Major runes. Why so much health?

Incase some of you haven't noticed, the rune trader sells major runes (other than vigor and absorption) for very very cheap. The reason is obvoius: -50 health for only ONE extra attrabute. Sup runes take down only an extra -25 for ANOTHER attrabute. My suggestion is simple: Make major runes take away less health! Maybe like -35 or -30. This way they will be worth using over sup runes and thus increase the major rune worths.

Sorry for bad spelling.

I must say I agree. Why have 3 classes of runes anyway? In most cases Minors are worth more than Majors anyway. The only Majors worth anything are Absorbtion and Vigor, and that's only because it is so hard to find Superiors and they cost so much. If they are going to continue to have 3 classes of Runes do something to Majors to make them worth using.

I agree.
Since you're already sacrificing 50 health for 1 extra point, might as well sacrifice another 25 to get the full benefit.
Major runes should reduce less health, then maybe some people would use them.
I really don't know of anyone who uses a major rune of x where x is an attribute.

I would probably reduce the health penalty on major runes down to -25 or even -20, actually. And even with them that low, I'm not sure I would use any--minors are nice because they carry zero penalty, and superiors are nice because they're the strongest. To decide that an attribute is important enough to take a health penalty to raise it, but decide that it's not worth paying the full -75 for a superior, would in itself be rather strange. You need to give majors a noticeably better health/attribute efficiency than superiors, or else using them (given the alternatives of minor and superior) is almost inconceivable. Currently, the only time I would even consider using a major rune is if I want a superior one, but can't afford it.

I think the fact that regular merchants will buy some major runes for more than the rune trader is a good indication that there is approximately zero demand for them (and probably also that there's a minor pricing bug in the game, but that's a separate issue).

Yeah....

traders give 10g, and the merchant gives 25g. WTF?

although 15g isnt a big problem, even for the PvE folks.

/signed

I dont even use Majors because of the health cost. Unless your a Warrior with the armor to help you or a Monk with the healing abilities, having even less health than normal is a stupid idea.

Its definitely not worth the extra money to get a superior vigor over a major. The difference is not worth that much.

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.

We're discussing major attribute runes. Runes of vigor and absorption are completely different special cases.

And whether it's worth the money or not depends a lot on how much money you have, and what else you can usefully spend it on, both of which will tend to change as you continue to play the game.

I strongly disagree. I think the penalty of two major runes should be markedly less than the penalty of one superior one.

You know how it costs way more attribute points to get one attribute to 12 than to get two attributes each to 6? Same principle applies here: one spiked attribute is more valuable than two mediocre ones, and so should cost more.

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.

actually it is also 25 gold. it shows 10 but when you to sell it to them it's 25gold.

the thing i don't like is that some superiors cost so low. Superior rune for only 100-400??? the hell!!! they are superiors and they cost that low, sigh, maybe few ppl uses them.

I have 17 superior runes in my storage and only 3 are useful to me (2 vigors and 1 absorption). I am a Warrior and I rarely get runes for warrior.

Yes, but in some cases I have actually asked the rune trader for an offer on a major rune, then gone to a regular merchant five feet to the right and gotten a better offer on the same rune. I go back to the rune trader to check if the price has changed, but it hasn't--the regular merchant flat-out offered me a better price.

That didn't happen for all of the runes, by any means. A few of the more popular majors were selling better to the rune trader, and the majority were the same prices at both merchants. But some did sell better to the regular merchant.

Proportional to their benefit above the minor runes which have no penalty, yes. And the cost of getting high skills has little to do with the rune penalties - the same penalties for rune use apply regardless of skill level. There's enough characters who focus on getting 2 different skills very high - going with 2 major on those skills should be equivalent to a superior oone one and a minor on the other, so that it becomes a tactical consideration.

[QUOTE=Felbryn]We're discussing major attribute runes. Runes of vigor and absorption are completely different special cases.

And whether it's worth the money or not depends a lot on how much money you have, and what else you can usefully spend it on, both of which will tend to change as you continue to play the game.
[\QUOTE]


Okay, and I brought up vigor runes.

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.

Maybe for you, but if you take a look at the major rune econamy its rather sad. This idea would make major runes more usful tho and thus boost the major rune econamy. This would really help gw a lot I think.

Keep it. An extra attribute is actually worth the negative hp if you need it, and if you know what you want to do.

Yes, that's called an "off-topic post." One person started a thread on one subject, and you posted a comment that was entirely unrelated to anything that anyone had been saying on the original subject. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that it was a misunderstanding, as opposed to deliberate spam.

The monetary cost of obtaining superior runes of vigor and absorption is not in any way related to the health cost of using major and superior attribute runes.

You could always make the Vigor runes have an affect on armor. Minor, none. Major, -7 armor. Superior, -15 armor

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...

Yeah I'm not sure if that would be worth the 100s of threads of whining...lol

I suspect the current system is to make superior worthwhile of getting

THIS WOULD BE MUCH BETTER
minor -0 health
major -25 health
supiror -50 health
and even though this is nothing to do with it we need a suprior mana, major mana,minor mana rune that works like vigor

I agree with the energy runes. We have absorption that affects armor/dam received, we have vigor that affects health, we need energy runes now. Superior Vigor runes just seem to be there so spellcasters can counter the effects of using that Superior Smiting/Domination/Fire, etc -.-

I agree. What I think is unfair is that worriers have an extra rune! They should make one for everybody: e.g. Ranger rune of minor/major/sup evasion. And give like a 5/10/15 chance to edvade or something like that.

At least two people said that a linear system of penalties (e.g. -0/-25/-50) would work "better." Would one of you care to specify why?

As I already pointed out, attributes normally function on diminishing returns. Raising an attribute from 0 to 1 costs 1 pt., from 11 to 12 costs 20 ts. True, the runes operate on an independent system not involving attribute points, but if the general principle of diminishing returns is a good one--and I think it is--I don't see any reason to make an exception to that rule. If you see a reason, please point it out for me.

On the same topic, 5/10/15% evasion is absolutely insane. That's escalating returns. First level dodges 5% (1 in 20), second level dodges 5.3% of the remaining attacks (1 in 19), the third 5.6% (1 in 18). If you don't see the problem, just look at what happens if you continue the pattern for another 20 levels (I realize that there aren't that many grades of runes, but the fact that the pattern tends in that direction should be a clear indicator that you're doing something badly wrong). If you were going to supply evasion, something closer to 8/12/15% would make much more sense (it may still be excessively powerful, but that's more the kind of progression you'd want).

As for warriors having an extra rune, they really don't. Warriors get 5 attributes, but they can only make any realistic use of 3 of them, whereas every other profession can use 4-5 (it takes skill slots, but they can still use them with a single build--warriors need completely different weapon sets for axe, sword, and hammer attributes, and need to meet minimum prerequisites to use good weapons). The Warrior Absorption rune is nothing short of being *part* of the class bonus to their armor, anyway. Giving other professions similar runes would be a direct nerf to warriors, and thus should only be done if they need a nerf.

Attribute diminishing returns is already built into GW's character point-allocation system. Also, diminishing attribute returns is a GW "trend," not a "rule."

There's no sound reason why the hit-point penalties should be so radically pronounced at the major + superior rune levels, especially when minor runes get none. The present rune system makes major and superior runes pretty much non-viable unless you exploit the 55/105 monk build concepts, or are a caster/ranger lobbing spells from a distance.

The present rune/health penalty system also puts an unnecessary burden on front-line warrior tanks, which have to pretty much settle for all-minor runes to maximize health.

A linear returns set-up would allow more character build creativity, improving all classes while diminishing the 55/105 exploits. Sounds like a good way to level the playing field...

Agree, the penality/bonus ratio is not linear.

To justify mayor runes and the -health system imagine you use a superior rune and ask yourself:
Can -25 health for +1 attribute (mayor to superior) be worse than +50 health for -1 attribute (mayor to minor)

Yes, because the attribute point costs grow faster than the triangular numbers, its all exponential.
But you have to be VERY in dept in optimizing builds, and i bet noone is as enough to prove the bold text above with an example.

Warriors with 16 weapon mastery and 13 strength will never understand the above.

My PvP monk uses three superiors (prot, heal, divine) because I am too lazy to remake the character to get the bonus for healing or protection (depending on what the team wants, I go that build).

And I have to say that even when I used two superiors (my superior vigor not counting in either case) the 150 hp drop was quite substantial. The +50 hp that the superior vigor gives me is nothing compared to the -75 the other superiors take away.

For reducing rune penalties on HP to -0/-25/-50, I /sign in the most beautiful handwriting ever.

I have seens several suggestions to lower the Superior rune costs to 50. (the 10/30/50 and the 0/25/50 suggestions)

I disagree with this. The game is currently balanced in regards to Superior rune usage. People are discouraged from running multiple Superior runes, because the Superior Vigor only balances the 2/3 of the costs of one Superior attribute rune. (The 55 monk build is a special case.)

The values of the Superior attributes runes and the Superior Vigor runes are carefully chosen.

The real problem is that there is no penalty for minor runes. This is done to encourage their use, but I think it's too much of a discount.

There are other suggestions to use a linear 25/50/75 formula for runes, but I think this penalizes Minor runes too MUCH. There is a CLEAR intention to encourage Minor runes, so how about a compromise solution:

Penalize runes with either a 15/45/75, or a 10/40/70 formula.

The advantage of this technique, is that it provides a linear 30 point spread between runes, and still encourages Minor runes with a discount. It doesn't disturb the balance of the Superior runes vis-a-vis Superior Vigor runes, but it DOES allow builds to use two Major runes with nearly the same penalty as one Superior attribute rune.

4 Minors + Superior Vigor = +/-10 hp (balanced)
2 Majors + Superior Vigor = -30/-40 hp (balanced)
1 Superior + Superior Vigor = -20/-25 hp (balanced)

I don't really have an issue with Minor runes... they act as a small money sink for the economy with no drawback. Say you're an air spiker. You obviously need your superior Air and Sup Vigor runes. But that leaves three more slots of armor! Why not just equip minor Earth, Fire, and Water runes for the heck of it? The cost is still less than dye...

Major runes, though, definitely get hosed. Seriously, give them -25 health instead.

Clearly, there is a design at hand in which it costs more to get up another attribute. That much is obvious in the attribute point distributions. Yet the runes don't follow this: Each attribute point is penalized the same amount for Major and Sup runes: 25 HP/Attribute level.

My theory of runes:

Minor = no change
Major = -25 health
Superior = -75 health.

That way, first point up is not penalized, second costs 25 health, and third costs 50. Increased cost for linear benefit.

I agree with only bringing major runes down 10 hit points.
Id rock 2 major runes at -40 hp each.

I think -80 for +4 attrubute points vs. -75 for +3 is a good trade off.

Right now I do the usaully all minors and one superior.
My monk rolls with all minors because i cant afford or cant find a superior and i wont wear majors.

From none to minor, -0 health and +1 point
From minor to major, -50 health and +1 point
From major to superior, -25 health and +1 point

That's not diminishing, not even linear, but escalating returns in the current system. (above minor, anyway)

It makes no sense for the first attribute point above minor to be more expensive in terms of health penalty than the second attribute point above minor.

I hate doing a rune run and getting 6 majors, and they merchanting them as armors because the armor is worth more than the rune

I dont think there is ONE attribute Major worth more than the base 100ea...

Popular class Minors I've seen at 700ea..

It would make more sense to me if the THIRD extra attribute point costed more per point than the second.

Right now Like everyone said:
Minor - 0 penality (-0)
major - 50 penality (-50)
sup - 25 penality (-75)

If it were:
Minor - 0 penality (-0)
major - 25 penality (-25)
sup - 50 penality (-75)
It would make more sense..

It also would keep the equation the same,and keep low hp monks from ranting (if their sup's stopped taking -75).

I used to think the same thing, because this leads to the reasoning of "What's wrong with giving players more HPs?" Because:
If players have more hps, they last longer -> If players last longer battles take longer. -> If battles take longer you need more strategy to win. -> If you need more strategy to win, the game would be more in synch with what Anet wants... right?

Yes... and a really big No.

When Yes? In PvP. It could be a lot more interesting... maybe. Either it would or matches would drag on and on and on.
When No? In PvE. Why? Because the game designers would need to completely rebalance the ENTIRE GAME. Lowering the HP cost of superior runes would lead to everyone using multiple superiors. This combined with more hps, results in DRAMATICLY more personal player power. Power over the computer more precisely.

Yeah so what, right? Let players be more powerful, that's good, we want that right?

Wrong again.

Why wrong?

If player power is dramaticaly more then it should be, you loose balance. A game that is too easy becomes boring at warp speed Mr. Scotty. That's bad. Bad bad bad bad.

Remember, mobs in the game don't use runes. They have their set HPs. So by allowing players to increase their hps, and at the same time their powers, you run into the same EXACT problem as allowing additional levels into the Guildwars Game. You loose balance. It would be as absurd as allowing vigor runes to stack. (Sure we'd all want that initially, but when we got bored even faster of the game because every zone became like killing Charr outside Ascalon as a level 20... you'd agree then.)

As it stands now, you can increase your personal power, but at the risk of increasing your death factor. That's balance.



Now, as for Major Attribute Runes being lowered. Yes, I agree with that and think it needs to be done. How much? I say reduce them so that they only reduce you by -40hps. This way 2 major's (+4 to attributes) costs -80 health. Where as +3 from a superior is still -75. Then if you think about it, you'd only be loosing an additional 5 hps for another skill point.

This would make for some real tuff decision calls by players and would put majors as desireable as superiors, and hopefully to ultimately spread that money around.

well i use major runes on my characters.

why? bacause i'm a cheap ass. i'm not going to pay an extra 13k for a superior healing rune.

i use a maximum of 2 majors on any character. (usually one). i love em. i don't care about -50hp. i DO however care about -75hp. don't know why. i just do. :P

I'll sign the petition to lower the health penalty of major runes. I don't feel the need to agrue for a specific number or even bring up logical reasons to reduce...the bottemed-out value on ALL major runes with a health penalty should be evidence enough that something needs tweaking.

Agreed upon this. As it is now, NO-ONE uses major runes; most sups are extremely cheap anyway, why not take a sup for only -25 extra anyway?

Majors are useless, the penalty and availability of sups has rendered them redundant.

The only way to make them used again would indeed be something like a -35 or -40 penalty.

Major Runes are worthless with 2 exceptions... They sell for less or the same as minors in most cases. Very few people use them. I say either make them viable or remove them from the game. Can't they be changed in some way to make them at least useable?

Ideas?

Suggestions?