Discussion Archives: Current Revision | Archive 1

Fake prestiege hat images[edit source]

If you didn't know already, prestiege hats 8 - 10 are faked... should we leave them in or wait until we get the real images? Admittedly, the fakes I made look really legit. --Bigd56 | Talk 03:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say we shouldn't include false information, and I'd include images in that. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 04:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
But then again, the fake images look better than Unknown hat.png. --Bigd56 | Talk 04:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
And it specifically mentions in the article that the images are not real. --Bigd56 | Talk 04:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I think Unknown hat.png suffices. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 04:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I think they should be replaced with Unknown hat.png. It's just too easy to not read that small text that says they're faked. Nice images though.PeaceBear0 07:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I've decided to change the images to Unknown hat.png. I'll also mark the fake images for deletion. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 06:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I've got the 10th Hat, and its real, but I need someone to edit it to add transperancy, size, and such. User:Mythiko97
Stick it up with the correct name, but don't insert it into the page yet. I'll edit it if no-one beats me to it and replace it with the edited version. OrbFu 23:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

8th Prestige hat added[edit source]

I have added a real picture of the 8th prestige hat. The 9th will come soon, but I don't know if it is possible to get a picture from the 10th, as you can only see it after you can buy the next hat (and there is no 11th hat.)

Lose hats and spells after membership over, or keep?[edit source]

If you become a member for like one month or so, and unlock certain spells and prestige hats, do you keep them when you go back to nonmembers? Even if they were automatically put back once membership was regained I would be happy. Does the prestige hat/purple orb still appear by your name once membership is lost? I've seen someone who had no purple orb/hat by their name but used members' spells (such as a flame dragon).

Because I'm considering just gettingo ne month of membership to play mainly Arcanists, and hopnig I don't lose my rating, hats, and spells. If I do keep the spells it would be sweet to use afterwards.

Thanks for your time, Abcdlmnog123 00:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Abcdlmnog123

A friend of mine once quit membership before prestiege hats came out, and when he became member again, he still had all spells, but he couldn't use them while he was a free player. I am not certain, but I'd assume you keep your prestiege hats as well. You definately keep your rating, but you lose the ability to play rated games. --Bigd56 | Talk 01:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks a lot. Abcdlmnog123 01:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Abcdlmnog123

No problem, glad to help. :) --Bigd56 | Talk 01:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

As a non-member I can easily help. When you lose membership, all your spells are kept and can be selected and used as usual in the Sandbox, but not in unrated games. If you happen to have all the spells, you can also still buy a prestige hat (though there'd be no reason to) If you need any more information, just ask on my talk page. Thanks. 19118219 Talk 03:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The original question hasn't yet been entirely answered, so I'll fill in the gaps. The hat and orb do not appear by your name when you aren't a member: however, the hat still appears above your head in game. (So Aik Hui is wrong about there being no reason to buy a prestige hat if your membership has expired - if you're not planning to join again, you don't lose anything and you do gain some headwear). OrbFu 14:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Heavy tidying[edit source]

I didn't manage to do the complete revamp I was hoping to, but I've made a start. I'd like to justify one change I made and request comments on some questions which have come up. On changing the rating section: rating doesn't really measure skill - prestige hats complicate it. Then questions: Is it actually true that everyone in the team gets a wand for winning in team rated? Can anyone confirm "Most damage" as an award? I thought that was Most Powerful. Also one of Most Cruel and Most Honourable must be wrong. Comments? Finally, I've never seen "Most Fit" - can anyone confirm? OrbFu 00:14, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Most honourable was wrong, I fixed it. Regarding verification of the different ones, I'm pretty sure that can all be found in Archive 1. I think everyone on the team gets a wand... occaisionally, very rarely, I see somebody on the winning team who did not resign, but they don't get a wand. I've always assumed that these people were just limited by their prestige hat.... TimerootTalkContribsEdit count 02:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Archive 1 doesn't have any reference at all to Most Damage or Most Fit. Thanks for the other corrections. I hope you don't mind if I remove the sentence about life gain, castles, etc. from the Basics section - I don't think that level of detail is appropriate there. OrbFu 07:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Here and here - almost all awards, including Most Damage and Most Fit. --BeyPokéDig 14:16, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Additional question: can anyone confirm my suspicion that Shining Power should be alongside Lichdom in the list of personal spells which aren't cancelled by a Sanctuary? OrbFu 13:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I remember, the sanctuary knocks the Shining Power user out of the sky until the start of their turn, and then they're free to fly as normal. But it's been a while since I used it, so I might be wrong. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 14:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm down to the sections on "Tactics" (most of which don't seem to me to be tactics at all) and "Suggested move sets". Do these add value to the page? The former seems to me to be really "Metagame": i.e. commonly encountered strategies; I can see some value if rewritten as such, but it's a bit fluid. The latter just strikes me as non-encyclopaedic. OrbFu 15:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

If we're going to keep those sections, I think they will need significant re-writing. I also think that they may be more suited to one or more subpages. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 17:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
As no-one has defended these sections, I am going to remove them. If anyone wants to replace them, I think it would be better to do so in another namespace - perhaps we should discuss having a forum for subjective advice. The last revision with both of them is rev 23964. OrbFu 14:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I hope to tackle the subpages soon. Some at least of the spellbook pages seem to have various bits of advice, of varying usefulness. Does anyone want to propose a suitable place to move them? The talk pages are really for discussing the article rather than the subject of the article. I could perhaps move them to a forum topic, but unless anyone speaks up I will simply delete them (OR, NPOV and Cite all apply in most cases). OrbFu 22:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

If you decide to move them I think a forum topic is probably the best place. But I'm not opposed to deletion. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 08:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Page Length[edit source]

I've noticed that this page is approaching 32kB again, I think we should move spellbook-specific information to the current subpages, and perhaps create some more subpages. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 14:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Arrow trajectories[edit source]

I've partially reverted one of Timeroot's edits, with respect to the trajectory followed by arrow spells. I invite anyone who doesn't believe that the first section of the trajectory is parabolic to take Fire Arrow into the sandbox, move left slightly from the starting position, select a target at the top-left, and then fire it gently left and perfectly horizontal. It will dip below the horizontal and then come back up as it enters the homing phase. OrbFu 13:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Arcanist Clans[edit source]

Should we discuss the first 5 Clans, and where they are now? (OWA, WOA, SP, MOTA, Arcane Hunters)

I'd say no, since they're unofficial. It would be unfair to only mention a small number of clans, and to mention them all would be way too much work anyway. And I don't really think it would add anything to the article either. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 19:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you can mention that there are clans, but as Quartic said, you can't mention just some of them Ad Fundum 19:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Since they're unofficial, it would make no sense to add them here. Perhaps a FunOrb Clans Wiki would be a smarter idea. {{SUBST:Nosubst|Signatures/Mythiko97}} 21:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Health points, hit points, lives, life...[edit source]

At the moment there are various synonyms used for hp. While synonyms are good for variety, they're bad for precision: Joe Bloggs, who hasn't played the game, might get confused as to whether health points == hit points. What should be the standard term? Personally I favour health points, followed by life (as in "50 life"). OrbFu 14:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Health is used in the instructions - I think we should try to be consistent with Jagex's terminology. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 15:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

assistince[edit source]

could someone assist me in putting the requirement column on all the spell books. I have already done nature, thanks.--Peckham33Talk 22:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to wonder, how necessary is this? The level 2 spells are always listed immediately after the required level 1 spell, and the level 3 spells always require any 5 spells. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 22:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
if you feel they arn't nesasery, then remove the one(s) alreadyt in place.--Peckham33Talk 05:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
It isn't just my opinion that matters. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 05:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't feel they're necessary either, because of the same reason. 19118219 Talk 05:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Question[edit source]

I am posting this for a friend who is to lazy to create an account here:

This is a short page i created because I want to know some things about Arcanists. We all know some people transfer on it, we all know some people cheat for their wands/prestige hats. Recently, N 0 V 1 S Fo got removed from the highscores for “wand drawing”. I find this very weird because other people have done it too, and they aren’t removed. For example, some people agree with a friend to resign a game versus him, then win a game versus him (the friend resigns in this case), win, lose, win, lose, …, and so on. This way you get a wand everytime you win, how come that some people get removed/banned for this, and others don’t ? Some people got the 10th hat this way and nothing happened to them.

does anyone have an answer for him? Erzmeister 16:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The FunOrb Wiki isn't run by Jagex, so the editors here are unlikely to know the answer. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 17:02, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
yes thats true, but he is looking for a definition of what wand drawing is too i think Erzmeister 17:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Protection against non-registered users?[edit source]

I have been noticing the Arcanists page is a target for vandalism; only yesterday, 2 'idiot' edits were made by 2 unregistered users. If this continues going on, it might be better protect this article. What do you think?Powdinet 08:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Have you read the archive of this page? Consensus for semi-protecting this page seems to fluctuate on a regular basis. OrbFu 11:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The page was protected in the past; it was unprotected after a decision that there are unregistered users who make good edits. 19118219 Talk 11:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
That was my point. The first time it was discussed, a decision was made not to protect it. The second time, a decision was made to protect it. The third time, to unprotect it. This is, I believe, the fourth time it has been discussed. FWIW my opinion is that it should be semi-protected because it attracts more spam than the rest of the site put together. OrbFu 12:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually this is the third time. The first time, a decision was made to protect it. The second, a decision was made to remove the protection from the first discussion. 19118219 Talk 13:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The first discussion was in May on Vimescarrot's and my user talk pages. OrbFu 15:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I guess I should had read the Archive Powdinet 15:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't think there's a problem with reopening this discussion every so often, since circumstances certainly change. Currently, I don't really think the level of spam edits on Arcanists is bad enough to warrant semi-protection. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 16:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Clothing combinations....[edit source]

In the featured article template, and I think the main article as well, it states that there are "over 1,000,000 combinations". Could someone cite that? When I checked, it ended up being aproxamitely 290 tirllion combinations. That's a big difference...... TimerootTalkContribsEdit count 23:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's your citation - in the Description section. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 00:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but is that something to go by? According to that page, there are still only six arenas... :P TimerootTalkContribsEdit count 00:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Ok, there are 54 bodies. 54 heads. 54 right hands. 54 left hands. 72 hats. 57 beards etc. 32 primary colours; 32 secondary colours; 16 hair colours; 8 skin colours. 2 of the skin colours block one primary and secondary colour, and one blocks two. So there are 54*54*54*54*72*57 = 34.896.541.824 clothing combinations ignoring colours, and 127072 colour combinations. That makes 4.434.373.362.659.328 combinations in total, although not all of them would be visually distinguishable (some of the beard etc. options don't actually have anything in the hair colour). OrbFu 21:14, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Since they introduced the costumes, the number has gone up, I think. KillrTalk 22:12, September 5, 2009 (UTC)

Eh i added the Inlarged ingame pic for Arch Mage[edit source]

Tittle says it all but i dnt see the pic on the Arch Mage achievment Page when i go there. Wtf is up with that?

`Novis

I added the image to the page for you. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 03:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok thanks dude

'Novis

Thanks a lot, but if you don't mind, could you please get a better version? It'll only take a few seconds. First go to Achievements Online and click the Arch Mage icon (It looks like Arch Mage.png). When the large image at the top right shows up, just right click on it, save it as either a .gif (default) or .png, and upload. Doing it this way takes less time than editing away the background of the .jpg you uploaded, and is better quality. Thanks again in advance. 19118219 Talk 08:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'll add the new image to the article (and delete the old one) for you. 19118219 Talk 06:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
nice transfering, i hope it gets you banned

Note on removal of a trivia item[edit source]

I've just removed the trivia item "On February 9th, Arcanists became the #2 game on the top ten list, being bumped by Armies of Gielinor". This would arguably be notable had Arcanists held the top spot since the launch of the list, but as it wasn't number one in the first week I consider that if we're going to consider this transfer notable then we should consider all of them notable and start a Ten Ten History page. Feel free, as always, to dissent. OrbFu 19:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Damage types: Water Damage[edit source]

The Seas Familiar doesn't protect from Maelstrom, Hydration or Ocean's Fury no matter what level it is at. I think they should be removed from the Water Damage category. I know the Spell Description states they're all "Water Damage" spells, but we all know the Spell Descriptions have many errors... Cursed Pride 11:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Go for it. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 19:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Something else also. Perhaps "Pebble Damage" could be expanded to "Anti-Tower Damage" so it can include the Dwarf's Kablam! spell and the Clockwork Bomb?Cursed Pride 03:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't aware they even did double damage... TimerootTCE 04:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, the Clockwork Bomb is a more recent thing, but Dwarf's Kablam! always did double damage to Towers also. Cursed Pride 06:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I think pebble damage should probably stay as it is for clarity. Kablam! and Clockwork Bomb can have a note added to explain the extra damage. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 12:27, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I never knew you used this, Cursed. But back on topic; I do think that this Anti-Tower Damage should be added to the Arcanists page since it is a special type of damage that has a different damage rate depending on the scenario; Same as OverLight spells and UnderDark spells. Q Kue Q 19:24, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

Rating Gain question; please respond[edit source]

OK, so the article says that you stop gaining or losing rating if you play with another player 40 or so times.... Does this mean that every time you play that user after the 40th game, ever, you will not gain or lose rating? Thanks in advance for replies Mythomagic5 01:56, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

We wouldn't know. KillrTalk 11:04, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

The "DK Hump"?[edit source]

Can anyone tell me what this is? For some reason the people on the Forums are apparently sworn to secrecy.. :\ How exactly do you do it? Apparently it's clicking in the right place. Q Kue Q 21:34, September 12, 2009 (UTC)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS20ytviqAM

Different combinations of Arcanists costumes[edit source]

(Sorry Quartic, apparently I wasn't logged in. I was the unknown guy who edited the number)

I was bored so I counted it myself :D. And the guy who did it previously did a mistake, I don't know where. (Maybe when removing the non-available colours depending on the skin)

The real number is 4,434,373,362,659,328. (Sorry, I'm not bored enough to count the F2p-only ones.) If you need an explanation, I simply did 54*54*54*54*72*57 (that's all the different Arcanists without the colours). Then you multiply that by all the different colours possibilities, which would be 32*32*16*8, except that you have to remove some combinations due to the skin choices.

Edit: I just noticed, we could also remove some combinations because some parts would not be shown if you have a Snowman Head, or maybe something else... maybe another day :P

~ Crupu

Don't forget that new costume items have been added since release. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 16:11, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
What's the number doing in the article in the first place? As I pointed out in my calculation further up the page, taking account of things like hair which doesn't use the hair colour complicates things so that it isn't an accurate figure anyway. (That's before taking into account that it's out of date). I'm going to remove the entire sentence on the grounds of inaccuracy and oppose putting any exact figure unless it is rigorously justified in the talk page. OrbFu 19:39, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

"Arcane Minion"?[edit source]

In the types of damage section in the death part, it says all minions can be zombified except arcane minions, which are defined as minions that cannot be zombified. That's like saying that' blorg + blarg = blorp, where blorp is blorg + blarg. Very obvious and redundant. PeaceBear0 07:05, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

arcanists.com[edit source]

does anyone know this website, and if so if it is fake? It says at the bottom of the page "© 2009 Jagex Ltd" and when I created a new account to test it, the next time I used funorb.com it said I was logged on as that account, yet Jagex has no mention of it on their website. T3h dr4g0nz 20:55, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

www.arcanists.com is a legitimate Jagex website. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 21:05, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

No Champion of Magic achievement on list[edit source]

There is no achievement on the achievements list for arcanists for champion of magic, and i searched for it because i tried to add it, and there was a page with some weird description of some weird comment.


Sirz Benjie 23:09, August 10, 2010 (UTC)Sirz Benjie

Fixed it - Someone removed the achievement box that makes it recognized as an achievement when adding information about it. Vaatikitten 04:59, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Deletion[edit source]

The page was deleted by an unregistered user. Is the page being fixed or something because this was 6 hours ago and no one seems to of noticed. CraZy-gAEmeR 18:04 20/04/2011

People messing up the page[edit source]

I'm not sure about how to edit websites, but I do know that you can undo edits and lock pages to accounts only. THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. Too many people are vandalising the page.

Page has been protected to registered users for this page until further notice. Lil cloud 9 08:02, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much.
This is so true. I've just fixed a vandalism at Book of Overlight, but there are more, such as at the Orb Defense page. Something should be done. Playing on League of Legends EU West Server as: Enerdy 20:14, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

this game like worms series? Nadiya2000 says

In a way. Vaatikitten Talkpagethingy 15:53, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

Arcanists 2 - 1:1 remake

Discord -  https://discord.gg/83bAdTD

100% Playable

Pur3 extreme (talk) 01:35, May 7, 2020 (UTC)Pur3 Extreme

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.