Sorry for bad spelling.


|
Originally Posted by John Waffletord
Its definitely not worth the extra money to get a superior vigor over a major. The difference is not worth that much.
|
|
Originally Posted by Nighteye
Major runes should have a -37 penalty, instead of -50, so that the penalty of 2 major runes equals the penalty of 1 superior rune.
|
|
Originally Posted by One and Two
Yeah....
traders give 10g, and the merchant gives 25g. WTF? although 15g isnt a big problem, even for the PvE folks. |
|
Originally Posted by Jigs
actually it is also 25 gold. it shows 10 but when you to sell it to them it's 25gold.
|
|
Originally Posted by Felbryn
Besides, if you think that the health penalty of all runes should be proportional to their benefit, then you should be arguing that minor runes should be given a health penalty of -25, not that majors' health penalty should be reduced. Obviously, if that were done, people would be a lot less inclined to use minor runes.
|
|
Originally Posted by Jade
Yes, but you can have 3 attributes with major runes on each, or for the same penalty you can have 2 attributes with superiors. I guess it's a matter of choice. I know that sups are worth it when I play my spell casters but when I play my melee/ranged characters I use majors. To be completely honest the extra +1 to an attribute, to me anyways, isn't worth losing another 25 health.
|
|
Originally Posted by John Waffletord
Okay, and I brought up vigor runes.
|
|
Originally Posted by lord_shar
A more uniformed/linear system of attribute rune bonuses and life loss would probably work better. For example:
-Minor rune = +1, no life loss -Major Rune = +2, -25 life loss -Superior Rune = +3, -50 life loss. I know the 55/105 monks would scream about this should it ever happen... ![]() |