lies...

i've heard many times recently that the pennance torso is better than a rune platebody... well i'm here to settle the score. the pennance torso is indeed a sad excuse for a rune platebody replacement.

Rune platebody
as opposed to:

Fighter torso:


how torso is better than rune platebody:
it has no ranged attack loss, so you can range-melee hybrid if you want.
slightly better slash defense, thus more protection against whips in duels/pking
+4 strength to have a max hit increase of 1-2

how torso is worse than rune platebody:
other than its slash, all of its other defenses are at the adamant level, making you more suceptable to dragon daggers, and most monsters in the game
if you get bombed by magic, you're more likely to take more damage
takes days worth of time and effort to get, and if lost, requires the same.


my question: why do so many players think that increasing their max hit by 1-2, yet not increasing accuracy, is a worthy trade for taking more damage, and thus wasting more supplies and generally having a harder time beating anything but another player, who is most likely high enough in defense level to wear somthing better than the torso-wearers best alternative? long drawn out question, but you get the idea. +2 max hit is not a worthwhile trade for an overall increase in damage taken.

thoughts anyone?

oh, and on one last note, i'd personally prefer to have a proselyte hauberk; it has similar stats to the torso, except a large deficit in slash defense, but it makes up for it with a +8 prayer bonus, which will let you use your strength or defense prayers long enough to make up for the stats it doesn't have. plus it requires 30 defense, not 40.

comments please.

I agree with you, but also I don't.

Firstly, Rune Plates are better defence, but my max hit with it would be around, say, 31-ish with a abyssal whip. Now, Fighter torso, will make my max hit go up, to about 34.

Although it's defence is worse, it'll allow you perhaps kill the attacker towards you faster, instead of slower.

Basically, you may not be hit less than a Rune Plate, but you'll hit harder, which can cause the attacker to die sooner rather than later.

its awsome for ppl whit low str and high def like me i used it to train def worked awsome 80 str is not much of high hits so thats why ppl think its better then ur high def u can go for higher hits also torso is 45 def so its a bit more defencefull even in less def bonuses. Well since higher hit u kill monster faster that means u still take less damage so in sum up i think they both goes a bit like same well thats for ppl to deside if they whant def or higher max tho in most of aspects plate owns torso but torso owns it in more in pvp combat if ur oponent uses slash atacks. Thats me opinion

People use the torso for 2 reasons:

1. It lets them hit more, which is REALLY important. Hitting higher is usually more important than defense, unless you're tanking.

2. When you died, you could just run back and pick it up, saving 50k or so.

Now of course, #2 is not so important with gravestones and such. But for most training and pvp, I'd say torso is better.

Your right. At one time I was told torso is better, but then I saw it wasn't and then I stopped going for it.

But now I went for it again and its in my bank.

one thing i just checked out, and don't understand, is that 8 months later when the pest control update came out, why offense loving people didn't go for void armour. only a few rangers dared to use the armour, and i've proven myself up against gluume that the mage boost makes it as good as ahrims or better. (he had 97+ hp compared to my 84 and it was close in each fight.) i can only assume that the warrior helm set is better than a torso, berserker helm, rune legs and gloves... offensively i mean. defensively, void is just under full black d hide.