Items Kept on Death

[Dire_Wolf]

Flaming, spamming and non-relevant posts will be reported.

 

Items kept on death is based on alchemy price of a item. It is a flawed system because often a low priced item protects over a extremely high price item.

 

So have you experienced this flaw in the system? Then please mention it in this thread

 

What is the goal/aim of this topic?

To possibly create a change. It's not a rant, but meant to be constructive critism for Jagex.

 

Discuss and tell about your loses because of the flaw.

 

Friend 1:

Lost Saradomin sword in PvP, Onyx bracelet protected over it

 

Friend 2:

Lost Armadyl plate, Rune platebody protected over it

 

Myself:

Lost Fire cape, Farseer helm protected over it

 

Lost Armadyl plate, Fury protected over it.

 

Have lost more but don't remember them well.

 

Please no lectures about "Plan your equipment better" or "You should of know there was a risk" or "Boss hunting has a risk"

Please no suggesting of basing items kept on death on G.E

The flaw i mentioned needs to be tweaked only not the entire system.

[Shelby_Polo]

I usually don't take Arma to bosses because I a lot of things protect over it; very annoying.

[Adellund]

Fire cape should never be kept on death, as it is a minigame-related item, and it would be idiocy to let firecape be kept on death/protect over lowball items like farseer and rune plate, when people perfectly fine accept that you loose fighter torso on death(maybe because it's more of an training armour rather than a pvp-combat armour)...

[zotto]

perceived illogical behaviour of a game engine doesn't equal undesirable behaviour.

 

Naturally it is not nice to lose an item highly priced on the GE to an item that isn't, because the game engine has decided that the real value on death is to be determined by the alch price.

 

However, the rule isn't hidden. There is even a way to check the real value of an item and what is kept on death in the interface, which is accessible to everyone.

 

Knowledge of what makes the game tick will give you an advantage, and in this case it is public knowledge.

 

With that in mind there isn't really a problem with the 'item loss on death problem' as such. It is merely a problem of some players temporarily forgetting a public game rule, or not bothering to check up on what items are kept on death, since they assume too much.

 

Is there therefore a problem?

 

Only if we insist that Jagex continues the current trend of making everything easier and eliminating risks.,

 

But there seems to be a substantial part of the fanbase who actually objects to this process.

 

In conclusion: there is no problem other than the unwillingness to check real values (that is the one when encountering a death situation), or the fact that people tend to just overlook things or forget about certain things.

 

Have I ever lost valuable items, items that were more valuable on the GE than the ones I kept? Many times. It's part of the game.

[Star_Fox]

i look to it as necessary to keep items from overflowing. although as ironic as that sound for godswords and barrows...its more necessary for stuff like...lets say rares and hard to get untradables. :wink:

[Obtaurian]

I don't think that it's a problem. In fact, it's what makes some items as expensive as they are. The Barrows helms are good examples of this. Changing it would lower the prices of numerous items.

 

I'm not totally opposed to the change, but realistically, it's not going to happen. A way to get around this at bosses is to simply swap items by lending. You and a friend bringing Armadyl plates? Swap them.

[Da_Latios]

Personally, I like it the way it is. Items kept on death should be something you check before going to battle, and if you still go knowing the risks and end up losing an item, it's your own damn fault. If expensive items protected over everything, imagine the build-up of expensive items in the economy! No, we need some way to dispose of them, and this is one of those ways. Items lost on death shouldn't be predictable just buy looking at its price. The core value is what Jagex set it to be, and that is its alchemy price.

I may sound old-fashioned in saying this, but there are too many changes. Let's at least keep this tradition.

[Youmu]

Achievement Diary rewards should not be protected. You can get another one from the person that gives the reward at any time, so they should be lost upon death.

 

I just saw my Explorer's Ring 3 in the protected items, which is why I'm bringing this up.

[Aussietroopa]

You can still lose items with Graves? I'd like to feel what you're saying, but until Gravestones are removed I'm afraid you'll just need to learn to click the little button which says "Items lost on death", and plan for death.

[Gigatiran]

Yeah, it's a stupid system...everything I own will protect over my blue partyhat even though it's my most valuable item, but the game doesn't consider it my most valuable item. I don't like how a lot of things protect over more expensive stuff. It should be changed to let you protect what you want to protect.

 

Also it's bs if you are pking with a godsword, get a good drop, then one of your stats protects over it, that needs to be changed for sure.

[gorgoroth]

Simple solution: Don't die. Quest/Mini-game Items should always be lost on death. Sure, some items have lower alch vallues than they should have and some items protect over items they shouldn't but if you know a lower vallued item protects over something of higher vallue it should be your responsibility to make sure thay either you dont die or you switch that item with something of lower vallue. Trying to make a "change" won't ever work -.- specially not to Jagex. You always know that there is a certain risk involved when dying, its your responsibility to make sure that you are willing to lose the items you don't keep on death.

[Zepheras]

I wouldn't see this change as positive in the past, but with the recent inflation from 76k tricking, this may actually help with keeping the price of high end armour and weapons under control, if more are available in the market to circulate around, instead of getting removed from the system.

[Mike_Ike111]

The system is perfectly fine. There are way too many ways to keep alive, and at any rate you've got freaking gravestones already. Consider yourself lucky that you have 6 minutes to get back to your grave, because it used to be 1 minute before your items appeared for everyone elses taking.

 

I don't really want to come off rude, but it's as simple as not dieing. Every game needs a risk, and what you are proposing is taking away a big risk factor away. It's already nearly impossible to ever die in this game, so why make the risk factor even less. The last time a died by a monster was a few years ago. If I am going to die, I want to lose everything I have or else I'll never learn again.

[Zepheras]

The system is perfectly fine. There are way too many ways to keep alive, and at any rate you've got freaking gravestones already. Consider yourself lucky that you have 6 minutes to get back to your grave, because it used to be 1 minute before your items appeared for everyone elses taking.

 

I don't really want to come off rude, but it's as simple as not dieing. Every game needs a risk, and what you are proposing is taking away a big risk factor away. It's already nearly impossible to ever die in this game, so why make the risk factor even less. The last time a died by a monster was a few years ago. If I am going to die, I want to lose everything I have or else I'll never learn again.

 

Not really, events such as connection loss and momentary lag are not part of the in-game lessons that you can learn about. What do you propose, get a better connection before you start playing? Forever go on boss trips in welfare gear?

 

The idea of keeping items on death gives the impression of protecting three most valuable item, yet it is decided by the game, which is like an oxymoron. I may want to protect some low value item for sentimental sake, or actual high end items to minimise my wealth, but in either case I can't.

 

In fact, they're better off making you lose all your items, instead of this contradicting system.

[gorgoroth]

I have possibly the worst connection in the world. I have lagged out many times which resulted in me losing a Fury because my Barrows protected over it. I get over it and go buy new items or make the money to buy it again. If you know you have a bad connection you need to take the needed precautions (such as having a friend outside the boss room ready to bless your grave or welfare). Its just as simple as that.

[jeroenrocks1]

i lost my whip in pvp cause my dragon square protected over it, u should have heard the ventrillo records lol

[Zepheras]

I have possibly the worst connection in the world. I have lagged out many times which resulted in me losing a Fury because my Barrows protected over it. I get over it and go buy new items or make the money to buy it again. If you know you have a bad connection you need to take the needed precautions (such as having a friend outside the boss room ready to bless your grave or welfare). Its just as simple as that.

 

 

So, aside from having a decent gravestone, "a friend" is the new must to survive death? Anyway, this topic isn't even about how you can prevent item loss from death, but rather the selection of three items you keep, should you for some reason cannot get to your grave in time.

 

So it's like, if you get your fury back in time, great. If not, why should you lose your fury instead of your barrows when it's clearly not the 'most valuable' by player standard?

[langer]

I lost 3rd age mage amulet and 3rd age mage hat once due to connection problem at the same time as a Dr. Hyde/Jekkyl random and both fury and RFD gloves protected over it.

 

I was mad mainly because of the place I got the random (iron and steel dragons). As for the "flawed" system, I knew what I was risking and I accept the loss. The system is fine by my standard and constructive cristicism as, you put it, is not what you are doing. You offer no solution to this and don't offer value based on the G.E. as someone's items kept on death could change every 4 hours because of G.E. updates.

 

Player chosen items kept on death could be a solution... Don't know if the technical implementation is simple or not.

[JoeDaStudd]

Remember the only true value of an item is; the high alch value, low alch value and the store value. The rest is decided by the players.

[Nagrom_17]

I really hope they keep this the same. If they change it to player selected or ge priced then its just another example of a few people whining and making the game easier. As others have said, make sure you check what you will lose before death and just assume you will die. Always assume the worst so it can only get better.

[Lets_3ekout]

It's been like this since the dawn of RS, it's a unique quality to RS that I've always liked, I'm not sure why. If it worked on GE prices or if you could select items to keep, it just wouldn't be the same. Runescape shouldn't be about carrying around 3 ridiculously expensive items with the rest welfare gear. The way the item loss system works now is a pretty effective counter to that.

[samurai_lassie]

Dragon Halberd and any PVP artifact over 70k or so protects over claws. Almost lost them a few times but its a risk taken.

[Youmu]

Speaking of the Items Kept on Death feature...

 

They really should add a right click "Check High-Alchemy value" and "Check Low-Alchemy value" options on items within the Items Kept on Death feature so we can see their real values.

[Nagrom_17]

You could quite easily value all your items at a general store or look up the alch values on tip.it, im not saying that would not be a useful feature I am just suggesting some alternatives. Checking low alch values(general store) should work if you are just comparing what protects over what since the low/high alch values should be proportional.

[Youmu]

You could quite easily value all your items at a general store or look up the alch values on tip.it, im not saying that would not be a useful feature I am just suggesting some alternatives. Checking low alch values(general store) should work if you are just comparing what protects over what since the low/high alch values should be proportional.

I'm just saying it would be much easier if there was the option to look at them without having to go to a general store. Like price checks.

 

Speaking of price check, it can do with two more features, the Low-Alch price checks and the High-Alch price checks. Makes much more sense.