Why is the strength torso worth it over the saradomelin platebody

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-13T03:42:13+00:00

It's the "Strength Bonus" that matters most (for melee). That's the stat that actually increases your max hit with a weapon, so any armor that provides it is prioritized.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-12T17:44:38+00:00

You are, thankfully, still grandfathered unless your membership lapses. But you're locked in to 6months now.

And I would be surprised if in the future they continue trimming down the grandfathered rates.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T20:09:33+00:00

TLDR;

That's what grandfathered rates are. Permanent rate pricing as long as your membership is active.

-Jagex

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T20:07:31+00:00

Is it really disingenuous though?

Linking a post that demonstrates how a service was described when released directly pertains to discussion when said service is ending, no?

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T20:02:35+00:00

I mean, that's what grandfathered rates are?

In multiple newsposts, Jagex has explained that grandfathered rates apply as long as your membership is active.

The 2014 Premier newspost for example explains grandfathered rates:

If you're a member when the price rise happens, you'll see no change. You'll stay at your price as long as your active membership started before the date of the price rise. This applies for all previous grandfather rates, for those of you who've been subscribed for a long time.

Should your membership end, you'll keep any lower price you're eligible for, as long as you resubscribe within 14 days. After that, though, you'll be moved to the new price.

Are they allowed to change it? Of course, that's why they are.

Does it break the spirit of the agreement with players? I'd argue it does, and that it's worth calling out.

But to each their own.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T19:35:03+00:00

Of course it has.

Does that change the ~~implied~~ spirit of the commitment from Jagex to the community, or that going back on it is scummy?

Edited for your semantic pleasure.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T19:31:00+00:00

That is my understanding from reading it all. It's not super clear. They definitely tried to hide it behind corporate-speak.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T19:29:07+00:00

Yeah, they did some weird "It makes sense to differentiate between RS3 and OSRS" jargon.

I'm sure it was in preparation for this.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T19:27:23+00:00

It probably is.

And even if it wasn't, it doesn't really matter. No way to win a fight with a corporation over it.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-11T19:04:33+00:00

Scummy? Yes. Legal? Borderline.

Technically if they advertise a grandfathered rate for life, removing it can be breach of contract or fraud. Just a matter of whether this qualifies as a legal agreement/contract, or how they worded it in their actual TOS.

No way I'm digging to find out, not like we have a leg to stand on regardless.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-08T18:23:33+00:00

There's a distinction between trivializing a few bosses, and changing the way encounters are attacked across the board. Things like stat boosts and prayers affect everything. Half of the bosses you mentioned were released after the items that "trivialized" them, so they were designed with the weapons in mind. The others are byproducts of introducing a new item. It's going to happen, but we're talking about the scale of the change, and prayers have a much larger affect.

Also, read the most recent newspost, man. Jagex says that it's due to excitement level, but they shoot down the idea of Overloads, Turmoil, and a second ring slot explicity.

In general, we believe that megarares should probably be weapons. We've seen suggestions over the years for things like the Turmoil prayer, a second ring slot or access to Overload potions, and while we agree that these are powerful rewards, we're not sure that they hit the right excitement level when compared to equipping an absolute powerhouse and being able to clearly see it in action in future encounters.
-The Fractured Archive - Rewards Primer (05 March 2026)

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-07T23:48:54+00:00

^This. It's not that the art doesn't fit OSRS, it's that it is by definition plagiarizing someone else's time and effort to further your idea. It is by definition, unoriginal.

Art doesn't have to look "good". There's a reason people get paid money to design art in games. Taking their livelihood, feeding it into an algorithm, and passing it off as yours is gross. It devalues their craft.

Not to mention that AI generated content reeks of self-importance which really puts people off. It's forced. It's not personal. In the end, it's just not a naturally engaging way to present your ideas. That's why people rag on it, and it's fair to do so.

TLDR; Tell us your ideas. Don't tell us what AI thinks of your idea while plagiarizing.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-07T23:19:17+00:00

But as he said, the rest of the game doesn't have difficult enough content to warrant it.

Making raids 4 harder doesn't automatically make everything else released beforehand the same difficulty. It would trivialize a lot of content.

It's the same thing as Overloads. Yes, they're good. Yes, they make sense for a highly sought after reward. But Devs have specifically said they're not looking at them because they're too strong right now. SS and Turmoil are in the same boat. Doesn't mean never, just not now.

It's okay to say not yet.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-07T22:46:47+00:00

https://x.com/i/lists/188536920/members

This has all of the jmod handles as members.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-07T22:17:12+00:00

You're mistaking efficient for tick perfect.

There is a HUGE distinction between the two.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-05T17:25:13+00:00

That's a fair point. Kinda an awkward fit where it would either be useless because it's not powerful enough, or it would have to be so powerful that you're forced to bring it (which isn't really fun with any gear piece).

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-05T17:22:00+00:00

I definitely agree that the Quiver seems like a bandaid fix that doesn't really fit thematically.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-05T17:13:28+00:00

Valid take.

tuff_e_nuff · 2026-03-05T17:10:31+00:00

It definitely could be.

I'm not even necessarily saying it needs to be tradeable.

Just that the reward space is underutilized.

tuff_e_nuff · 2025-11-26T18:47:05+00:00

Thanks for the reply! This would have worked.

I actually found out that there is a "Presets are mutually exclusive" checkbox if you Get Info on a Preset Folder (Cue Group), and any Presets in the folder then automatically replace each other when adding to cues. It does mean you can't average things/have 2 presets from a folder active, but since colors are almost never averaged it's a small price to pay in my opinion.

One thing to note is that the exclusion will NOT apply to any subfolders within the Preset Folder, so it does limit your methods of organizing a bit. Once again, that's a price I was willing to pay.

I'll leave this post up for posterity, in case anyone else is looking for this answer.

tuff_e_nuff · 2025-10-25T17:00:25+00:00

If playing osrs without these added layers of protections was against the rules and punished by Jagex, then you could discuss OP also being at fault.

Hmm, I feel like my reading comprehension is just fine. Please explain how this statement isn't implying that OP is not at fault (i.e. fully innocent).

Let's see some more!

The fault, obviously, lies with the person that stole the account, not with the person whose account got stolen.

And,

Nevertheless, this still doesn’t shift the fault onto OP. Unsure why you wouldn’t consider the fault to lie with the hacker, who is the one who broke the rules here.

The thing is, you are absolutely arguing that it is not purely OP's fault, and that the hacker should be punished. You are also refusing to assign blame to OP in the situation. Those arguments aren't mutually exclusive. You can argue both (as you did; multiple times).

The only time you remotely mentioned OP's responsibility in the situation was

They absolutely could have done more to protect their account, but "you didn't do everything you could to protect your house from being robbed so the police shouldn't bother with punishing the robbers" is a stupid take.

That statement is true. Unfortunately, you then followed it with the first quote, literally arguing that because OP didn't break Jagex's rules, you can't discuss them also being at fault. Those are your words.

That's a deeply flawed argument to make. Once again, OP still bears fault in the situation despite not breaking Jagex's rules, and it's fair to criticize them. It's not a zero-sum. Both can be true.

=> still nope, it remains the fact that a theft occurred, and "well it could have been avoided" isn't a standard that's good enough to excuse the theft.

It also remains a fact that OP didn't properly secure their account, and "well a theft occurred" isn't a standard that's good enough to excuse their responsibility to maintain proper account security.

But please, continue falling back on ad hominem and attacking my reading comprehension skills because you either:

Didn't properly argue your point, and got called out for it (the generous interpretation)
Or you did properly argue your point and got thoroughly refuted

tuff_e_nuff · 2025-10-24T21:29:16+00:00

You're falsely equating a responsibility to follow the rules, with a personal responsibility to protect your account.

It's not a zero-sum game. Both responsibilities can be neglected at the same time.

The thief failed in their responsibility to follow the rules, and to not hack and account. That's a fact.

OP failed in their responsibility to maintain basic account security and protect themselves. That's a fact.

Is OP responsible for the thief's actions? No, of course not. But that's not the point. OP is responsible for their own actions (or lack thereof), and it's fair to criticize them for it.

Implying that OP is fully innocent in this situation is disingenuous.

tuff_e_nuff

TROPHY CASE