Template talk:Mahjarrat

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

Iban[edit source]

Before Jagex gives an official answer about the genetical relationship of Iban and Zamorak ("yes" or "no"), Iban should be mentioned in the unconfirmed area. This is because Lucien's daughter, who most likely doesn't even exist, is mentioned too. Favouring the other would break the RS:NOT#CRYSTAL policy.

There is two choices: either remove both of them or keep both of them. --Muhahaa 21:06, October 17, 2009 (UTC).

I disagree. Lucien's Daughter is actually mentioned in-game by an NPC. That alone is enough to keep her. All the information we have regarding Iban, (History of Iban. I've linked you to this many times but you haven't seemed to acknowledge it)shows that he is NOT a Mahjarrat. --Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 17:47, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
History of Iban gives no proof at all. It was written by a crazy witch who may not know everything. Judging from the fact that Lucien's daughter is not mentioned on Zemouregal's notes and Enakhra is the only female Mahjarrat on Gielinor according to the same notes, it is possible to be a half-blood Mahjarrat with the other parent being human and the other a Mahjarrat. Other option would be that Lucien's daughter doesn't exist at all. --Muhahaa 13:44, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
Let me quote the Godletters (Issue 23 - Zamorak Considers Some Issues): Either. Both. Does it really matter where the blood came from, as long as it is still mine in thought and deed? As you can see, Zamorak pretty much confirms that Iban isn't his physical son. Also, Zemouregal's notes not mentioning her doesn't mean she (Lucien's daughter) doesn't exist. She could very well be Enakhra - After all, Lucien afters to consider his daughter rather weak. Enkhra may not be weak in the physical sense, but surely in the mental sense - She is, basically, in love with Zamorak. She came out with some nonsense about her feelings being for Zamorak. What have feelings got to do with anything? This is about our continued survival here. Pah - women! Lucien, being who he is, would most likely consider any kind of affection a sign of weakness - Especially when directed towards Zamorak. Antonstaen 12:35, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

To quote Enakhra: "As for Iban, I know him. He was naught more than a weak human in life, but part of him demands my love. He may not be a 'son' of Zamorak in your narrow, literal sense, but he is imbued with my lord's unholy power: sweet with corruption, like the pass he dwells within." --Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 17:46, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

Jhallan and Lucien[edit source]

They need to be in the deceased category.

I think it was decided not to update the template so that it doesn't act as a spoiler for those who haven't done the quest. Suppa chuppa Talk 23:12, September 16, 2011 (UTC)
If we say that Jhallan and Lucien are currently alive, then we are lying to our readers. This is completely unacceptable. We are an informative online RuneScape encyclopedia, not a spoiler-free strategy guide. This needs to be changed. Right now. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 09:23, September 17, 2011 (UTC)
It's not currently alive but current. Jhallan and Lucien are current because they are part of several quest whereas the rest of the deceased Mahjarrats aren't. Also, when we learned about these deceased Mahjarrats, we learned at the same time they are already dead which is not the case with Lucien and Jhallan. Therefore, Lucien and Jhallan should placed back to the current category. Also, Bilrach shouldn't be in the unknown category but the current because of his involvement with dungeoneering. And about lying, it's not that simple. It's depends on whether you have done the quest or not. Damned Finn 08:15, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
Jhallan and Lucien are dead only if you have completed the quest. 15:02, September 17, 2011 (UTC)
This discussion should be continued here. Suppa chuppa Talk 15:05, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Hazeel[edit source]

It says that Hazeel is dead if the players didn't help him which isn't ture some one change it

the template says that hazeel is dead or alive according to your choice in hazeel cult but i that isn´t true because he is ressurected even if you choice was the carnilleans (read the notes of zemouregal)

so i think that should be changed ( i can´t do it because i cant see that line :P)

I fixed that part. Suppa chuppa Talk 19:33, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

Bilrach[edit source]

During ROTM, we state the "Strange Power" event we feel, is when a Mahjarrat dies, our characters get it during the sacrifice of Jhallan, and when Lucien get killed.

When talking to Ali The Wise (Wahisietel), he states it happened because of a Mahjarrat which was "At the wrong place at the wrong time", and states it was a waste of power.

This goes together with the Strange Power event, which was previously known as the "Dungeoneering hint"

Should Bilrach be moved from Unknown do Deceased?

I think it should stay unknown until someone says "Bilrach is dead". sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 16:55, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
Seconded. I'm personally convinced that the Strange Power event was Bilrach's death, but we have no official way of knowing that right now. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 19:24, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

Remove Mahjarrat status[edit source]

Even discounting the spoiler issue (which is much greater here than it is on individual articles, since this infobox appears prominently on multiple pages), it simply makes NO SENSE to list Mahjarrat by status when Jhallan and Lucien ARE NOT dead for all players. They're probably dead for only a minority, in fact.

The infobox doesn't really lose much if we just list them in alphabetical order. Infoboxes aren't there to tell you about whatever it is leading too - that's what the article itself is for. Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 06:54, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

Anybody have some sort of comment on this? I'd do it myself, but the template has been locked from editting. Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 22:57, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, i would support this, it also should get rid of this spoilers debate. and it is true, there not dead for everyoneto my talk page! King TALKWer den König nicht ehrt, ist nicht Lebenswert. 23:06, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

Just pointing out that this is still an issue! Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 19:55, October 3, 2011 (UTC)

Forum:Spoilers. Besides, by your logic, Ali the Wise should not be listed as a Mahjarrat, we shouldn't have any information on Bilrach, and the fact that Nomad teleports away after Nomad's Requiem should also be removed What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 10:02, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
Not seeing how any of that is 'by my logic' - none of that information appears in an infobox that is used on multiple pages. I am aware of the spoilers discussion, but the infobox doesn't lose anything if we simply list the Mahjarrat in alphebetical order - we don't nessessarily need the infobox to give each Mahjarrat's life story; that is what their ARTICLES are for. Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 06:53, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any issue with listing them alphabetically. Having them listed by their existence would be confusing to players who are low in quest points. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 06:48, November 1, 2011 (UTC)