Talk:Diablo II: Lord of Destruction

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bias[edit]

As someone who has played through the pinacle of the Diablo series, the Diablo II beta, and through every single D2 patch, I consider myself fairly experienced in regard to the Diablo series. However, I've noticed considerable bias on this page regarding which classes were over/underpowered. By the guidelines of wikipedia, this article is in need of a massive revision in order to remove these biases. Even though I agree with a select few of the biases mentioned, they all need to go. Wikipedia articles need to remain neutral.

After trying to remove some of the disgusting ammount of bias in this article, I have come to realize that nearly the entire thing is filled with personal opinions/strategies and pages worth of useless information. This article needs dozens of hours worth of editing before it will be even remotely 'wikipedic'. --Akaroo 02:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have also played through the entire Diablo series. Unlike you, I would contend that the so-called 'bias' in this article is justified. If a class X can in theory be as powerful as class Y, but is almost never in practice, you can construe that in two ways; either the player is lacking in skill or the class is imbalanced.
The imbalance can be in specific instances, or in general. I remember when whirlwind Barbarians were king, nigh on invincible. In that case, whirlwind was imbalanced, it was significantly overpowered.
In 1.09 the Amazon was queen. Either of the Amazon's two most popular builds, javazon or bowazon, could mop the floor with their intended opposition.
The comments about the Amazon's bugged fend, the 1.11/1.11b perfectly built and equipped Paladin's damn-near-demigod status, or the Druid's summoning tree being nigh on useless, are all examples of indeniable facts. I call it imbalanced, and rightly so. Just because someone has something unpleasant to say about class X or class Y, doesn't mean that what they've said is incorrect. --60.227.18.58 04:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is an article you don't usually find in an encyclopedia, so the contributors are usually just fans. I think what's holding back many ppl is that a sweeping revision would require the deletion of pretty much everything, get a lot of ppl angry and likely cause an edit war. I'll give it a try, though.
Those who're about to get reverted, salute you. --Brother Laz 11:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At a minimum, the opinions about the different classes and skills need to be sourced. --Gjc8 05:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

Although I tend to forget/ignore LoD having any plot, it does, and I suppose it would make sense to have a section on what happens in Act V and how the game ends/possibility of sequels etc. I'm too rusty on this aspect and don't have the game installed right now to refresh my memory. Will somebody add this in? - Phorque 16:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The amount of events of major significance to the main storyline is limited but worth mentioning, and the numerous parallel plots, including the story of Harrogath, are notable as well. Someone with sufficient knowledge should probably add a short story section to the article. --Krainert (talk) 19:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italics Usage[edit]

Some consensus has to be reached on the usage of italics in this article...it seems to be almost at random. The names of the difficulties are italicized in some places, not in others. The same is true of the nicknames for the various class builds (hammerdin, etc.). Personally I think the italics have been completely overdone...I don't see the purpose of italicizing anything here. But it has to be decided one way or the other and made consistent throughout the entire article. Odysseyandoracle 08:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While cleaning this article I found a lot of what you are talking about. I'd take the view that all builds and skills should be italicized as it outlines them as being game-specific terms. My changes reflect this.

Rob 22:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all the hack stuff ffs[edit]

It's bad enough that grab and map hacks even exist, no reason to elaborate on them, considering it's still a violation of the TOS and by extension the law. That's like having an article on DVDs of which one third is devoted to how to crack copy protection. Brother Laz 09.12.2005

I tend to agree. I don't really need to know what each bot does. A list of their names and maybe a quick description would be enough for me. Rob 22:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree too. I've just rearranged it erasing some parts. Please! If I screwed something up, tell me and I'll return it as it was (I've saved thewhole section in my PC) --andycyca 00:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erasing information just because it seems "too large" relative to other parts of article doesn't seem reasonable. You could expand the Non-hack areas first or move the Hacks/Cracks to separate article.

Wikipedia isn't bound by the "TOS" of Diablo II. The existence of hacks and their descriptions cannot be ignored in this article. Kirbytime 01:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm new to wikipedia editing. But I have to say that leaving out "The hack stuff" from the article is a bad idea, since most of the readers here are experienced diablo players they should know that hacks are very common in the multiplayer of diablo 2. There is a lot of discussion weather it's fair or allowed to use them, that discussion shouldn't matter for the sake of the article, since it's still such a common thing in diablo, readers of the article should know about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.254.128.164 (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

uber diablo[edit]

And the last feature is still a mystery to many newbies: Uber Diablo. A 1.10 only small charm called Annihilus is only spoutable from Uber Diablo, who only drops one of it every time. But the way to summon this greastest beast is still a mystery, even to me. From rumors, it says that first it is required to know the "Key Item" on each server (such as Stone of Jordan), and when you sell a number of this "Key Item" to the NPC in one Hell Difficulty game, and after a period of time waiting, a phrase spouts: Diablo Walks The Earth. Then the player is half-successful. the first unique monster you kill after the phrase will turn to Uber Diablo, and Beware! Uber Diablo is the strongest of all, it has over 500k hit points, and 95 all resistance! Usually, it requires 8 skillful players to be able to kill Uber Diablo.

  • This was part of the artical. Besides the fact that it is very POV, this seems like a rumor that doesn't belong here, what do you guys think? --ZeWrestler 12:14, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is only partially right. What happens with the world event is that Stone of Jordans specifically must be sold, and Stone of Jordans only. This includes every game on the entire Diablo 2 Expansion server. Then one or more lucky games will have Uber Diablo spawn in place of the first Super Unique met. Not entirely sure on the hitpoints, it might actually be more. After he dies, there is usually a mad scramble for the unique charm he drops, one of three (two?) unique charms in the entire expansion, called the Annihilus. It's madly broken. Uber D and the Annihilus charm aren't rumours.

The World event, is signaled on certain servers with this: A notice about the number of Stones of Jordan Sold. After a certain number of Stones of Jordan are sold, someone being in proximity to a super unique monster, triggers 'Diablo Walks The Earth" message, and that super unique monster is converted to a Diablo looking monster, with much larger stats, hence his nickname "Uber Diablo." When killed he drops a unique object called an "Annihilus Charm" or "Anni" which is a charm which has special properties. Like the Hordoric cube, a player can only hold one.

It is a small charm, taking up only one inventory slot, and requiring level 70 for use. This charm provides +1 to All Skills, regardless of class, +10-20 to All Attributes, and that same +10-20 to All Resistances. It also adds +5-10% to Experience Gained, helping characters gain levels just a little bit quicker. [[1]]

It is so well known amoung the community, that even novices hear about them. The story is documented here: [Uber Diablo ] But it begs the question, even though the quality of authorship, and accuracy is *much* higher on Diablo Wiki/wikika, is it still a verifiable source? Its essentially a distillation of the information on diabloii.net, and is both a primary source as well as a definitive game reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.192.77 (talk) 23:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

suggestions for improvement...[edit]

hi guys... i notice ZeWrestler is active in this page =)

anyway i think this needs to be cleaned up a bit... examples of things we cn do to make it better:

  • Games infobox on right (like in Diablo II article)
  • Info on Druid/Assassin can be taken from Diablo II article
  • screenshot or cd cover pics
  • some cleanup on the formatting

thanks. suggestion welcome =P --Debroglie 09:49, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Good suggestions. Naturally, you wrote that right after I took some time off from this page. I was reading over the druid section today, that seems extremly POV to me. I believe it should be rewritten to NPOV. --ZeWrestler Talk 12:47, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps we should consider writing a RuneWords article at some stage? or would that just be TMI? --Phorque 08:00, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If this article gets to long, then we should consider it. Otherwise, it might be considered fancruft.

To ZeWrestler and the rest of the editors of this page: thanks for making this article better than what it was before. (although this article and the Diablo II article needs to be rewritten to NPOV as mentioned by Zewrestler)... anyway thanks all for cleaning up the article =) -- 202.46.112.73 17:55, 21 July 2005 (UTC) -- oops, i forgot to log in =) Debroglie 17:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, Phorque here. I moved the Druid and Assassin stuff over to this article and took the best bits from the ones already here. I also moved across the Runewords section and did a bit of editing. I think the article still needs a little fixing on the wording but I've taken off the Stub and Clean-up templates because it's looking much better now.

Patch 1.11[edit]

This section needs major help. Any suggestions? --ZeWrestler Talk 12:30, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes: wait until the dust settles. It's hard to say just how easy or hard the new Uberquest is at the moment. Some say it is nearly impossible, others claim to have soloed it with their smiter or kicksin. Also, it is possible that a 1.11b is on the way, what with the ridiculous amazon-runeword-on-merc-crash-bug ("Peace") and the missing modifiers on the paladin runeword.--~~BrotherLaz, 4 August 2005 22:13 (GMT)

i still dont see any change of 1.11, paladins & tornado druids are still kings of the game. The only change i did saw was the usual banning of cd keys and the ban of maphack, wich led to much revolt, particulary in people who used such things. Still it was nice to play without people using maphack or bots... although i think that shit lasted for like a week, like it usually does.

If i recall, the new uberquest requires atleast 3 characters; a paladin, a necromancer(poison), and a sorceress[citation needed]. tyler nelson 16:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bulk move & rewriting of Pros & Cons[edit]

Done!--~~BrotherLaz, 4 August 2005 22:23 (GMT)

Rocking! This article is way better now. --Phorque 07:54, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Looks a lot better! --ZeWrestler Talk 12:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--~~BrotherLaz, 5 August 2005 22:28 (GMT)

In section 3, 'The History of the Game', the classes are listed in a seemingly random order: Druid, Assassin, Barbarian, Paladin, Sorceress, Amazon then Necromancer. Perhaps they should be placed in a more logical order, like alphabetical?

  • Alphabetizing done. RJFJR 16:22, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed the hack issues (Or at least I think I did...) Please tell me if something's wrong --andycyca 00:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D2 off Battle.net?[edit]

Perhaps there should be mentions of PvPGN? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 02:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PVPGN listings.[edit]

I think that here should be an article about some biggest PVPGN realms since some of these work for mods like Zy-El.

I have been long playing in place called Apocalypse Realm, which is actually better than regular battle.net. At least the Diablo2realms site which has since renamed it's self to Temple of Zakarum.

Assassin[edit]

The Assassin bit completely neglects to mention the Shadow Warrior skill.

zoney ♣ talk 22:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diablo Clone vs Uber Diablo[edit]

"When enough Stone of Jordan rings had been sold back to NPCs on a server, Uber Diablo would appear," I'm almost CERTAIN this is incorrect. Diablo Clone is not Uber Diablo, and Uber Diablo is not spawned by selling Stones of Jordan, Diablo Clone is. Diablo Clone is the source of the Annihilus charm, and Uber Diablo is the source of the Hellfire Torch. Diablo Clone exists in the 1.10 patch, and Uber Diablo was added in 1.11 (b? not sure). If nobody has any conflicting evidence, then I'll make the appropriate changes. --MaXiMiUS 20:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was added in the 1.11 patch. Patch 1.11b fixed a game crash error when the runeword "Peace" was worn by a mercenary. I've never managed to make it to Hell mode in a legitimate fashion. Is this quest available in open battle.net? tyler nelson 16:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uber Diablo vs Pandemonium Diablo[edit]

I'm here to clear this up once and for all Uber Diablo is the one who is summoned through the selling of Sojs and Pandemonium Diablo is the one in the Panemonium Event. (Hellfire Torch) P-diablo is almost 2 times stronger than U-Diablo. Even on the Atreat summit it is listed as a seperate boss. -Lord Kaboom

Uber, Pandemonium, Clone?[edit]

As I understand it, not all of these names are actually used in the game, I think one is just a nickname that the player base came up with. The question is, which one? Dansiman 13:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clone is a nickname for Uber. Uber is the SoJ one, Pandemonium is the Trist one. Confusingly, the Trist versions of Meph and Baal are 'Uber' rather than 'Pandemonium'. Andymc 15:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

act locations for pictures[edit]

Should I use rogue camp or harrogath for assassin and druid screens? Andreyvul 18:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rouge camp it is, then. Andreyvul 18:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Information which should be moved to "Diablo II"[edit]

[Disclaimer: I haven't played this game in several years.]

There's no reason why the chat gem should be mentioned here--it was present in vanilla Diablo II and indeed, I remember it being in the D2 stress test beta as well. Duping, too, most likely isn't restricted to the expansion only, and much of the criticism under "Critical Response" is just as applicable to vanilla D2. The article on the expansion should deal with things that are relevant specifically to the expansion--everything that can also apply to vanilla Diablo 2 should be in that article, not this one. --Lode Runner 10:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information on the Secret Cow Level is already in the Diablo II article and I don't think it needs to be mentioned in this article too since the Level existed before the expansion pack. 81.153.226.133 (talk) 17:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

does the portal tyrael open really go to harrogath?[edit]

once you kill baal tyrael does show up and open a portal, but its not to harrogath, its to destructions end. if i'm wrong could someone correct me? Rubby13 19:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC) When you kill Diablo Tyrael opens a portal to Harrogath. When you kill Baal a portal opens to Destruction's End. Dansiman 04:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your memory is correct on that one. I'd say it'd worth checking baal battle videos to confirm. 89.100.48.115 (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is that true? Your Opinion![edit]

The text says:

This resulted in a greatly reduced variety of "builds" for each character, since only specific, greatly "synergised" skills were capable of dealing the large amount of damage needed to complete the game

I don't think so, I think that was the best step to allow players to not only play the 3 standard variants of every character because the synergies allow you to make former senseless spells very powerfull.

I would tend to agree with you. The addition of synergies may have reduced the amount of varience in the skills actively used by "endgame" characters, but it also seems to have allowed the player to make the levelling process itself a potentially much more diverse endeavor.
--74.248.227.197 01:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think one of the great things about the synergies, is that they allow beginning players who don't realize the benefit of saving skill points for higher-level skills, and therefore sink extra points into particularly weak skills, to receive a slight balancing effect when they do get to the higher levels. In some cases they also allow players to customize precisely how their favorite skill will improve, as in the sorceress' Frozen Orb, which can be improved in the areas of total damage, freeze length, or degree of chill. Dansiman 07:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I never heard of these "synergy effects" before. Could you point me to somwhere where I can find more information on the subject? --The Fifth Horseman 13:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Found a document about that on GameFAQs. --The Fifth Horseman 13:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Patch History Section[edit]

A few days ago, 60.241.169.85 removed the Patch History section. That person was me. The Fifth Horseman undid that change. I'm not going to say it's wrong or right, but that I did think that the Patch History Section needed cropping. I point you all to WP:NOT#GUIDE and WP:NOT#INFO. I do think it looks better now though, although two of the paragraphs I think could stand to be removed. The paragraph mentioning v1.11 mentions something which is really only relevant to the players of the game. The paragraph following that just details two minor changes; they may not be minor, but from a non-player POV, they would certainly classify as minutiae. Any comments? Ong elvin 23:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My problem is that anyone reading it now will see that Patch History stops at 1.10, while the infobox lists 1.11b. I believe that, given that patches from 1.07 to 1.10 are explained, 1.11 should also be explained, even if it's just a couple of sentences saying what changed. Andymc 21:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that might be considered a problem, but again, Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate bank of information. I don't think the Patch History should even be there, actually, with the Modding and Hacking subsectinos being made their own. Anyway, if anything about v1.11 was said, I'd only put down the date it was released, nothing more. Stating what changes are involved only falls within Wikipedia's intended scope if it's a very major change. (And I personally classify those as something even a newb to the game will be able to comprehend.) Ong elvin 23:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It also states that there is a patch 1.12 being worked on to be released in 2008. The source of that info should be noted being that Bnet has no public info on a new patch at all. Moefugger (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC) Moefugger / Bellyass —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moefugger (talk • contribs) 15:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Aldur's Watchtower" set information[edit]

The itemset for Druids, "Aldur's Watchtower", is a nod to the David Eddings' Book series The Belgariad and The Malloreon.

Aldur's Disciples are all sorcerers and frequently shapeshift to various animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deities_in_The_Belgariad#Aldur —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ofunniku (talk • contribs) 19:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing that some of the Staff at Blizzard are fans of the books.

I'll add a new trivia section and put this info there. (Ofunniku 19:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Duped[edit]

"...(and hence, widely duped)..." "...added to remove the widely duped rings ..."


This is an encyclopedia. The word is "duplicated". 

                           PCB  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.214.229.68 (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to use the edit button. MatttK (talk) 23:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cow King / Cow Level[edit]

I think this entire section needs some clean-up...

First... "After beating Diablo, the player can choose to have access to the Secret Cow Level by transmuting Wirt's leg and a town portal tome in the Horadric cube from inside the Rogue's camp."

A player can't open the Cow portal until they beat Baal not just Diablo, correct?

And second... "When a player kills the Cow King, the player who opened the cow level becomes unable to reopen the portal to the level on that difficulty level if he was in the killing player's party at the time of death."

I believe the mechanism by which a player becomes unable to "reopen the portal" is actually more of a typical quest-like structure, isn't it? I thought that if a player kills the King for the first time (i.e. gets the quest) then everyone in that player's party also gets the quest and becomes unable to make future games, not just the person that opened the portal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.82.180.21 (talk) 14:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Diablo" has been corrected back to "Baal" and the other sentence in question has been removed, as it is WP:GAMEGUIDE material. DP76764 (Talk) 15:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact (unlike proper quests) if a player who is able to open the portal to the Cow Level kills the King, then everyone in the Cow Level (partied or unpartied) "completes the quest" and therefore becomes unable to open the portal. When this happens the King drops a heap of stamina potions (they do not automatically drop on his non-quest drop). On the other hand if someone who is unable to open the portal kills the King, then even nearby partied players do not complete the quest. 131.111.184.8 (talk) 23:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Features[edit]

I remember etheral items were already in Diablo II without the expansion so there is no need to mention them here in the LoD article again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.100 (talk) 10:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1.13 Changes[edit]

I would appreciate some description of the changes that appear with the new patch (currently in testing). I have heard there are new quests and bosses, and perhaps some new runewords. Do tell! Bigdatut (talk) 21:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should wait until the test finishes to elaborate on details. For now it's only speculation - for example, it's still unknown if they're going to fix a major player killing bug that everyone on the test forum is complaining about. --Explodicle (T/C) 16:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any updates as to the new content as of 1.13 --  Grimbear13 ►Talk  18:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did try to add some updates to this on November 16th, but my revisions were undone. 209.242.135.98 (talk) 22:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated content.[edit]

There are several paragraphs of duplicated content, starting with the second paragraph of "Season 2".

It looks like maybe the first "Season 3 - Patch 1.11" section can simply be deleted, provided that the correct content is in the prior ("Season 2") and following ("Season 3 - Patch 1.11") sections.

Could a previous maintainer please check this?

174.3.187.31 (talk) 04:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC) drb[reply]

 Done Cleaned up. Thanks! DP76764 (Talk) 05:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Druids and Blizzard has a go at Irish[edit]

I remember having a fair share of chucles when I was reqading about the Druids. Hopefully that's supposed to be Scots-Gaelic they're referring to there. If it's Gaeilge (of which I am a speaker) then it's pretty half baked. It'd be fair to say they never saw a baininsceanach before, and woe betide them either way. Thems is fiddly grammar. Ye didn't mention Scolsglen at all, or the Túr Dúlra, or how the first Druid (Fiacla-Géar, sounds like a Connameara toothpaste for dogs to be honest) was purportedly related to Bul-Kathos. Still, I hope they'll make an appearance in the expansion to D3 (whenever that'll be)

Here's a good source of info you can link to: http://www.diablowiki.net/Druid. No need to include it in the article. Shtanto (talk) 21:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Diablo_II:_Lord_of_Destruction&oldid=1199654194"