[2021] Now that Curses will no longer require 29 Defence, allow players that have previously reset Defence to do so again.

Originally posted by KBMonay

Support! I only brought my Defense up to 29 a while ago because of Curses’ requirement. It never looked like this was going to change: now that its changed I’d kill to go back. u/Jagex_Stu is this anything you guys could look at? I think a lot of people would be thrilled to reset their levels again, especially since the Curses debate was a hot topic back in the day. I knew a few people that quit or just gave up on their purés because of it.

Originally posted by rickrossRs

Will you be my father

Originally posted by An_Aviansie

The only thing is that I picked the option to never reset my skills. I mean never. I don't want this to change even though curses are becoming available to pures.

Just make sure the option to never reset gets remembered, please!

Originally posted by Jagex_Stu

On Monday, I can look into reopening the JIRA where I removed the 29 Defence req and add an adjustment to the one-time skill reset, sure.

From the comments, sounds like infinite resets would be preferred. Will make enquiries on Monday as to whether this change is permissible.

So if you object to that approach, now's the time to vocally object. :)

Originally posted by washingtncaps

I feel like you shouldn't be able to reset it more than once in a while. Like, some measure of time that a "good pure" will never notice that lets you fix mistakes and long-ago choices, but can't just oopsies some XP on and off whenever. Having a pure should still be a "big" choice and gaining XP should still be a "big" mistake.

Also my smooth brain isn't sure if having the freedom to drop the defense whenever would have PK implications.

Originally posted by washingtncaps

Week or month seems fair to me, a week being on the player friendly side since it should so rarely matter to others, and a month skewing towards the thematic integrity of the thing since there's still some bragging rights to be had, seems like you'll have the pulse of who cares more about what going forward.

Originally posted by Bml2

Hi Stu! It's awesome that you're tackling these big issues for small communities.

As an ironman runescore hunter, would it be possible allow irons access to fishing trawler and heist (with xp rewards forbidden). Currently these are the only two achievements which are IMPOSSIBLE for ironmen.

ty <3

Originally posted by Zaruz

Personally I'd still want to be able to permanently opt out. Perhaps a reset so you have to opt out from the update, allowing anyone a one-time chance to change a past decision?

I was hacked whilst not playing, some DB leak I guess, years ago. My defense was reset which was a major ballache when I came back. As I wasn't active, a bank pin wouldn't have prevented it due to them waiting out the timer. Id much rather be able to guarantee I won't lose 200-300 QP again.

Originally posted by KBMonay

• Two weeks sounds like a fair middle ground and Bank pin requirement is a bang on idea. I believe it currently does not. It definitely doesn’t if you e entered your bank pin already upon login. Can’t confirm if it’s your first bank pin requiring action, but I believe it doesn’t.
• To echo someone else I’m not sure Ironman should be able to access the reset as it really goes against the spirit of the mode.
• And another huge thing is that people have some concern about people getting really tough achievements like killing the new boss on 40000% enrage, and then resetting their defence and still holding the title. I don’t know if there is some means to distinguish that someone got their achievements not being a 1 Def pure, but that would uphold the integrity of achievements if it could be done.
• currently I think you can complete achievement diary tasks, get the rewards, then reset your defence. This allows people to get end game items like the tirrawan quiver 4 and hold onto it after resetting defence. It would be great if a comprehensive look through could be done to make sure resetting your defence takes away ALL things that required Def (there’s a large list, like adding the wall beast soul to your player owned dungeon requires 5 defence to wear the helmet required to kill it). This list is pretty big and I think I could provide an exhaustive list of info on it if needed

Originally posted by DonzaRS

I'd really just prefer a 'truely opt out of this never to happen never again' sort option. Perhaps just reset the perm opt out option and make it publicly known so people can choose again.

Originally posted by KBMonay

Okay I’d be happy to. Is there a best place to send it to you?

And I totally understand. I have zero idea how daunting it would be to develop something that could trace all Defence related existing and future content back to the reset feature. I’m sure it’s why many things have passed through and I was hesitant to bring it up, seeing it as one of the cons against instituting more than one reset; but I think it’s only fair to mention it.

As for Ironman I have not played the mode so I can’t speak to their wishes. I didn’t know it was available to them, I’m surprised! Definitely would like to see there wishes weighed in.

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Hey Stu, just wanted to share my thoughts to help with decision making.

• Resets in their current state change the meta a lot, especially for 1 defence ironmen.
  • There's actually good chunk of content that can't be obtained, or is significantly harder, if you have 1 defence.
  • Good examples include ascension crossbows (requires WGS for dragon limbs, which needs 65 def), and sunspear prayer training.
  • An ironman could basically play as a main, complete WGS, obtain ascensions, then reset back to 1 defence - though this would take literally months of playing an ironman higher than 1 defence.
  • HOWEVER, everything I've described is already possible in game, it just requires some planning.
• Resets in their current state are almost impossible to maintain.
  • In other words, it's been in the game so long in an awkward state that it just is what it is at this point.
  • Too much content interacts oddly with it, but we've had that awkwardness since 2014 and it's just not worth maintaining as you said.
• Frequently available resets would make 1 defence ironman way too easy.
  • Ironman is about self-sufficient gear progression.
  • 1 Defence ironman is about more challenging gear progression.
  • Being able to get defence, boss for 2 weeks, obtain some gear, then reset back down kind of takes the charm away from the role.

Because of the above points, unlimited resets makes it way too easy to get defence whenever you need to complete/obtain some content, then reset back down.

I think the key point I'd recommend here is a very long delay between resets. I'm talking one year per reset, to really discourage people from just using it whenever they want.

Originally posted by DonzaRS

I think B is a fair compromise to for those of us that never wish to reset at all. Perhaps even a slightly longer window up to a month for the option to reset just to give anyone with a change of mind time. I know I would log in and pick the option that I don't want to reset again, really its for the people that need time to think about the benefits and drawbacks.

Really the most important thing about this change is probably giving people enough time before it goes live and while its live to pick which option they wish to choose. Effectively just mentioning it exclusively multiple times via socials to get the word out.

I think as well it all pokes at the larger issue of account security but thats a whole other thing lol.

As far as a middle ground it's a good set of options for each.

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Because resets have been available to ironman for 7 years now, I don't think it's worth the tech debt required to change it correctly. Ironman won't benefit from any new rules around resetting - it's just an accepted part of the meta.

I do think unlimited resets actually levels the playing field for 1 def ironman as some players reset way more efficiently (ex. obtained ascension crossbows then reset). The long cooldown helps maintain integrity though,

We have started a small community of 1 def players (some ironmen), and the general consensus is to leave the meta as is but relax the permanent lockouts, so those who reset inefficiently have another opportunity.

We are actually compiling a document with meaningful information regarding skill resets and any of their bugs. If there's specific detail you're looking for just let me know and I'll include it!

Will send it over to you via twitter in a bit.

Originally posted by rickrossRs

I see, maybe you need to get your farming level up

What seeds are you planting?

Originally posted by DonzaRS

A2 I think offers the best option for always having the opt out avaliable.

I think long term having the option to reset always open will result in hacked accounts being maliciously damaged past item clearing items so it could do with a time restriction of some variety.

• What comes to mind is the number of players that have already chosen to opt out, the number of people that have used it, the number of people that wish to use it after changes and the number of people who would opt out again.

• Going forward I think it would create a point of malicious behaviour for those that hack accounts just to destroy peoples work even more so. Though the bank pin is probably the strongest security we've got at the moment it's not perfect and could be guessed or removed after 7 days.

Obviously the catch with A2 is the variable needing to be zeroed on the next login to start the timer.

• I'm not sure if this is possible or not but perhaps then just give this a 1 year window before it no longer has the option then defaults to their previous opt out if selected prior. Also assuming new accounts would also not get the choice to do this at all since they'd have been created after this change.

• Perhaps an option to opt out for a year or longer? maybe select or type in a number of years, though this would require players going forward to remember to do this and actively do it.

So in terms of account security I feel its more a potential liability having no opt out at all. I guess the hardest thing is choosing a duration where people can opt in or out before one of those options are gone. The number of people a reset will benefit I think I'd assume to be much smaller than the number that could be hurt by it in the future but thats just speculation.

I think keeping the opt out should always be there but just like the other options should also require a bank pin incase of being hacked. On the other side, should it also have the option to get rid of the opt out so players can always reset when ever they like under whatever restrictions apply there?

Sorry my point is getting long here I think I'm starting to ramble a bit. lol

Originally posted by KBMonay

Hey Mod Stu, I finsihed the list and sent you a message on here. Please feel free to check it at your convenience. Cheers!

Originally posted by KBMonay

Ah okay I haven't personally seen the Doc. Any chance you could send me the link/link the post and I could see if I've anything to add? I compiled my document on my own, didn't know anyone was making something communal!

Originally posted by Luigi_2134

It's great seeing an update that greatly enriches the gameplay of pures while having amazing communication at the same time. You are truly the MVP u/Jagex_stu. :)

Though, it's a bit disheartening that the other pure types always get the short end of the stick such as summoning pures and tank pures. 1 def pures are able reset defence while there's no way for tank and summoning pures to reset att/str/magic/ and range. Not only that, but nearly all but 2 quests that awards defence xp are in lamp form giving the option and choice of 1 def pures to not claim that defence xp while on the other side of pure types, there's a good bit of quests that awards att/str/magic/range xp in non lamp form.

Now I understand that having resets for att/str/magic/ and range are not possible sadly, but at the very least, could the magic xp in The Elder Kiln, Love Story, Do No Evil, City of Senntisten, Watchtower, and The Void Stares Back be converted into lamp form similar to how [the magic xp in Evil Dave's Big Day Out quest was converted into lamp xp.](https://imgur.com/G4pGx3u)

Having these quest's magic xp in lamp form will enrich tank and summoning pure's gameplay as they can access to quest rewards such as the new Ancient spells like animate dead which is every tank's wet dream just like how it's 1 def pure's wet dream to access to curses. It will also allow tank and summoning tank pures to do fun challenges like kiln and earn their capes and probably encourage interesting YouTube videos similar to oldschool. Having access to kiln will also give the tank pure community a huge longterm goal to set such as Final/Insane Boss and Golden reaper. Currently there's no point for the tank and summoning tank pures to strive for these insane feats due to unwanted Magic xp from The Elder Kiln quest as to obtain those longterm feats, it requires 100 Har-Aken kills and the drop log.

I want to say we are extremely extremely happy to see 1 def pures getting this update. There's been nonstop positive talk throughout the pure community and in my clan chat. This update lit up a spark of hope to the pure community and that maybe one day, those combat xp will be in lamp form as it would mean the absolute world to tank pures. And if possible, a toggle to not gain xp when using spells in pvm such as vulnerability, enfeeble, and stagger to help the team deal and take less damage in group encounters. Remember 1 def pures aren't the only type of pures out there. :)

-much love from the Tank and Summoning Tank community

Originally posted by Luigi_2134

It's great seeing an update that greatly enriches the gameplay of pures while having amazing communication at the same time. You are truly the MVP u/Jagex_stu. :)

Though, it's a bit disheartening that the other pure types always get the short end of the stick such as summoning pures and tank pures. 1 def pures are able reset defence while there's no way for tank and summoning pures to reset att/str/magic/ and range. Not only that, but nearly all but 2 quests that awards defence xp are in lamp form giving the option and choice of 1 def pures to not claim that defence xp while on the other side of pure types, there's a good bit of quests that awards att/str/magic/range xp in non lamp form.

Now I understand that having resets for att/str/magic/ and range are not possible sadly, but at the very least, could the magic xp in The Elder Kiln, Love Story, Do No Evil, City of Senntisten, Watchtower, and The Void Stares Back be converted into lamp form similar to how [the magic xp in Evil Dave's Big Day Out quest was converted into lamp xp.](https://imgur.com/G4pGx3u)

Having these quest's magic xp in lamp form will enrich tank and summoning pure's gameplay as they can access to quest rewards such as the new Ancient spells like animate dead which is every tank's wet dream just like how it's 1 def pure's wet dream to access to curses. It will also allow tank and summoning tank pures to do fun challenges like kiln and earn their capes and probably encourage interesting YouTube videos similar to oldschool. Having access to kiln will also give the tank pure community a huge longterm goal to set such as Final/Insane Boss and Golden reaper. Currently there's no point for the tank and summoning tank pures to strive for these insane feats due to unwanted Magic xp from The Elder Kiln quest as to obtain those longterm feats, it requires 100 Har-Aken kills and the drop log.

I want to say we are extremely extremely happy to see 1 def pures getting this update. There's been nonstop positive talk throughout the pure community and in my clan chat. This update lit up a spark of hope to the pure community and that maybe one day, those combat xp will be in lamp form as it would mean the absolute world to tank pures. And if possible, a toggle to not gain xp when using spells in pvm such as vulnerability, enfeeble, and stagger to help the team deal and take less damage in group encounters. Remember 1 def pures aren't the only type of pures out there. :)

-much love from the Tank and Summoning Tank community

Originally posted by carlossolrac

Hi, would resetting my defense take away the quests I already did for the curses? "Purez" is my account name and I leveled up to 42 Def and kept it as my void pure. It would be cool to reset my defense to lvl 1 if I were to keep my prayer (now 99) and curses. I however, talked to the dude in lumby and asked him to never reset my defense incase I would get hacked and it would reset my quests and prayer.

Originally posted by Luigi_2134

> I think that Stu's suggestion about blocking XP would fix a huge amount of problems, not take too much effort to develop and should put an end to a lot issues.

Mod Stu's xp block suggestion is perfect and is such a beautiful idea, I shed a tear in awe of how brilliant and genius it was. Yes, it is the best approach and the best solution that solves all the issues for each and every type of pure. It is the most efficient fix that is also future proof and the ideal thing to do as we acknowledge in our 2nd reply post. With Stu's idea implemented:

• There's no need to have xp being converted to lamps in the quests we named and some of the ones we didn't named
• No need for xp toggles on spell usage
• No wack a mole/case be case basis on manually fixing spells/quest xp
• Will be consistent and future proof as there will be no need to fix a future update that gives a new spell/quest xp
• Fast and efficient to update than manually fixing certain spells/quests/other xp related things
• Peace of mind for pures and can play their heart out without paranoia which is probably the biggest +
• Individually toggling certain stats will born new types of pure types which is extremely exciting.
• + many other unnamed issues

As of right now in the 10 hp pures, they can only level up defence and not offense stats since they can only PvM by killing monsters with reflect/poison because if they attack it with their wep, they'll gain xp in hp. With individual stat toggle blocks, a new pure is born and many others with 10 hp pures can now level up offence stats and can PvM by attacking with their weapons instead of just only reflecting/poison. This is extremely exciting as we can just imagine all the PvM challenges/feats/ and accomplishments that could be done with a 99 offence stat account with 99 defence but only 10 hp. Will definitely will be well liked and supported as seen how in Old School, many players try to do challenges with all kinds of builds such as inferno and it gives great exposure to the game as it nets in hundreds of thousands of views like the most recent inferno pure challenge.

> A general combat XP toggle would be great, and wouldn't ruin the achievement of existing builds such as 10hpers, like isolated stat XP blocks would.

Ideally, individual xp blocks will be best as it opens up new types of pure builds such as stated above. It would also makes pure building more enjoyable and encourage multiple pure builds as you don't have to slog with pest control minigame for example. It will increase the fun factor a lot when playing and building pures. And lets be real, with treasure hunter giving out loads of xp, 10 hp counts are not that impressive as many people assumed the player spun for their xp, and unfortunately the majority of 10 hp accounts did as it's human nature to take the path with the least resistance. What's impressive and more respectable is doing challenges with THAT BUILD as mentioned above and as seen in the Oldschool Runescape community. It's also seen here as well in rs3. People post and praise hard challenges and feats done by players. You never/rarely see any xp related posts here, not even 5.6b xp, compared to the PvM accomplishments being posted. If you are saying it devalues ur hp account because you did it the hard way, well that's not a valid reason as people back then did Livid Farm the hard way back then before they included the Livid Farm toke enhancers and Livid Farm Plant from the Traveling Merchant Shop.

> Leave quests as is. With the XP block, no more dev time needs to be spent changing the XP rewards to lamps.

Yes leave quest xp in their current form if xp blocks are being implemented. The Pure community are some of the most patient types of players so the xp block is worth the wait. :)

> Most stat requirements should remain for the sake of game progression (can be debated though). Mains should have the vote on that.

If stat requirements should remain for the sake of game progression as you just said, how come you the defence requirement for curses is being removed even though it's been voted during RuneLabs by mains to keep the defence requirement. Pretty ironic and hypocritical don't you think? :o

Stat requirements being removed are very well received as seen in the past and the current situation with the defence requirement for curses.

> Allow defence resets with agreed upon limits and if possible, add a way to verify when you have not taken advantage of a defence reset (such as an icon, like ironman), so that you can prove that you did what you did with the stats that you have.

There shouldn't be a special icon for not resetting unless there are resets for all types of combat skills. And if we do get a special icon, we should have an icon for players not ever purchasing keys to cheese their builds. Tbh, skill resets should be removed if the xp block update ever comes into fruition, as with the xp blocks, there would be no accounts ruined, thus no need for resetting. Was just a thought by some, but all in all we support the defence reset even though the other pures got screwed over by not having resets for the other combat skills. Pretty unfair for other pures but we will support it (not the icon though), because we support all types of pures here and hopefully, you do as well.

Apologies for the Wall of China text and late reply, but this is the thoughts and feelings gathered of many types of pures and takes time and discussion from clan chat/discord/friends/friendly pure rivals in wildy, and even unfriendly pure rivals in wildy. Remember, pures are not Black and White and come in many forms. Each and every one of us absolutely love Stu's suggestion on xp blocks.

We said this before but it's worth mentioning again...

/u/Jagex_Stu 's xp block idea is god tier and it would be the absolute best thing ever for all types of pures :D <3

Originally posted by minmaximust

Can we just support here, rather than having to make a twitter acc?

I support:

XP blocking, yearly defence resets, removing stat requirements to reset stats, removing weapon requirements to add special attacks into EOF (since they are based on your equipped weapon's damage/ability damage anyway, it shouldn't be game breaking).

Originally posted by Crodi

So I've been reading the thread and most of the examples and ideas have been mainly for 1 Defence Pure accounts. As a Clan Leader of players who excel at creating different 9/10 Constitution accounts I have a few concerns about our Pure Resets + XP blocks.

First off, we 100% support xp blocks as long as it's for EVERY combat skill (including Summoning + Summoning familiars). I've talked extensively with the clan and they agreed that either the xp blocks be for ALL or NONE of the stats. The idea of just having one skill able to be XP blocked, say Constitution for instance, is a terrible idea. We know it would just make our kind of accounts not unique and easier to accomplish, therefore ruining what the build was supposed to be and represent in the first place. Not to mention taking away the challenge that's associated. I hope, if the xp blocks pass, it will also stem towards blocking xp gained by the Dwarf Multicannon + Magic/Melee Varients (Coil and Cyclone) AS WELL AS any xp gained by using a familiar to attack. It would open up some new ideas for tackling monsters and quest bosses we may encounter and overall PvM enjoyment!

As for pure resets, I don't think there's any reason to take off the requirements needed to reset Constitution/Prayer as these were for Skillers who were "ruined" back when EoC's combat formula was getting reverted back to the Classic combat formula. While there's still use for the reset feature, we feel it's best not to get rid of the requirements as it would make it so anyone could create a 10 HP account after maxing all of their combat skills, therefore taking away the achievement, the uniqueness, and overall the challenge. Those who have messed up do end up creating new accounts to not repeat their mistake(s) again, believe me I was one of them.

I agree with the resets being at least 1 year apart, should there be a reason to reset. I'm not sure what kind of things you can add to the HP/Prayer reset. Possibly the only thing I can imagine is taking off the HP/Prayer pets of those who have gotten them and decide to reset. That's the only thing I can think of.

Also if you're looking to change some quests into lamps, especially for the 1 Defence community, the 10HP pures have been advocating for some other quests to receive the lamp treatment such as:

Constitution XP from quests:

• Dream Mentor: 15k Direct XP

• Witch's House: 6,325 Direct XP

• Grim Tales: 5k Direct XP

• Recipe for Disaster: 4k Direct XP

Miniquest:

• Knight Waves training ground: 20k Direct XP

This one in particular as it allows 10HP pures to finally do Nomad's Requiem.

Thank you for your time in reading this thread and my post!

Originally posted by Luigi_2134

After reviewing JannaMechanic's google doc:

• We agree that unlimited resets are preferred
• 1 year per reset is okay I guess, we were thinking like 6 months or so
• An op out is needed for those who don't want to reset
• Removing the need to redo quests that now have a lamp form

What wasn't discussed in the google doc was an op in option. So instead of having a permanent op out option, why not have an op out option + an op in option with the op in option taking 1 year before you can reset.

For example, a player had the op out option but now wants to reset his defence. He talks to Nastroth for the op in option but it'll take 1 year before he can reset similar how it takes 7 days to reset your defence. This can be cancelled at any point just like how the ability to reset a skill can be cancelled during the 7 days.

That way, players who got hacked cannot get their skills resetted unless they've been hacked for a whole year which I'm sure a hacker won't have access to the account in that timeframe, and even if they did, usually hackers just clean out the players banks and move on and I'll doubt they will wait a year/relog in after a year to confirm the skill reset after that 1 year wait/cooldown.

Another area we agree with the google doc is Option A on the Essence of Finality topic. Essence of Finality was made to create interesting gameplay and approaches by adding spec weapon into the amulet. For example, a player can use a Guthix Staff (level 60) onto the amulet and can spec with a t90 staff with tier 90 weapon damage. Why can't we do the same but in the opposite direction? Currently, players aren't able to put spec weapons into the amulet if they don't have the level to wield the spec weapon. Players should be able to put the spec into the amulet and spec with 50 magic for example. The spec will still scale on the weapon used so it'll still do 50 tier damage so it's balanced.

> Would also appreciate further discussion of the suggestion to remove the level requirements from Nastroth's 2 resets, to open them up to more player types.

We would absolutely love this! Tank pures got screwed over all over the place when they didn't allow resets for att/str/magic/range while ALSO having an unnecessary requirement to reset prayer/hp. Spirit Shield tank pures had 75 prayer for spirit shields but level it up to 99 since back then, prayer didn't counted for combat levels. When they did the xp reset update years back, we were happy about it but quickly devastated as we cannot reset prayer if we had over 5 defence. This destroyed Spirit shield tank pures, 10 hp / 99 tank pures since they leveled up hp since it didn't counted for combat levels, and ruined 65 prayer Druidic Staff Summoning pures who use to have 65 prayer to be able to wield the Third Age Druidic Staff as it only requires 65 prayer and gives the use of a Tier 50 2-hand Magic weapon while being level 1 magic. + other forms and types of Tank/Summoning Tank Pures

Ideally have resets for all combat skills but we are aware that is most likely not an option unfortunately.

Hope our feedback helps u/Jagex_Stu!

Originally posted by Pekempy

The way you have it suggested, anyone could leave "constitution" off and run ed3 trash to get 99s in weeks, crod was suggesting a "block combat XP" toggle (para 2) which would prevent all in one, similar to how the osrs DMM toggle worked for PvP. Otherwise our accounts that are 9/10hp and 99 combat stats are devalued due to people being able to make these in a few weeks and it destroys the uniqueness.

Originally posted by TastyRomeo

First of all, we do not necessarily want a singular block, as you claim here:

They want a singular block so players can't recreate their builds without going through all they've been through.

As mentioned before, what we do not want is an individual Constitution block. Any other individual blocks, or a total block, or both, is a compromise we can live with.

Second, as for expecting other players to "go through all we've been through", that's only partially true. RS3 has been, and still is, getting progressively easier - and the same is true for training a 10HP account. We accept that, and we don't resent players making 10HP accounts now for having it easier than we did back when we made ours.
We're willing to accept certain xp blocks, even though they make things even easier. But an individual Constitution block is a step too far and then some. It completely removes any and all effort necessary to create a 10HP account - and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to put effort into a special account, quite the contrary really.

Third, I vehemently disagree with your framing of 10HP accounts as "impossible", e.g. when you write

Many people who want to create low hp builds cannot do so

Nothing is stopping players from creating and playing on a 10HP or low hp build, except their own unwillingness to put in some extra effort compared to a main account. And let's be honest here, this isn't OSRS where you have to clean archaeological finds in the Varrock Museum for 1000 hours to level. Training a 10HP / low hp build takes extra effort, yes, but it's very far from being unreasonable.

Fourth, I feel like you're glossing over the massive devaluation. Is it worth alienating players who have championed this kind of account build in favour of those that apparently don't want to put in any effort? Will the large amount of players ^\citation needed]) who "want to create low hp builds but cannot" care about this kind of account long-term if it becomes essentially trivial to make?

I don't think so. I think many of the current 10HP players will lose interest in their account and possibly even quit, and many of the "new" 10HP players will also very quickly lose interest because on the one hand these accounts will have lost most of their prestige and uniqueness; and on the other hand because they will barely differ from a main account anyway.

Finally, I feel like the benefit of an individual Constitution block is extremely overblown. The only "benefit", compared to a full block + individual blocks for all other combat skills, is not having to put any effort into training a low hp build. It does not unlock a single piece of extra content.

To conclude, I'll quote /u/Jagex_Stu's earlier post:

So I need to be sure it's what the pure community collectively want. :)

The option of a full xp block, as well as individual blocks for all combat skills bar Constitution, is something I think pretty much every one can stand behind. And looking at earlier posts, that's already a big concession from the side of the 10HP community.

But an individual Constitution block is something that would make me, and pretty much every 10HP pure I've spoken to, unhappy, and that's putting it mildly. It is clearly not something the pure community collectively want.

Originally posted by Conscious-Savings-18

Stu, I'm going to think on it just a little longer. I want to weigh in all the comments on the thread and all the opinions. I know i've already replied but I'm going to do a second read around the post. Will try to see if I can look for a compromise.

Originally posted by Luigi_2134

There's are a few ways we can go about this:

Option 1: What you suggested u/Jagex_Stu

1. Ruins 99/120 hp pures with 1 in each stat

2. Ruins 99/120 proud Summoning pures with 1 in each stat

3. Any pure that makes use of toggles gets devalued for the tradeoff of the benefits it brings

Two communities gets devalued a lot, the rest get devalued in some shape or form but for the benefits it bring. Lets see the other options

Option 2: Toggles for each skill but if hp gets toggle, all gets block

1. Ruins the 10 hp pures with 99 and 120 Slayer as slayer can now be trained easily and all of their hard work and efforts are ruined. Void Points do not have an option for slayer xp making these pures devalued a lot more.

2. Ruins 99/120 hp pures with 1 in each combat stat. Not fair the other type of hp pures gets devalued for the sake of 1 type.

3. Ruins the proud 99/120 Summoning pures with 1 in each stat because they can now obtain charms without gaining combat xp.

4. Other players eager to get into hp pure building cannot make use of what the xp toggling update brings because they cannot toggle hp

5. Any pure that makes use of toggles gets devalued for the tradeoff of benefits it brings

Three communities gets devalued hard, 1 group cannot participate, and the rest get devalued in some shape or form but for the benefits that toggles bring. This makes it even worse than Option 1.

Option 3: Option 1 but forcing at least 1 of the combat toggles on minimum

1. Ruins many forms of pures that doesn't include a 99 such as level 80 strength terrasaur Strength pures for example

2. Any pure that makes use of toggles gets devalued for the tradeoff of the benefits it brings

Even though this option solves the 99/120 hp pure's problems and the 99/120 summoning pure problems, it ruins many other pures in return. The rest gets devalued in some shape or form but for the benefits that toggles bring. Option 1 so far is the best option atm.

Option 4: Xp toggles for all skills

1. All pure types are able to make the use of toggles and gets devalued in some shape or form unbiasedly and fairly for the tradeoff of the benefits toggles bring

Everyone gets devalued in some shape or form unbiasedly and fairly for the benefits that toggles bring. The best solution out of the 4.

No matter what, any form of pure gets devalued. Options 4 gives everyone an unbiased and fair devaluation for the benefits and value xp toggles bring. You cannot please everyone but you can be unbiased and fair as you possibly can.

Originally posted by Jagex_Stu

Thank you for your insightful reply!

To explain the XP block toggles in more detail for clarity, what I'm proposing is to add the following checkboxes to a new section near the bottom of the Combat XP section of Gameplay Settings:

• Receive Attack XP
• Receive Constitution XP
• Receive Defence XP
• Receive Magic XP
• Receive Prayer XP
• Receive Ranged XP
• Receive Strength XP
• Receive Summoning XP

Note they're expressed in positive language as that's preferred industry UX, and ticked by default.

In essence, each skill that contributes to combat level gets a separate toggle.

These would then be checked in the centralised code that gives the player XP. If the passed skill is unticked, you don't get the XP.

So that means XP in that skill from ANY source is blocked. Turn off Summoning XP, and if you complete a quest that gives Summoning XP, you don't get it. If you rub a Summoning lamp, it disappears and you get nothing. If you train Summoning, you don't get Summoning XP.

This toggle should provide the reassurance that XP is blocked at its core and minimise corner cases.

As much as I would love to continue converting all quest XP to specific lamps - my brain likes consistency (it's why I did things like add quest overview screens to all quests in time that was intended for company-wide personal development) - nowadays there's less opportunity for passion projects. Delivering what's already on the schedule is highest priority.

(It's helpful to know which quest XP you value more, though, so thank you for that - it helps with prioritisation).

Something like these toggles, though, which gets higher impact from a relatively quick and targeted change (though I can't speak for the QA time involved, which could still be a deal-breaker) is something I'd be more likely to successfully pitch to my producer the next time there's an opportunity between projects.

Consequently I need to be sure it's the solution you want, not just a compromise. (I also need to run it by the combat council for approval once we agree the design.)

If securing time to do this leads to unhappy instead of happier players, that wouldn't be good.

So I need to be sure it's what the pure community collectively want. :)

Originally posted by Dominwin

Totally fine with locking combat skills.

However, if players get skilling pets and their xp is locked I feel like that would be a problem.

If they get the pet and then lock their xp I think that could be a great solution for people on low xp that get one and want to show it off, while being somewhat able to use the skill.

Originally posted by MrStealYoGrill69

When you thought nothing could be more hype than rs3 inferno, mod stu just out hyped inferno. I can't handle so much hype. :D Gonna be super interesting to see all the pures types trying to obtain that sexy cape, whether it is a summoning pure, 10 hp pure, 1 def pure etc. No matter what, it's gonna be an enjoyable watch. I definitely enjoy watching the osrs pure inferno videos. Gonna do my best to try to get the cape on my 90 att, 1 str scythe account. P.S. Any hints on the new capes having special passive effects? ;P u/Jagex_Stu Assuming there's new capes that is.

Originally posted by osrslmao

With respect Stu, Luigi has always wanted individual xp blocks and that document is so one sided its not even funny. Basing a big part of your decision on that document is like letting a fox convince you to have him guard the chicken coop.

This update would be far more detrimental to the 10hp community that full blocks would be to the pure community.

It seems to me that the split is fairly equal 50/50 between full blocks/individual blocks, which seems to give a clear and obvious answer as to what you should do.

Nothing.

If its split this evenly and going one way or the other would upset a lot of people then just dont do anything. Dont make any xp block changes and let us keep playing our limited accounts the way we always have.

Please please please give this some more thought before implementing, and do not listen to people pretending to give a ''balanced, both sides argument'' because i promise you we are all biased very strongly towards one or the other. Just some of us wont admit it.

Thank you

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Hey Stu!

It's me again :D

I just wanted to point out that the 1 def community I'm a part of didn't participate in this conversation - we are the ones who created the Skill Reset document.

I don't mean to put down other people's efforts, however we put care into that document to ensure it stated the problems in a fair and non-biased way, as well as being comprehensive and readable for you. We clearly defined the implications of such changes and those affected by it.

I took a look at the document you were sent regarding XP blocking and it has a ton of bias/assumptions, and didn't have the community discussion it needed to draw conclusions. From what I'm hearing as part of the 1 def community, there's a lot of folk who play specialist builds - that XP blocking would affect - who haven't had their opinions considered.

This is also very different from the XP reset conversation/discussion, because XP-blocking would completely shift the meta for these builds - it's a lot more controversial.

I'm involved in the conversation now and have offered to facilitate discussion. I personally don't have a hard opinion on XP blocking, but I want to be sure you receive a document that is comprehensive and readable, and that everyone's voice is heard.

Does that sound ok? :D

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Understood.

We're inviting as many folk as possible to gather opinions. I've narrowed the conversation down to three key points on the motive for requesting XP locks.

1. Some players are just scared of messing up their build due a bug, misclick, or unexpected behaviour. They want an XP lock to catch these odd cases and keep their account safe from unwanted XP.
2. Specialist builds (ex. 10 HP 99 strength, Summoning Tank) are challenging to level up because of limited training options. Some players want XP locks to gain access to easier methods of levelling their skills (ex. Slayer becomes much easier to level at 10 hp, if you can lock HP xp). This also extends to achievements - 10 HP builds have to think about how they approach combat to avoid HP xp.
3. Some content requires you to gain combat experience to access/partake, but doesn't have any level requirements (Ex. pet hunting, bossing). Should this content be accessible to those who don't want to gain combat XP, provided they have all sufficient level requirements? Should this be a case-by-case discussion?

I think people who support XP locks in some way have one or more of the above as their motive.

Those against the XP bock don't want any of them, or want 1 but not the others, and would rather not have it all together.

We're going to have discussions about each point to see which ones are agreeable, and which are too controversial.

If you like, I can share those discussion results and we can design a solution with you, or we can design a solution and propose it to you. It'll definitely take some time.

Thanks again!

Originally posted by Tranquil_Pure

I will create a discord and invite players from both sides of this discussion. Would you like an invite as well?

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Thanks for understanding!

We discussed the motives I mentioned earlier and summarized the opinions of the community for each motive.

Here's a quick summary of the discussion (so far, at least). We've given everyone a few days to review the discussion summary and voice if they felt their view was not fairly expressed or represented, though some thoughts might come through in the coming days. I want to be sure everyone feels heard, and ultimately we request something that benefits as many players as possible.

We haven't gone down solution exploration just yet, but everyone seems to agree on these:

• There shouldn't be a drastic impact on strategies/metas around levelling/achievements (ex. bossing) that become possible with XP blocking or some other solution.
• Failsafe features, or ways to "undo" mistakes (ex. resets), are generally seen as a positive, but only if they don't also introduce abuse cases or change metas drastically.
• Content access through blocking direct XP rewards (ex. quests, lamps, basically anything that isn't doubled by bonus XP) is generally seen as positive across the community.

FWIW, XP blocking seems to affect 10-hp build metas far more than other builds, as if they could engage in combat without gaining HP xp, their entire combat strategy changes and all existing achievements are irrelevant.

We are being conscious of dev time and tech debt with solution design too, wouldn't want to propose something unrealistic.

I think the right solution is some sort of balance between meeting the above requirements as closely as we can, and being easy to implement dev-wise.

Hope you find the discussion summary interesting - and feel free to share your thoughts too!

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Anytime! After moving the conversation to the problem rather than solution discussion, we found most people were in agreement.

Side question regarding a potential solution: is "Direct XP" (i.e. XP which is not affected by bonus XP, such as quest rewards and lamps) distinct-enough to be easily blocked?

I'm curious if its designation as "not affected by bonus XP" gives us a flag to target for XP blocking, without affecting other sources of XP (i.e. XP which is affected by bonus XP).

Thanks again =)

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

Thank you for the response!

I'll just provide some context points rather than any personal opinions.

• We were hoping for individual skill toggles, sorry for not being clear!
• I don't think anyone would have issues with extending that toggle to all 28 skills, we were just being mindful of development time and the vast majority of specialist builds focus on combat skills.
• Because Direct XP only considers XP which isn't affected by Bonus XP, it's not actually a good fail safe. If I, as 1 defence, somehow accidentally check defence XP in combat settings, and I run to a boss, I'll instantly get 10 defence from one kill. The Direct XP block wouldn't have saved me as combat XP isn't direct XP.

• i.e. It's not particularly meaningful, achievement-wise, for anyone if they have never turned on Direct XP blocking, but I don't see the harm in QC messages.

• EDIT: One more point, we really do have to emphasize that this toggle is for XP rewards only and not general xp. I'm worried someone will misinterpret and then complain about getting HP XP. We saw how people misinterpreted "CLAIM REWARDS" yesterday.... lol

Originally posted by JannaMechanics

From what I've been seeing, there would be a good amount of upset players as a result of any general (non-direct) XP toggle, even if you include the quick chat badge of honour.

There are also 10 HP builds who want failsafes, and don't want their combat strategies changed - they would be left out. For that reason, I think the community is just far too split on general XP toggling and I don't see it being a good use of dev time.

I did come up with a potential alternative failsafe solution (that consumes bonds, yay dev time incentive!) but I'm not confident enough in the design. I could share that also if you like.

Originally posted by Charmseeker_RS3

Blocking all sources of experience would be unwise from what we've seen and discussed - there is enormous disagreement between multiple communities and blocking all sources would benefit some communities but not others. The solution we came up with that everyone could agree on was blocking direct xp, which is experience that is not affected by bonus xp (quests/lamps/challenges,etc.).

Originally posted by osrslmao

There is still a massive split in the community regarding full cb xp block vs individual xp block, with more leaning towards full cb xp block. I dont see you ever getting both sides to agree on that, even after our discord being in discussion for weeks (although the most vocal supporters of individual xp blocks have yet to join the server despite us inviting them multiple times so make of that what you want)

However blocking direct xp from quests/challenges is something we can all get behind and dont see a downside to (especially with the QC option)

Originally posted by minmaximust

Just voicing my opinion here.
No objections to Jenna's document.
I'm one of the "aggressive" players who would enjoy a total XP block, however...
I do understand that this would invalidate the effort of other player's builds.

I wonder if there could be an (agreed upon) solution such as what was mentioned, the "chat badge" proving that you had never utilized the full XP block, including the addition of quick chat statements.

If this isn't desirable by the players impacted, what could be done to allow some players to utilize a total XP block while at the same tome not devaluing the effort of other builds?
As was stated, Janna's idea is a fantastic start.
I'd still like to get back to the drawing board to see if a total XP block could be implemented without negatively impacting other player's builds.

Thanks Mod Stu and all of you players who have helped/will help in this discussion.

Originally posted by ProBro_1337

Mod stu, why are you overcomplicating things. What's with the Nastroth thing when it can just be put into the settings interface. Having it at the settings is a lot more convenient and a lot more noticeable compared to an npc at some random Runescape castle. It's just like how those Guthixian Butterflies being toggled off from the guy east of Falador Lodestone, Memstix. You wouldn't believe how many people still do not know a toggle exist for those account ruining butterflies. Surely that should have popped into your head right? It'll be easier to see which skills are toggled if it's from the settings interface compared to manually trying to quick chat each skill every time. Keeping things simple is king.

Originally posted by ProBro_1337

My apologies if my original comment sounded a bit harsh, was just trying to give constructive feedback and it pains me remembering all of my "fallen" brothers that got their accounts ruined due "common knowledge" not being as common as most people think. Ease of access and awareness of it existing is important. There's been times where a payer messed up his account by misclicking those guthix butterflies and then panic cry in clan chat about what happened with people responding, "oh that's "common knowledge, you should have known"." With the ruined account player saying like, "oh I wish someone woulda told me this was a feature" or like "I wish knew about this." It's the same situation with other things like players being safe using ring of recoils and then mistakenly thinking other reflect like things such as armour spikes from smithing doesn't give xp when it does.

Then same situation happens, people tell him or her that it's "common knowledge" with them saying they wish they knew about other reflect like items were not all the same like ring of recoils. It takes an experienced player to know all the little details and inconsistencies and tips and tricks. Not everyone has a person that takes them under the wing and guide them, and even if they do, the person guiding doesn't tell them all the things to watch out for. I am sure you at least had a time where you took someone under your wing or just in general and they made "noob" mistakes that you would assume is common knowledge. I am sure you had those "today I learned" moments as well. Heck, just recently Mod Sponge had one of those moments about boosted combat stat levels giving an extra static 4-8 damage per level making his new magic ability 'magma tempest' way way stronger than he intended and he said he never knew this and he's been playing for over a decade. Which is why we got today's nerf of that ability.

All in all, ease of access and the awareness of it existing is very valuable, more than aesthetics. (I'll admit though, the max challenge interface does look "prettier," but pretty doesn't help save an account.) Not sure how possible this next idea is, but, maybe there's a section in the skills setting section where if you click it/or a button, it'll open up that max challenge-like interface so you can have all 3 of ease of access, awareness, and aesthetics.

Originally posted by RsBugsAndGlitches

Speaking of One Skill At A Time, you do know that only blocking direct non combat skills makes it easier since it gives players access to quests they couldn't do that gives xp and levels in an assortment of non combat skills. Quests that gives skilling methods that couldn't be done without that quest or useful skilling items and areas. As someone who plays a OSAAT on the side, https://imgur.com/1a2S7H5 , only direct xp being block doesn't sit well with me and my buddy who is doing an extreme version of 200m at a time while I am doing 120 at a time. If you are gonna do that, have another separate toggle selection for indirect noncombat skill xp. So a section for direct noncombat xp and a section of indirect noncombat xp with both having quick chats in their sections to keep their prestige. It'll also help for those players who like to broadcast all their 99/120/200m's all at once since they will be able to make, for example, untradeable potions to PvM with their friends. Another example is players can still make progress towards Player Own Farms/Range Out Of Time farm animal breeding logs while not getting that 120/200m in the skill to save for that special all 120/200m broadcast moment.

Edit: it'll also helps players who are saving up all their 120/200m broadcast participate in events such as the Golden Partyhat Hunt as it requires skilling in artisan skills, gatherer skills, and support skills. Currently they either have to forfeit that well earned 120/200m skills all at once moment or events/updates such as like the 20th anniversary golden party hat hunt.

Originally posted by KeikuKeikuKeiku

Hello, I'm not part of the pure build community, but, I think something of this sort would be a good middle ground to support both sides and show some official support. If it's doable, though, I think it might be better to set the Quick Chat flag for whether XP has ever been blocked using the toggle instead of whether the toggle is activated. That way you end up with a similar transition to that of Ironman Hardcore to Ironman while still allowing people an extra layer of protection for their pure accounts.

Originally posted by RsBugsAndGlitches

What she is asking is basically like this:

Example:

Pretend a player is just playing around with the buttons by turning it on and off on either direct or indirect options. Then put the buttons back into their original default, unused form. Will that player's quick chat still say they used the toggles even though they actually didn't make use of em and just played around the buttons? Or will it only says you made use of em when it actually blocks xp?

She also had another interesting idea that is worth mentioning of having a quickchat of how much xp was blocked. "I have blocked a total of "x" Defence xp." Though it was just an interesting idea she threw in but we do not know if that is possible or if it doesn't mess with the engine/server slow down?

Originally posted by Jagex_Stu

That's a really good point, and I can implement whichever approach is preferred.

So planning that out in detail for clarity:

• Instead of remembering that you've ever used each toggle, we remember that you've benefited from this toggle (ie if you've toggled off direct Strength XP and direct Strength XP gets blocked, that's when we remember it)

• The quick chat is then phrased something like "I have been protected from a Strength XP reward" rather than "I have disabled Strength reward XP at least once".

Ultimately let me know what needs to be quick chatted in order for this design to be acceptable, and I can make it happen, within reason. :)

Where it comes to displaying specific amounts of XP or number of uses, I'd prefer to limit to a binary check per XP type per skill though, or the variable data usage adds up fast.

Originally posted by Jagex_Stu

Having said that, been having further discussions with the 10 HP community, and at least for them, as long as you're unable to tag a monster/player to get XP/credit/drops when you have toggled off indirect Constitution XP, they don't need QCs to prove which toggles they've used or have active.

Is quick chatting your toggle status a desired feature for anybody else?

If not, I could cut QCs from the design and make toggling off Constitution XP require attacking to be toggled off.

Originally posted by MrStealYoGrill69

Stop trying to ruin a good thing by changing the 1st idea you had. Rip summoning pures since they'll gain unwanted hp xp or unable to use that big ole familiar in action. A summoner not being able to do combat is pretty much like a skiller who has a huge toddler following him (useless steel titan that cannot do combat).

Originally posted by Charmseeker_RS3

I've been playing Summoning pures for over 7 years and I can tell you that the solution that Marty proposed DOES NOT hurt me in any way whatsoever. The entire point of a Summoning pure, and any other account that has 10 HP, is to engage in as little combat as possible. Summoning pures are not using their familiars to do combat willy-nilly.

When you're training Summoning or any other combat stat on a pure or 10 HP, the entire challenge of the account is "how can I train this skill in a way that's completely different from how a main would train it?". The problem lies in finding a solution that works for everyone, and being able to engage in combat while blocking HP experience but enabling everything else ruins ALL of the hard work my friends put into their accounts...

What Marty said here:

Any pure build that doesn't want to lose access to what they have now just... has to not block constitution XP, meaning they have to lean into the same strategies that have always existed.

is completely accurate. You can still do combat on a Summoning pure or 10 HP account right now. I would know because I have a Black Dragon pet on my Hardcore Ironman Summoning pure and I'm planning on going for the rest of the chromatic dragons, Abyssal Minion, King Black Dragonling, and TzRek-Jad. You can still participate in combat and not gain experience using methods that already exist in-game. They're just.. slower, which seems fair IMO. If you're going to do it the unconventional way, it should be a grind. That's what makes achievements like that feel so great.

50 of us from different pure and skiller communities have been discussing a solution for almost 3 months now on Discord and the one that Marty proposed was the only one almost everyone could agree on. From what I've read, it seems to me that a select few people on Reddit want to devalue 10 HPs and skillers so they can have the priviledge of participating in combat like mains. So it's easier for them.

I hope we can all come to some sort of agreement that doesn't completely devalue one community in favour of another, just because a few people want achievements handed to them.

Originally posted by Dan3HitU

Replied to you on Twitter and you pointed me here....

After reading, this sounds great, a way to toggle all unwanted XP off like we already can in certain instances (example like with Pulse Cores) a simple interface like that would suffice.

I'd love to extend my original Pure account even further than what I've already done with it, literally 19 years in the making!

Originally posted by darkerthrone

Hi there, sorry to bother, but I was really curious if there have been any recent developments on defence resets. The fact there is even discourse about it has me over the moon that I may be able to revive my old account and play 1 defence again without spending the years it took to get to where I was again (ie making a fresh account)

I really don't want to pester anyone about it too much so please ignore me if there is nothing to share, I'm just super hopeful and excited about the whole thing. :)

ps. thanks for all you're doing for us

Originally posted by darkerthrone

Hi there, sorry to bother, but I was really curious if there have been any recent developments on defence resets. The fact there is even discourse about it has me over the moon that I may be able to revive my old account and play 1 defence again without spending the years it took to get to where I was again (ie making a fresh account)

I really don't want to pester anyone about it too much so please ignore me if there is nothing to share, I'm just super hopeful and excited about the whole thing. :)

ps. thanks for all you're doing for us