I like the skin on this. Well...it's different.
- I quite like it too. If I didn't already have Sadi's Benediction on my monk I'd probably consider buying/farming this one. --Shadowcrest 00:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Does have a nice skin, I will give it that. Same stats as Kepkhet's Refuge, which I primarily use on my monk, as well as my collector counterpart of Sadi's Benediction. So many good items in this game, and you cant possess them all I suppose :(
Isk8 00:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- What are you talking about Isk8, Sadi's has a different inscription :P --Shadowcrest 02:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Does have a nice skin, I will give it that. Same stats as Kepkhet's Refuge, which I primarily use on my monk, as well as my collector counterpart of Sadi's Benediction. So many good items in this game, and you cant possess them all I suppose :(
Replicating stats[]
Please verify:
- A Protective Staff from Bolereh.
- A perfect Insightful staff head.
- A perfect Staff Wrapping Of Enchanting.
- A perfect Inscription "Aptitude not Attitude".
66.47.27.36 18:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, looks fine.--
El_Nazgir 19:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Reversion discussion[]
This staff has the same stats as Kepkhet's Refuge except for its Holy damage and requirement of Protection Prayers rather than Divine Favor. Was removed, and then I added it again. The reason for my decision is that those are fairly big differences. One uses a certain type of prayer, while the other uses the special attribute of the class. The second difference is the damage. Holy is very different from the generic fire damage. One staff can be used equally well if the monk in question is specd into Prot,Healing or Smite. The other requires a specific specification. These differences are big enough to be noted. By adding that the differences are there, the original poster points out a similar staff with the DF requirement versus protection, and not wanting the reader to assume they are the same in every other aspect points out the damage is different. I agree that it should be reworded some, but the note in my opinion should stay mentioning there is a staff with the exact same mods for those interested in finding a less expensive or more easily acquired alternative. 06:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
- That's kind of what I meant... they are significant differences, hence why it shouldn't be noted that it is like Kepkhet's Refuge. It would be like including a note under an Ele fire staff that has the same stats as an Ele air staff if it has the same mods. I checked and there are a couple that have said note, but IMO they shouldn't. RabidCoqui 22:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- Ah I understand better. While agree the differences are significant, there are also some things that are too much alike. While I could say they should read the talk page, and they will see this, what would that mean for other staffs. I know I have been looking at a staff before and because of a note at the bottom like this found what I needed somewhere else. That is why I would like it kept. The important points on both staffs are the halves casting time of prot prayers and the enchant +20%. There are differences as noted, but the similarities are what people are looking for when compared to the req for the staff. That is why the note should stay. Though as I said above you can, and hopefully will reword it. The current wording can be kind of confusing.
Tenetke Mekko My Talk 02:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- Ah I understand better. While agree the differences are significant, there are also some things that are too much alike. While I could say they should read the talk page, and they will see this, what would that mean for other staffs. I know I have been looking at a staff before and because of a note at the bottom like this found what I needed somewhere else. That is why I would like it kept. The important points on both staffs are the halves casting time of prot prayers and the enchant +20%. There are differences as noted, but the similarities are what people are looking for when compared to the req for the staff. That is why the note should stay. Though as I said above you can, and hopefully will reword it. The current wording can be kind of confusing.