Talk:Skill Runes

ADVERTISEMENT

From Diablo Wiki

(Redirected from Talk:Runestones)
Jump to: navigation, search

WANTED: More Rune Info[edit]

If you're among the lucky people who played the Diablo III demo at blizzcon, and had the chance to play around with skill runes, please contribute to the article by adding your experience. Did you find any rune during your play sessions? Only the Wizard class could use rune, still we lack a lot of info about many skills-runes combination. -- 08:58, 3 November 2008 Bandreus

Nothing to add, just signed Bandreus' comment. ;) It would be great if anyone has more knowledge on the runes, feel free to add them here, if you're too shy to edit the main Rune page ;) --Leord 14:23, 3 November 2008 (CET)


Notes[edit]

I suggest we should separate Rune into Rune and Skill rune:

  • Runes will be a general article on runes in the Diablo Universe, mentioning the D1 manual pics, tattoos, writing, D1 runes, D2 runes, etc etc. Somatic components of spells...
  • Skill runes will specifically be about actual skill runes.

--Leord 14:24, 25 November 2008 (CET)

Runes might come from old Arcane magic, considering the Wizard spell. --Leord 15:43, 25 November 2008 (CET)
Lut Gholein: The Binding of Destruction - mentions runes --Leord 17:16, 25 November 2008 (CET)

Amount of Runes[edit]

It's confirmed there are going to be but 5 runes (source):

IGN: We know you couldn't show the runes because you guys are still working on the map and everything else, but could you tell us a little bit more about them? And also, since the monk has his own innate runic tie-in in a way, based on his manipulation of his attacks, how does this differ from the barbarian or the wizard or the witch doctor in how he winds up using the system?
Jay Wilson: Well, the system is similar for every class. What we did is we broke down five basic runes. Each rune has a general type of effective pluses. One tends to be more damage-oriented. One tends to multiply effects, splits projectiles or bigger radiuses, things like that. One tends to be a very energy-efficient rune, so you cut down cost or in some way increases the benefit of the skill, so you get more for less. One tends to be more focused on death effects, critical effects. And one of them we call just…the weird rune, which is our grab bag for anything unusual we want to stick on. Every active skill, we define an active skill as a skill that you have to click to activate, can have all five runes affect it. Each rune will change the function of the skill. Some of the changes are minor, there are some cases where there's not much appreciable effect. And then some cases are much more drastic, where for example with Ice Storm or Blizzard, one of the things we're playing around with, this halo of frost whips around her and anyone that moves through it takes damage. That adds on to the effects that Ice Storm already does. So there's a whole bunch of different…the basic idea is to capture that dream of, I'm gonna customize my skills. Even though you and I have the exact same skills, we don't play the same because our skills are different. And then throughout the game, the runes will upgrade in power. So that will just increase and amplify the effect that they have.

The page currently states that furing development more runes will be added. Might want to change that, but I'm not sure what to do with the current text. Replace it with a note that there'll be just the 5 runes, or remove it altogether and put that information elsewhere? --Vipermagi 14:19, 26 August 2009 (CEST)


Just re-write the article to correspond with the currently updated info. Add a "Development" section, if there is none, and add when runes were revealed, how they worked, and how they have changed so far. Add the article link above to "References", or add a reference section and do it then :)
Don't be afraid of over-editing. Rather that and we'll have to fix it than being outdated info. The point, however, is that you just tell how it is, and add a reference link. no need to quote him, like we have done a lot in the past.
--Leord 16:24, 8 September 2009 (CEST)