Talk:Barrows

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape

Archives Archive 1

Contents 1 At Long Last A Barrows Guide to be Proud of. 2 Food for thought 2.1 Conspiracy 2.2 kill count 2.3 Deleted 3 kill count 4 Article of the month ftw! 5 Barrows Statistics 6 Barrows- Melee, mage, or range. 7 Possible changes 8 in response 9 Crumble Undead 10 This article is pretty NOOB 11 thoughtless editing and disregard for readers 12 Salve Amulet 13 Salamanders 14 Melee all 15 Cannonway 15.1 Mage 16 Barrowzzz 17 6th brother 18 shouldn't 19 Page split 20 Do I have the rquirerments? 21 Updated with new information 22 Ring of Wealth? 23 barrows boots? 24 kc? 25 Missing Door Puzzle! 26 Re: Do I have the requirements

[edit] At Long Last A Barrows Guide to be Proud of.

Thanks to all those that helped, especially for the maps and door guides, adding the symbols to the recommended combat order, and generally touching up and rearranging the article to make it more readable, I'm not too good at it myself. I made most of the article, with help from other users, thanks especially to vimes, I got a bit fed up when players kept changing it all because they tought they knew better after 1 trip, I have been on over 3000 myself, now this has been smartened up and made more readable again I doubt those people will want to change it back and forth,especially since it has been nominated to be featured! Thanks again guys it really looks good, Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} . :-)

What did I do? JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 09:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

when I was new and unfamiliar with the wiki coding several people corrected my coding mistakes, on this article it was you. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} .

[edit] Food for thought

Please don't hesitate to write below your results of your own experiments. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} and  Urssaff ^talk 09:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Uh...Such theories (unprovable, unciteable, unreliable and untrustworthy) don't belong on this wiki. If even a fraction of the ludicrous theories like this one that players have come up with were true, Jagex would be guilty of more conspiracies than any government anywhere, ever. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 09:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I would say the evidence we have is astounding if you are prepared view it, a massive increase in barrows drops when using lower armours, we have stated we cannot prove this, but there is widespread feling in the barrows community that this is now the case, you want this removed put it to a vote, I do not see why your narrow-mindedness the issue should deem this part of the article unworthy of note. We have sufficiently stated several times that this is conjecture for the most part, but there are certainly parts of that can be proven i.e. the realtionships beteen rune drops, and when this is the feeling of so many of the barrows community, I think you should either test this for yourself or put it to a vote before you write it off completely. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

Conspiracy theories get posted on the RuneScape forums. A lot. So why haven't I heard of this? It can't really be a significant part of the community if not one person has thought to post it there.

Fine, vote if you must. I still maintain that conjecture of this kind should not be on this wiki. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 10:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

It is on the runescape forums I myself put it there, and there are other threads like it, I have consulted with these players and stitched it into my own thread. Please also stop changing the part of the article about chest drops, it is true that kill count affects the amount of runes coins, and bolt racks recieved, I have not changed the part about it not affecting equipment drops which is also true. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

I got rid of the voting panel because they can easily be fixed. Just write keep or delete on this discussion, like we always do. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 10:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I am perfectly happy to delete this if the vote dosen't go my way, I do not which to become enemies, we helped each other so much over this articles history, ill personally delete it if the vote is for deletion, and stick to the runescape forums, but the evidence gathered so far is pretty convincing, however we shall see how this goes. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

The whole thing about lower armoed and more barrows items is absurd. Unless a huge test has been done and shown to significantly increase the barrows items, this is pointless. As another has said,t hey have done the same test , with a much differant conclusiont han yours. 130.65.109.40 00:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Dark_wizzie

Keep

Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

Delete

(voting ends 12pm October 1st (gmt))

[edit] Conspiracy

I disagree on the term conspiracy...It is not a conspiracy of Jagex, it may be a way ro regule economy ! Anyway they don't need to conspirate because they make the rules and the way it all works !

My approach is purely statistic, even if it can't be the absolute truth, it shows a trend...As i take note all of my trips (a bit less 600), it may be a good base to improve a theory. I will produce my stats as soon as i reach 100 trips with lower armour, but so far i have noticed a huge difference in barrows drops.

PS : Sharing a point of view with other is part of my pleasure of playing rs.  Urssaff ^talk 14:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] kill count

Yet again Vimes I am asking you to leave the part that says a higher kill count will raise the amount of runes, coins and bolt racks recieved, alone!. It is perfectly true, has been confirmed by ""Jagex"", and is a widely acknowledged and accepted fact, most if not all barrowers know this, why keep changing it? You have no reason to do so, please get your facts straight before deleting relevant information. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

I did. Then I deleted it. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 15:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted

I just got word back from Jagex. No drop rates have been changed. Kay? Now if you want to theorise, do it yourself, on your own userpage or subpages. But don't use this article to do it. May I also point out that your point is, for all intents and purposes, unproveable - whereas mine isn't. And I've provided evidence; you've provided statistics, which are a lot less reliable. May I repeat my main point: this article is not the place to post theories. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 15:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

they would say that, but ok ill keep it on jagex forums, the kill count is another matter however. tbcBob2006ty 19:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] kill count

Right, where is this proof you keep talking of? Prove it! and also as I am awaiting my reply to my second request to know if kc affects runes coins racks etc, i took the liberty of asking 30 random players in worlds 9, 6 and 46 from the bridge crossing from morton to the barrows whether they thought barrows kc affected rune racks and coins dropped, guess what 29/30 said yes, one guy said he was new to barrows and "don't really know tbh".

also " Q: Does Kill Count increase my chances of getting a Barrows Item? A: No, it does not. The only thing that matters is the number of brothers you have killed this run. Kill Count affects only Runes and Bolt Racks. However extensive testing has proven that Kill Count has significant role in determining what Runes and other items you get. You will not get any Blood Runes below 8 Kill Count, and you cannot get any Bolt Racks below 9 Kill Count. What you get after this is purely random"

Tip.it

all rights reserved copyright runescape tips 2007 inc

Your kill count from the tunnels doesn't increase your chances of getting Barrows equipment from the chest, but it does increase the amount of runes you get.

Sals realm all rights reserved copyright sals realm of runescape 2007.

you will find the two major fan sites agree, most of the wiki community probably does if you care to ask. I realise this is not from a jagex mod, I will post that in a few days when I get my reply, I have asked this question before and got the answer yes but I deleted that a long while ago, awaiting mods reply, bob. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

"You will not get any Blood Runes below 8 Kill Count, and you cannot get any Bolt Racks below 9 Kill Count." Utter bollocks. I did half my barrowing with a KC of six and got the same drops as always - i.e. crap all, but this did include an unrewarding amount of blood runes and bolt racks. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 19:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

you vs two well established groups of experienced barrowers, on two of the best rs fan sites on the web? Besides when I barrowed with a kc of 6 (not many runs, I must admit probs 200) I got neither no bolt racks, and scarce amounts of bloods, I agree what they say bout 8kc 9kc is bollocks but, they both are in agreement that there is a fundamental link between kc and runes, bolt racks coins etc! I don't think you can really compete with barrowers such as oddfaery2, abomb67 and sailorscoutx. Thats their opinions plus my own plus the 29 barrowers who responded to my survey already, I can't wait for my second reply from jagex! Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

right... ok I have my reply from jagex, w ah no scrub that i just noticed I cant share it, well since neither of us can prove it...

its looking like we are going to have to come to some kinda truce over this, like we did with the Castle wars flag holding issue, how about "however it is the belief of the majority of those who regularly play the barrows minigame; that kill count affects the amount of runes and bolt racks recieved from the chest." Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} .

May I point out that these tipsites, which I assume you're claiming are reliable, also claim (or, at least, claimed) that filling the fishing trawler with water gets you more fish? *laughs* JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 21:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to throw a hissy fit and start what would doubtlessly turn into a revert war about this edit, but I'd like to point out that removing the "still" makes it sound like the players might be right...when they're not. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 10:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well you can't prove them wrong so removing the "still" makes perfect sense, I'm not going to start an ew either, yes these sites are wrong about some things, but the water thing was pure speculation, this is based on the experience of the MAJORITY of their online communities who play the barrows, you have to admit most of the players will disagree with you and say that kc is a factor on rewards (non item rewards that is eg coin runes etc.) Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

Doesn't stop them being wrong... JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 13:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

lol doesn't stop you being outnumbered and W.R.O.N.G. —bob2006ty (talk • contribs) forgot to sign this comment.

You seem to be becoming irrational. You're not indenting or signing your posts. Might I point out that everyone knows that the cannon loses points, filling the boat with water gets more fish, and specials cause spinners? JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 16:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Might I point out that, statistically, there's no such thing as "luck". JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 15:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm only becoming "irrational" in the sense I didn't have the time too log in, ssj finds the same as the experiments myself and ursaff conducted;higher kc = greater rewards. First of all 'I' may point out I don't believe any of that **** you just said about water in the boat giving more fish or specials causing spinners anyway, I know this from experience, jagex replies and the experiments of other players.

I was talking about the kc consensus that is apparent in all the barrows articles stated by me, it is you who seems to be becoming "irrational", you seem to be running out of things to say, hence water cannon spinners point failing to prove anything about this barrows thesis because ity happens to agree with the majority of all the evidence(see last three lines of this post), I have already accepted some of the theories advanced by these sites are rubbish, 'I never said they weren't, but that is not my point', my point which you seem unable to grasp without changing the subject; is that the barrows articles on these sites agree with the common barrows community consensus that kc affects non item drops. Whatever you argue vimes, you'll never win this, the barrows community disagrees, the major fansites, a significant proportion of the wiki community, polled runescape players, and the experiments undertaken by fellow players. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

Hey all. I'm back. Lots of things happened with this article since I left. Very nice. TOok me a while to read through the talk page, but I think I know what you guys are fighting over. ALL OF THE CLAIMS ARE MYTHS! Jagez hasn't confirmed, nor disproved these theories. Therefore, it is very possible that they are true. Yet, at the same time, they could be false. The ONLY way to figure this out would be to conduct multiple controlled experiments. Of course, within a game like Runescape, such experiments are virtually impossible. Personally, I believe that kill count doesn't really affect drops once you reach a certain point. It has been confirmed that only brother kills add to the armour and weapon drop chance. However, they have not confirmed that kill count increases the chances of "lesser drops." I personally think not. I have done many, many trips now (lost count at about 2k). For fun, I did a hundred trips with 40 kill count, a hundred with my standard 12, and another hundred with only the brother kills. The results were very interesting. Both the 12 kill count and 40 kill count did better than the 6 kill count. Interestingly enough though, the drops from the 40 kill counts trips and the 12 kill count trips differed very little in the way of "lesser drops." another player (who will remain unnamed) also perform an experiment like mine, and found that a kill count above 15 yields the maximum profit through "lesser drops." Of course, your luck also plays a large role in the matter, but the trend was clear. However, this topic is extremely controversial, so don't expect a concrete answer from anybody.Ssj metroid 01:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article of the month ftw!

Finally, we got article of the month, oh yeah! lol I spent so much time on this it's an honour for it to be featured, thanks to all those who helped write with me, and especially those who sorted out wording and grammar, I wrote most of/alot of the content and sections for this, and well wahoo! (I did not have anything to do with the images that have been added though, ty to whoever added them they probably swung it for us. :-) Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

[edit] Barrows Statistics

As I said before, I have noticed something strange, at the beginning when I barrowed, i use to have an item every less than 20 trips, by now, it is an item every more than 40 trips...I believe that there is a link between what I am wearing and the loot...

Let me explain, at the beginning i was barrowing with full rune and mystic, by now, i'am barrowing with full torag, full ahrim and black d'hide, the more barrows items I wear, the less item I find.

To improve my theory, I have decided to do 100 trips with low armour.

You will find below my statistics of 200 hundred recent Barrows trips :

• 100 trips with high armour : Full Ahrim(no staff), Full Torag (No Hammer), Dragon shield, whip, d dagger, Quest cape, Barrows Gloves
• 100 trips with low armour : Full Mystics (No shoes), Full Rune, Whip, d dagger, Quest cape, Barrows Gloves

Detail	Mind	Chaos	Death	Blood	Gold	Bolt	Barrows	Half Key	Dragon Helm
100 Low armour	22.965	9.596	6.165	3.814	100.437	3.720	8	3	0
100 High armour	27.974	10.462	7.826	2.579	99469	2.891	3	2	1

To me, the results are pretty obvious, wearing Runes and Mystic seem to raise Barrows drops...

Remember it is just statistics, it is not a proof...

Is it just due to random ? I wish other wikians do the same stats, to test the theory...10 trips with low armour are quite fast...  Urssaff ^talk 13:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I wish anyone on this wiki knew how to use statistics properly. I failed enough of my Stats A-level to know that you've not done enough to reasonably conclude anything. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 22:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your encouragements ! I agree with the fact that 100 trips are far from enough to prove something, that's why i wish others to try...One question :

1/ Does someone else have noticed the same difference ?  Urssaff ^talk 15:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

To be honest with you, all I ever run with are cheap stuff (fighter, d skirt, helm of neiz, etc, with the sole exception of my dfs). All I get are runes and such. Haven't gotten a barrows item in about 100 trips. Personally, I think it's my luck. Absolute crud since I got my visage lol.Ssj metroid 02:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

100 trips with nothing but usual crap ? Well i guess you are more than unlucky ! The more number of trips i've made without anything was 120, with high armour...

This would agree with the random point of view ! Urssaff ^talk 11:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

wow poor ssj I have gone 55 trips before without an item, but then recieved a double next trip. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} 11:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Lol. I don't need your pity. I've gone with a 200+ dry streak once. NOT COOL AT ALL!!!Ssj metroid 00:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

As i'am obstinate, i have continued to improve my low defense theory, only wearing mystic (53 runs)...Still obvious, same results...But i still have to run 43 low def trips and 100 high def trips...I'll be back in 3 or 4 weeks...If someonelse want to give my theory a try, i'd like to share his/her results... Urssaff ^talk 12:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barrows- Melee, mage, or range.

Hey I have been to barrows about 50 times now and i have gotten nothing but runes and coins. Though I have had many situations where some people think that if you melee all of the brothers you will have a greater percenatage of getting barrows. I think that this is true, I will conduct an experiment to see if this is true. I will be back with more information =P

While I do think that information is false, if you are prepared to conduct a test and bring the results back, then by all means, please do. --Dogtag333 13:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible changes

The guide recommends ghostly robe top/bottoms for the mage bonus. But why? Lunar robes are WAY better than ghostly. For one thing, ghostly don't give melee protection at all. Plus, the lunar top and bottom give a total of 17 mage att/def, as opposed to a measly 9 from the ghostly robes. The only downside is the ranged attack penalty, and that's what the dhide is for, anyways. So maybe a change in the guide is in order?

Signed, RS username JimFromTx

[edit] in response

Thanks, your right; someone has messed up the guide alot by suggesting ghostly in suggested inventory over far better alternatives, and further confused things by splitting into four sections, I will clean it up. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} 12:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Crumble Undead

Does Crumble Undead work on on The Barrows Brothers? I know the slave amulet does. 18:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Barrow Bro

Crumble Undead does not work on the Barrows Brothers, since they are not undead. They are tainted, corrupted spirits. Likewise, the Salve Amulet doesn't work. This has been confirmed by Jagex. Ssj metroid 01:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This article is pretty NOOB

For one, jagex stated that you CAN NOT get bolt racks without getting 9 kill count What about "Getting Their" section? I have been doing barrows for a long ass time, got tons of mage levels their etc. This article lacks lots of stuff and the methods are pretty rubish.

Well if any editor can verify this they can feel free to correct the article where needed. --Whiplash 23:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

jagex has never stated that you NEED a certain kill count in order to loot the chest. They recommend that you kill all the brothers before searching the chest, as it gives you the best chance to get a barrows item. Ssj metroid 01:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

That's why a discussion page is useful : sharing people experience. In the main article, there is nothing about bolt racks and kill count, it is only the point of view of some players, as it can't be prove this part is not included in the main article. There are many methods to achieve barrows, many players think they use the best way...A collaborative work (like wiki) can't have a single point of view, that's the statement, accepting other...  Urssaff ^talk 09:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC) PS: I wish this anonymous player share his experience with us !

I've been on many barrows trips and countless times i've gotten bolt racks, and i only get a kill count of 6.Jmo

, 01:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] thoughtless editing and disregard for readers

Is there a way we can make sure accounts of no more than so many days old an edit this? Alot of people want to contribute their methods after only a few trips to the barrows, I have totaled almost 4k trips now, and when I wrote the bulk ofthe text in the beggining I wanted an article for every method, price range and combat/prayer level, which I have tried to do, but when people keep editing this (such as early february, some ips and a few new acounts edited unconstructively) to the detriment of the reader, who may not need such comments as "I got hit 40 by dharok and yeah u need to do this bit") it becomes unhelpful. The recommended order was changed, so mages had to go to dharok, ahrim, guthan, verac, torag, karil in that order according to one of the editors wtf???

Basically my point is; we need to put a lock of some sort on this so that unconstructive edits from ips or new acounts cannot harm the article, since it was featured on the main page attacks on this article are increased, I had to spend 30 mins undoing the damage that I planned to spend on other articles. I have asked the new accounts not to do this again, but we really need to lock it to prevent such damage. lots of people constructively edit, helping with anything from spelling to tips to method changes, reordering and tweaking amounts, keeping it up to date, more accurate (constructive stuff) and I thank those people, this is by no means my article and i realise lots of people want to share their views, but i wish they would do it here then put it in if the consensus is that it is a good idea, not put it in, and then it gets taken out again, because it may harm the reader during their trip to the minigame or doesn't contribute anything useful or that has not been said in a more appropriate place.

When people join the wiki they look for something to edit, much of runescape is covered on this wiki, so they go to what they know- the barrows or a similar minigame, they think of something to say and oh look its been said already, but they add it in anyway or change something insubstantial, over time the article has begun to break down, in my opinion it is too long, and in places doesn't make sense, please consider what I have said, vote if you like. (I shall be going through all of the article later today)

support (as the nominator?) Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} 11:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Support with comment Perhaps this limit should also be placed on the other Articles of the Month, as they are the first thing people see when entering the site. It is possible that many nonconstructive edits may be made to those articles by new people who are eager to help out (and increase their edit count), but have little experience or knowledge of that subject.Ssj metroid 21:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Support with comment I agree with both of you, this article is loosing its "essence", due to the multiple modifications...But how can we block others thinking "we have the knowledge", a new editor may have a good idea no ? Urssaff ^talk 08:51, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I wasn't saying we alone should edit it, after a few days if they have an account and are truly interested in contributing to the article they could do so. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} 15:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - Although there is a tendency for updating of the featured article with less constructive changes, at least it's caught quicker there. I think if we were to restrict updates on the featured article, then the problem would just move somewhere else. I'm not sure restricting access will actually reduce the problem overall.  Amaurice ^talk 16:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Support - As per Urssaff, also i couldn't follow the guide after it had become so complex, i had to have Bob2006ty Write me a guide that made it easier to understand. It's become very bad for people new to barrows. --Derial^{(Boywithbrain)} 17:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Salve Amulet

There seems to be a contradiction in the article. Under "suggested equipment" it says that a salve amulet will not work, while under "no prayer potions equipment" it lists the salve amulet as an option. I do not know myself if a salve amulet does or does not work, so could someone please verify? Aquilae 01:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The Salve Amulet doesn't work. It may be listed for the no prayer potion section because it has a decent prayer bonus. I believe it is +6. 24.17.207.20 03:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Salamanders

I've been testing out the Black Salamander after I saw someone doing the Barrows with it. I must say that the benefits from it are shining through. It allows me to carry less items and doesn't appear to hinder too much from armors (much like Slayer Dart in armor). I've kinda revamped my strategy down there with this new weapon. Might want to mention it as a possible alternative to recommended items to bring.

~Ixindor~

See tavern thread "omg black salamander best for barrows?" to see why it might not be. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk} 13:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I am a black salamander addict, i have done thousands of barrows runs. it is fairly well know that one of the best ways to go at barrows, on the melee brothers atleast, is to use slayer dart. here a few thinks that couls hake you sway over to the salamander crew. salamanders cost per cast is less than a cast of slayer dart. althought the cast accuracy of slayer dart is affected only by a very little ammount from armour, they magic style attack of the salamander is confermed to not be affected at all by armour and it is noticibly faster in the long run. the max his of sal's are higher aswell. there are some down sides (smaller range, no shield etc) but i believe it to be far better in the long run. erm dunno how to sign off i dont have an account :s

[edit] Melee all

Some questions:

1. See my userpage for my skills , can i melee all the brothers?
2. I want to use a Dragon Halberd in the Tunnels, safe them all and use the safe spots, should I?
3. I want to kill Karils DDP++ 4× special, then whip. Is that good?
4. The only brother that i am gonna range is Ahrims, good?
5. I make no extra kill count, just 6 minimal. Maybe more for healing with guthans, alright?
6. Im gonna "Whip" torags in the tunnels, or halberd too?
7. If im gonna use a Dragon Halberd, should i watch my strength bonus or attack bonus.

Ive done barrows a lot, but i maged all the time, now its time for some difference, and i need tips ofcourse!\

Thanx

Buzz ^{(Talk • # • √ • P )} 08:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

(It's better you reply at my Talk page)

Melee-ing Barrows wasn't a good idea, back on magic right now (23-03-08)

Buzz ^{(Talk • # • √ • P )} 06:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cannonway

Does cannonway still work? where you use your cannon to block the melee brothers and in the meanwhile bash their face with a halberd? 84.196.72.19 00:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mage

Item	Attack Bonuses					Defence Bonuses						Other
Farseer helm	-5	-5	-5	+6	-5	+8	+10	+12	+6	0	+7	0	0
Mystic robe top	0	0	0	+20	0	0	0	0	+20	0	+20	0	0
Mystic robe bottom	0	0	0	+15	0	0	0	0	+15	0	+15	0	0
barrows gloves	+12	+12	+12	+6	+12	+12	+12	+12	+6	+12	+6	+12	0
Mystic boots	0	0	0	+3	0	0	0	0	+3	0	+3	0	0
Amulet of Glory, Amulet of Fury, (the Salve amulet does not work)

could setup like this,for mage def and do box for melee to ^talk

[edit] Barrowzzz

• 2 items from a drop is very rare, what about 3?? A friend of me got 3 barrows items in 1 trip...
• They are not undead.. are they from the spirit world??
• Does summoning work in there??

Nope, summoning familiars are not allowed in.

• What kind of spirits are they??
• Is there a possible way to communicate with them??
• Are they alive in the spirit world??
• Who is the Strange Old Man??

Buzz ^{(Talk • # • √ • P )} 13:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 6th brother

Very odd, but I did not encounter him once during one of my trip. He just disappeared all of a sudden. Anyone know what happened? Powers38 ^{TalkI'm stalking your talk page, beware.} 03:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Same happend to me with guthans , but because i decided to try for another trip and not teliport out after opening the chest, he appeared for me after opening the door to the room with the ladder! strange isnt it? I suppose if anyone else has this problem just keep opening doors till the barrow brother appears if he doesent when u open the chest. signed: 91283746522

[edit] shouldn't

ahrim be third? dont need prayer for verac, and ahrim hits constant 20s. Rawrawr Dinosaur 16:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Page split

I have split the Barrows article into two pages: the main article and Barrows/Strategies. The reasons for this are twofold: To reduce loading time for the regular page and because most of the strategies are based on opinion and personal experience. People have been asking "Shouldn't Ahrim be before Verac in the recommended order? You don't need to pray against Verac." This is a matter of personal opinion and now people can just add their own strategies (within reason; we don't need a 100+kb page full of bad prose and redundant strategies) instead of worrying about whichever one strategy is on the actual page and, by extension, endorsed as the "best." --The preceding unsigned comment was added by your lord Andorin (talk) 22:33, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Do I have the rquirerments?

I was wondering if I'm able to beat the Barrows with only melee. My stats are on my page, but here they are. 65 attack and strength , 63 hitpoints, 61 defence, and 47 prayer. Leave a message on my talk page and say what I need to bring. By the way, I also have 51 ranged, and 56 magic.

[edit] Updated with new information

Errr.. shouldn't someone put something about Tehnoobshow's Exclusive interview with the Barrows brothers? Theg721 ^chat I feel the power. 16:39, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely not. That's fanon, and thus it has no place here. WWTDD? 16:40, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ring of Wealth?

Does ring of wealth increase better loot from the chest? Kat99999123^talk 21:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No.  Gaz Lloyd ^Calcs!_Awesome 08:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

no

[edit] barrows boots?

does anyone know wat kind of boots the brothers wear? i would really like to know.

Does not really look like they wear boots RT1 Aka Twigy. 20:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Why not use the concept pictures found on their respective Wikia pages, for example Karil the Tainted - _Simsarmy 20:31, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Sort of looks like Moonclan boots RT1 Aka Twigy. 20:50, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] kc?

what does "kc" mean? --

Mister Craftsman!

Chat • Works • Workshop

02:00, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

KC stands for Kill Count, or how many deaths you cause in the Barrows minigame before you open the chest.--I Levin 02:08, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Missing Door Puzzle!

Someone edited a door puzzle out of existence. The one with the pentagon and square. Please add it back if you know the file. Mamabear47 07:27, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Do I have the requirements

Only with so much money spent on high level food, armour and prayer potions that you won't make any money in the long rrun so unless you just want to spend a bit and check it out there's not much point.