Talk:Shadow silk hood

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
This talk page is for discussing the Shadow silk hood page.

~~it can be alchemised, high alch 5100 gp. but i have no idea how to edit :)

Untitled[edit source]

Are you sure that items in there can be alched? xScoobsx Talk Contribs 23:28, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sure, at least some can, XScoob, the high and low alchemy spells are in dungeoneering for a reason. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 20:21, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

alchemy[edit source]

ZamorakO_0: I don't think it's silly to retain the alchemy warning under the Bind heading. Yes it does seem like common sense, but it isn't - I have a 90+ Dun team who were all absolutely shocked to learn this, as they all normally alch their bound arrows as a means for gaining cash in most large floors. One game somebody alched their hood, and everybody was shocked when it didn't come back. This is a highly sought-after and valuable item, and I think a warning has merits on here. No this is not reason for *every item to have such a warning* as has been suggested - this is an item that is very difficult to replace, and when reading information about it players deserve to be warned to not be stupid with it (and on that note, look up the Three Logical Fallacies and reconsider your point).

AceMcDonut 04:17, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Are you asserting that bound arrows that are alchemized come back? --Saftzie 04:24, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
They do. Although you may have to keep 1 of them. HaloTalk 04:27, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
See, this is my point - alchemy behaviour isn't common knowledge or common sense in Dungeoneering at the moment. If this incident surprised five guys with 90+ Dun then I think it warrants general acknowledgement. AceMcDonut 04:29, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
It's ZamorakO_o (Big o underscore lowercase o)... Anyway, on the Dungeoneering page in the Binding items section, it clearly states in bold letters " If a bound item is sold, alched or destroyed, there is no way to get it back, so be careful." And the Ammo is the exception. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 04:30, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
That sure sounds like a glitch to me. Has Jagex ever said ammo is an exception? (Maybe I need to read that page....) --Saftzie 04:34, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
I would think alching ammo would be a glitch. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 04:34, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Yet it's worth remembering that it's not wikia's standard policy to expect readers to read articles in a particular order in order to get all relevant information for an individual article. Would you then agree most players won't learn this until they accidentally alch something valuable - I'm not making a case for spamming every Dun article with an unnecessary warning, simply that in this case for the most commonly prized item in Daemonheim that it merits such a warning.AceMcDonut 04:38, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
It just seems like it would be common sense... Alch something, it goes away.... svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 04:39, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
It's not the most prized...blood necklace, hexhunter bow. Both are extremely good and some people have gone 40 million dungeoneering experience without even seeing a soulgazer. I've seen 4 edimmus personally...only 1 necklace. HaloTalk 04:40, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Yup, that's what I thought initially until I found myself alching arrows in most large dungeons we do. This odd arrow behaviour gives a decent logical case for players to expect alching other bound items to retain them in the next round. As I've re-stated a few times, if a bunch of 90+'ers didn't know it and it cost them a rare and highly valued item, I think it's worth mentioning.
And I have a blood necklace myself, and can tell you that the shadow silk hood is of significantly greater practical use and is in more common usage.AceMcDonut 04:43, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
The hood used to be useful. On occult floors however it is not, because 90% of rooms you will still get attacked due to large numbers of necros and such. HaloTalk 04:45, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
It seems to me it would make more sense to clearly point out the exception, which is alchemizing ammo, maybe right after that bold warning on Dungeoneering. Otherwise, isn't the point that 90+ leveled players have been abusing a glitch, unintentionally, and were surprised the glitch wasn't bigger? --Saftzie 04:47, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
I reread that section, it doesn't say ammo is excluded. It says that ammo is the exception on the amount that can be kept. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 04:51, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
This is the relevant excerpt, I think.
You may also bind one type of rune or arrow, and these do not count as one of your bound items. Ammunition binding is always available to you, and you can bind up to 125 runes or arrows of any one type. The amount of ammo you can bind never changes in size.
Frankly I think it's not clear just from reading, but alchemizing and coming back seems glitchy. --Saftzie 04:56, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Agreed that it does make more sense to point out the exception, I just don't think there's significant cause for *not* having a warning here. And your statement's logically flawed - nobody can expect a glitch they're unaware of to be bigger. Until now I had always assumed it was logical, intentional behaviour of the game - and it's not a big leap to expect it to stretch to other bound items.
The basic fact of it is that each member of my team has done more Dungeoneering than both of you combined and in that time none of us have come across a single player who suggested this was a glitch, or that alching an item would not yield it in the next round. AceMcDonut 04:58, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Well, if it's a glitch and you were abusing it unintentionally (emphasis on unintentionally), I wouldn't expect that spontaneously and without any other basis you'd start thinking it's a glitch. Also, the issue of whether it's a glitch isn't a subjective one, so "This is the way everyone's always done it, so it must be right" isn't the right argument, either. I've posted a thread (QFC 180-181-786-61613014) to see what other folks, notably Jagex mods, think. --Saftzie 05:28, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Can you move it to General? Rants just doesn't seem to be the place for a thread like that. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 05:33, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Can a lowly user do that on his own? I suspect I need to attract the attention of a Forum Mod for that (or create another thread). --Saftzie 05:50, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
Move request submitted. --Saftzie 06:00, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
New QFC 14-15-653-61613236 --Saftzie 06:52, August 31, 2010 (UTC)
I've added some text to the main Dungeoneering article where it discusses alchemy, noting that alchemy of bound ammo behaves differently than alchemy of anything else. FWIW, one of the posters on the forum thread had a POV that seems most likely to me: it's unintentional, but Jagex isn't worried about it, because it's a finite amount of money. As always, a reply from a J-mod would be great, but I won't stop breathing while I wait. --Saftzie 08:46, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Silk hood drop log.[edit source]

Finally found a hood after 53 spiders when I started counting, but I had a few before that. My guess is the drop rate is around 1/60, but then again I'm really unlucky so dont be surprised if its like 1/10 :P  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

It's pretty random. I got my first one after probably 20 kills, but gave it to a friend. Now I'm desperately searching for another. (: sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 17:09, November 18, 2010 (UTC)
Saw my first hood drop at 80 dungeoneering, Got my first hood at 81 dungeoneering, got another hood and gave to my friend at 82 dungeoneering. I've probably killed 40 spiders, so 3/40 or 1/13 is my esitmated drop rate. 02:50, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
I've started counting since the first night spider I saw, I'm 87 dungeoneering at the moment. I've seen 49 night spiders, and one shadow silk hood dropped- that drop was the 44th night spider. I've also asked other people how many spiders they'd estimate they'd seen, and how many hood drops they'd seen. I averaged it out and it's within 1/60-1/ 07:48, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
I can now update this log. I'm 93 dungeoneering at the moment, and have seen 87 night spiders. The 44th, 65th, 67th, 78th and 87th spiders dropped a shadow silk hood. The 65th, 66th and 67th spiders were all in the same floor. My theory is that the more night spiders that spawn in a floor, the higher the drop rate is. I also think that the spawn rate may be determined by either A) The lowest slayer level in the team, or B) The average slayer level in the team. This is just a hunch based off testimonial evidence from people with high slayer levels saying they see night spiders spawn more often than they used to. 09:56, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
So, I just recently started dungeoneering, and at 43 dungeoneering, on my FIRST nightspider, I got a hood drop. Sorry, guys :-p. Chissey 04:55, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
ii belive that the higher slayer level the better drop rate, all these numbers seem abit off and ive seen afair few hoods while doing 5:5 larges (currently 80 slay got a hood afew days ago) ill start counting spiders and drops. ANGRYnub (talk) 23:20, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

truly best bind?[edit source]

Nowadays hood is considered an egoistic bind. many high lvls binding defensive/offensive binds instead like blood necklace or golden prec brace. many teams don't accept hooded people. so I think the article should be changed, as now it's saying hood is one of the best binds, while to high lvled dg'ers it's the worst.

agreed,in occults(and possibly warped as well) 3/4 of the rooms end up having something that will disable/ignore the ssh special...your better off with blood neck, or a pl8bod if ur 90+ def(80+ is debatable)Stewievader (talk) 22:35, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

What color matches it in the clothing shop?

Capitalisation?[edit source]

The capitalisation is incredibly inconsistent across this article. The reference to it in the patch notes is uncapitalised so I am going to assume this is the correct form.

Cook run 311 (talk) 09:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)