There are no mage fighters who use runes. They are just not on par with dreamweaving, and definately not with psionics. Sure, they have potential in groups, but solo, fighting with runes is just a waste of time. (Or so I hear?) Estarra respectfully disagrees with this opinion. Would like to hear more input on this. Also, keeping in mind that druid runes are the same as magi runes, so any ideas would apply to them too. Druids, however, get much better synergy with demesne runes than magi. For example, both passive impatience and paralysis.

I agree. As far as I see, Druids = Afflictions, Mages = Damage (rather, more 'direct' methods). Mages don't have a whole lot of use for it, especially when telepathy's available.

In my experience, there were really only three runes to use as a Druid. Ger for impatience, Poerth (I think) for masochism, and Cen for stupidity. Oh, and rad, but...a demesne full of rad runes makes it hard to be killed AND kill someone else. :/

For mages that use runes, the only one I ever seen used mostly are rad runes to move potential targets into your room for ganking.

Heh. So the general opinion is there are 4 useful runes, out of...significantly more.

I remember that Shorlen was working on revamping the entire skillset like the one did for Axelords and Pureblades. Not sure what happened to it now.

I have.. a couple of his notes.

I wouldn't mind seeing some better changes to runes, also I thought runes where nesscary for the statues mages enchant for the defense of the city.

Runes are a necessity for Totems and Statues.

Runes can be purchased from a druid though. Generally for mages, most of the afflictions made by runes don't really mesh well with demesnes.

EDIT: And also when given a choice between a powerful skillet (too powerful in some ways) like telepathy.....

I know, I'm just clarifiying it's necessary.

Necessary, but it mixes with a tradeskill too, which is a unique and great combination...but is it necessary for someone to sacrifice being able to fight, just to be able to make statues hit things? Like said before: buying them from druids might be better off for the magi guild than having a resident runist.

For a while in the Hartstone, there was a real scare that we might not have a skilled runist and have to outsource it, IIRC. I was scared at least, but it sure as hell didn't stop me from dropping Runes. It's just not a fun skillset when you have other options.

Its true. Runes isn't really exciting enough.
When I had it the only use for it was fusing stupidity and/or impatience runes in my demesne.

Wasn't it Sylphas who proposed infusable (sp?) runes in a staff? It would certainly make runes a relatively good option, but I'm not sure about Forren doing insane amounts of damage while afflicting sensitivity or stupidity at the same time.

If Forren were lucidian, would that make him a grieferock? Or a trill? Grieferbird?

Stop hijacking and go back to the topic.

The reason why infusing runes into staffs or cudgels is a bad idea is that for warriors to do damage and afflictions, they risk being parried, stanced, normal missed or hit rebounding which is something no mages or druids will ever have to worry about. Every attempt to hit is a 100% hit.

I remember Murphy saying something about Runes supposedly getting reworked too, back when he dropped BC for Geo, and he actually didn't take up another skill when he started off a Geo, since he was waiting for Rune to get the upgrades (which I don't think ever came). Meaning when he was killing people he was killing them only using Elementalism/Geomancy and Illusions. He didn't bother to pick up Tele/Weaving/Runes, which kinda shows Mages got it pretty good without having a secondary attack skillset.

But also along with the damage they can do, mages combined with telepathy at least get a pretty nice affliction list. So they aren't really losing out much, they got crazy damage and pretty decent telepathy afflictions (addiction, phobias, dominate, paralysis, stupidity, amnesia, and more) + instakills, willpower attacks, and other fun stuff. So actually why would a mage bother with a skillset that they would only use.... like what did you all say.... 4 of the runes in the whole skillset?

You know, everyone knows already that dreamweaving and psionics are the choice for pvp.. so uhm.. why not make runes more utility based so people who doesn't like combat would take it?

Put skills that will help regenerate health/mana/ego/whatever of people standing in a room passively or something... nymph like rune to pacify mobs, I don't know, but more utility based so it will be a viable choice for people not pvp oriented.

Just a thought.

You do that and may possibly end up with:

Idiota (ido rune): Throwing this rune causes you to cluck like a chicken
Uslesa (usls rune): Throwing this rune in water causes fish to jump into your hands


No, but honestly yeah you have a good point, making it have useful utilities that are nice would be neat.

Runes can afflict from afar.
Runes can be embedded in demesnes.

Both these things are great.

It is by no means a useless skill for Magi. It's just not on a par with psionics.. by any means.

It would be better if, like telepathy/telekinesis, runes offered another means to kill. As it is, with runes you've got to either damage kill or chasm as geo.

Point is, its subpar with the other skillsets.
The other skillsets provide utility, and better skills for a kill.
Impatience, Stupidity, and Rad. The 3 most commonly used rune because its all that works well with other mage/druid skillsets. So now, the only way for unes to be used in combat is to fuse it with a demesene (cen and impatience works well), or doubleslinging. Single slinging is a waste unless your opponent is screwed already. Herb balance can cover the affliction single sling afflicts.