Talk:Gift of the Rider

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/18453/gift-of-the-rider—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 77.249.57.21 (talk) at 14:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC).

I like how the forum links here, and here links to forum. Nice circle if I may say so. -Darqam 14:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

LWS4+POF release

Isin't it kind of pointless listing POF in the releases? Unless I'm mistaken, requiring LWS4 implies POF since one can't have LWS4 without pof. Unless there's another goal behind showing both? -Darqam 17:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I was under the impression that it helps show which living story release is tied with which expansion it requires. Example being Living World Season 3 with HoT, Season 4 with PoF, Season 5 with Expac 5...so forth. -- endeavor7530 17:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I could understand that, but from what I remember, we never did LWS3, and HOT for an item. That said, it's not wrong, but in my opinion just a bit confusing. So unless someone speaks up against it leave it alone I'd say. -Darqam 18:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

This would be an example of an item which I'd prefer be labeled with only PoF. I'm doing this from the perspective of how the article will be viewed in the future:

Imagine a person who bought PoF, played it for a month, and then put it down. A year later, they come back and want to make a legendary. What should the article tell them? Should it say, "The item on this page is related to PoF" or, "This item came out with the release of lws4"? The former is far more pertinent, as the person has all that's required to make the legendary; they don't need to buy lws4. The same can be said for someone who buys the PoF expansion in the future, sans lws4.

That's just my approach to assessing these labels. G R E E N E R 18:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh does this not require LWS4 to make? I assumed it did. If it doesn't, then by all means throw that LWS4 tag away because yeah it will lead to confusion. -Darqam 19:02, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

The release parameter is mostly supposed to indicate when it was released, which as a result will let players know what requires it, or at least that's how I've been treating it. In this case, I see this more as a late released PoF item than a LWS4 for the following reason: This item is an alternative method for players who do not have HoT to make all of the legendary weapons which were released without an achievement collection to make them. I'd use PoF and say something to the effects in the notes section that it released during LWS4 instead of during the initial PoF release. - Do_odleplex 19:10, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I agree on PoF tag, disagree on your use of release parameter. It isn't so much which release the item came out with, but which release it's locked behind. So yeah if you don't need LWS4 for this (which initially I thought it did) toss it out, I 100% agree it should just be | release = pof -Darqam 19:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Other than this item and some gem store items, I honestly can't think of any content where using release to signal when it was released wouldn't also indicate what was required to have access to it. Oh and Guild Halls I suppose, but outside of that...*ponders* - Do_odleplex 19:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)