Runestaves are now eligible to be designated as Creature Bane weapons. The following rules apply to Creature Bane runestaves:

* Like normal runestaves, they do not work with damage or critical weighting.
* All other weapon flares will work, including mana and acuity. If mana flares are selected, they will only flare when casting at a the appropriate creature type.
* The AS bonus can be selected, which will boost bolt AS and warding CS (by 3/5 of the AS amount) on every cast when fighting the appropriate creature type.
* The DS bonus and Parry chance options can also be selected.

As such, you could have a runestaff that normally has fire flares, then also make it a Troll Bane runestaff with double fire flares (first flare from the normal runestaff property and second flare from the Creature Bane), or a Troll Bane runestaff that grants +10 bolt AS/+6 CS when casting at trolls.

GameMaster Estild

Will undead bane to runestaves be a less rare option than it is to normal weapons?

Keith/Brinret/Shiun

Keith is correct

Wyrom, APM

http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/Policy%20Discussions/view/246

>Can I have Vvrael bane so I can cast at them finally?! =P

Anti-magic bane runestaff could be an interesting and equally attractive option as undead bane melee weapons if it could work like that.

I think you should put on the calendar to have a premium raffle for 10 banes added to runestaffs only to inaugurate this change.

>>Extraplanar bane currently does not let you hit the extraplanar undead without a suitable weapon

I think the key with the runestaff is that most pures have that suitable weapon (the spell) to hit extraplanar undead - so the flare should still fire? It's an interesting concept for runestaff wielders.

Doug

Ahh, yes - I see.

Still, I think finding a way would be a good thing - at least for any anti-magic creature that uses anti-magic to create spell effects (consider warlocks / witches). I agree with the point that there's still a lack of weapon. I'm just thinking drawing it (anti-magic) at some great physical cost from the creature and boomeranging it back might have some merit.

Might not help with the destroyers, though - at least, not well. Still, it's a suggestion from V and Kronius that has good merit to consider (if very rare).

Doug

You can find a list of the creatures affected by the various banes here : https://gswiki.play.net/Bane_weapon


Speaking in Faendryl, Jahosk says, "You will now be known as Blade Durakar, the Palestra."

>> Undead bane was never meant to provide the ability to hit undead without a suitable weapon in doing so (this has been stated multiple times and never "fixed").

Yeah - it continues to puzzle me that undead bane is effectively mechanically better than using a permablessed weapon for hitting undead (with the one exception being the ability to hit demons if your weapons is 8x enchant or higher).

Why is it mechanically better? Because permablessing takes up the weighting/flare spot on your weapon eliminating a lot of enhancement opportunities whereas banes have their own dedicated spot on a weapon (meaning you can add weighting or flares on top of your undead bane ability). Also banes typically add additional benefits to AS and/or damage as well.

I suspect enough undead bane has gone out now that the ability to hit undead with it has become an institutionalized feature of the bane. I'm hoping that at some point something will be done to make permablessing a more attractive feature for undead hunting weapons to offset the 'penalty' of having a permablessed weapon over an undead bane weapon.

-- Robert

A powerful whirlpool is suddenly overtaken by a windy vortex!

"I'm hoping that at some point something will be done to make permablessing a more attractive feature for undead hunting weapons to offset the 'penalty' of having a permablessed weapon over an undead bane weapon."

Good point, the most simple approach would be to give all permabless weapons holy water flares or something similar.