really understand what your response has to do with anything I said. The current article is already about "walking around the environment". I'm talking about another article for the other definition of "run" in GW - that is, using a build or a skill. EX: My necromancer is currently running Spiteful Spirit in Grenth's Footprint. Not sure if you understood what I meant, but it sure sounds like you didn't.--chrislee149 22:09, 21 April 2006 (CDT)
 * I can't see how that is a GW Definition. is sounds more like an english term. Foo 04:45, 22 April 2006 (CDT)