i agree that mages a rangers got screwed on this one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hilarious, you can wear full infinity with 50 magic and 25 defence and get the same bonuses as thrid age with 65 defence and magic required! :roll:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

but look on the bright side, when people go swimming in a melee 3rd age helm they'll be mistaken for a shark and shot! :

 

people still buy obby shields, and rune defender is much better. especially if your going to be talkin about abilities to wear and afford barrows armors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

defender is more attack less def while obby shield has good def while both give the same str bonus.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3rd age armor is just another set of novelty armor besides the shield and coif. dragon armor is novelty for people who have over 70 def.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

obby shield is a novelty now because of the defender... seriously any1 who has a rune defender uses it like 90% of the time over obby shield. 20 less def is not a big deal, people think it might be, its not. maybe with magical monsters but with melee... no. on the grandscale that is barrows armor users, the def lvl usually excedes 80 def, and 80 def+ 20 def points wont get u killed, infact heres how you basically negate the reduction of def, turn your combat training to defensive and uve pretty much got it an obby shield instead of a rune defender.

Personally I think the 3rd age mage looks much better than infinity. Infinity robes just look really... gaudy to me. Similarly I prefer the look of melee over dragon and white over black d hide

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+1 except on the dragon hide stuff, i dont like the white d hide that much, but i do like the mage stuff a lot.

u got a good point, i mean the partground on them is personally the only appealing thing to me, being used in the god wars and all, but i know what u mean, it's like an extreme FAD! #-o