Forum:New Quest Guide Feature Suggestion

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > New Quest Guide Feature Suggestion
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 1 June 2015 by Liquidhelium.

Ok first of this is my first time on this wiki, Im not sure if this is the right way to suggest a feature for the wiki, but here' goes.

I'd like to see an ironman danger meter in the quest requirments area. This could show ironmen how much or if any risk is involved in the quest.

Quests with no fighting or dangerous travel could be "safe"

  • fighting with safe death (no gravemarker made on death could be "safe boss"
  • common/low tier monsters could be "low fight"
  • some danger in travel could be "low travel"
  • mid difficulty boss and/or multiple enemies could be "moderate fight"
  • more dangerous travel "moderate travel"
  • Highly dangerous boss "high boss"

maybe not these, but some way to indicate risk for Ironman accounts in the quest.

Sorry if this came up in the wrong spot or something, if so feels free to delete this. I just wanted to suggest an idea I had.Wordstypedhere (talk) 03:36, May 13, 2015 (UTC)


Comment - This is indeed the correct place for such a suggestion, as it involves making noticeable changes to a template used on 200+ pages. In practice, someone might have just gone ahead with such an idea, but if you're not sure how it's best presented brainstorming it here is the next best option :)

For clarity, what are you defining as dangerous travel? I'm guessing anything involving the wilderness, but are there any monsters that are still aggressive? I'm also guessing this is for hardcore ironmen, as the regular type aren't penalised on death afaik. cqm 07:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Comment A lot of monsters are aggressive again. I'm sure there is a list somewhere. Raglough (talk) 07:37, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - All in all, this would just be introducing a large amount of subjectivity to these pages. We already have an objective stance on quest fights in the form of a list in the overview. It varies from person to person what is considered dangerous, so it's really up to the player to decide how dangerous a quest is. MolMan 13:09, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Mol User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 13:35, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Support - I don't see why introducing one line of subjective "Difficulty: bla bla" is an issue at all, to be quite frank. I love my objectivity as much as you do but I thought the wiki's job was to provide as much information as possible rather than to follow arbitrary rules. As long as we have some guidelines on how to rate their difficulty and a bit of common sense it should work out. bad_fetustalk 13:44, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

How about criteria such as travelling through the wilderness (not including situations where you can get there safely), being required to travel through areas with aggressive monsters irrespective of level or being required to travel through areas which can kill you via the environment such as Freneskae? Monsters you have to fight/kill are listed already, so it shouldn't be too hard to add this in as well. cqm 13:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
With that suggestion, I think it would be more useful to list the dangers of the quest rather than just giving it a categorical difficulty. Again, super subjective to make another set of difficulties, and I still think it would accomplish nothing. On the other hand, an additional section like dangers "Wilderness travel", "Cave of aggressive lvl 50000 monsters", etc. can accomplish the idea set forth by OP without being misguidingly subjective. MolMan 13:56, May 13, 2015 (UTC)
I think the best way to do it would be to combine both and show it in the format of something like "Difficulty: Hard (show more)" with the show more button leading to a sublist of the set of difficulties. I do suppose the list itself could just be visible from the start though. bad_fetustalk 14:24, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose any type of "difficulty" modifier to be added. Once there were two (official and 'our own'), and that was already cause for constant misunderstandings and back and forth editing. I can fully appreciate adding objective information such as "hazardous environment" (Freneskae). I saw that a template [[Template:Safe quest]] exists, albeit unused; this could serve to provide the opposite of the suggestion: label quests that are completely safe. All others have risk associated with them. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 14:34, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Mol et al. A veteran player in combat can die to a Level 1 NPC just as they can to a Level 1000. There are already descriptions on pages covering the bosses and npcs, their levels, attacks, damage outputs, and strategy pages. --Deltaslug (talk) 19:41, May 14, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - The ironman danger meter will not be implemented. --LiquidTalk 07:34, June 1, 2015 (UTC)