Talk:Skeletal Wyvern

These are very very tough. After several variations of equipment I eventually settled on full rune/fury/whip/elemental shield, with 10 prayer pots (4), 2 super attack pots, ectophial (can't be too careful), lunar staff (faster transport there) and rest sharks. Protect from melee constantly I was able to kill about 30 with that inventory. Level 102 combat. -- Eucarya Talk 19:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Not only that, this wyvern drops really bad items after a tough fight e.g a Black axe. 22:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Do skeletal wyvern's drop dragonic visages more often than any other dragon?--Pkthis 21:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

They seem to drop less often from what I've seen but not too sure. --Glass of water 08:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Salve
I'm like 80% sure it doesn't work on these things. Anyone else try it? --Wowbagger421 04:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

it doesn't but have you tried salve amulet (e)? Johnjack922 22:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Salve Amulet and (e) variant does not function against Skeletal Wyverns. I have a rant on the official forums about this.Planeshifted 22:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Skeletal Wyverns aren't classified as Undead (the Salve Amulet and Salve Amulet (e) don't work) or as Dragons (the Dragon Slayer gloves don't work. 13:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

NPOV
There is a blurb about the "best" method of killing these. I think it should be the removed. Planeshifted 18:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It IS the best method of killing them...that's like saying we should remove guides on how to kill any monsters. Maha Nadihan 02:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, fine. we should remove guides because they do not carry a neutral point of view.Planeshifted 03:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's kind of ridiculous... If the information is useful to those reading the article or playing RuneScape, then it has a place in the article. Deleting it on the sole grounds of "guides and tips don't give a nuetral point of view" is just silly. RuneScape:Ignore all rules 04:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So which is it? NPOV only applies in what situations?  I mean, guides by nature are biased in the first place.Planeshifted 06:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, in my opinion, NPOV just means to report information as is, ie, without purposefully trying to direct the reader's influece... For example, in the Pure article, there should be no comments like "making a pure is the best way to train" or "pures are cowards in combat" or anything like that (obviously it wouldn't be so blatant, but that's an example)... That would be a NPOV violation. However, things like "it is recommended to start your first attack with poison" or "slashing attacks should be used against these creatures", I would consider to be fine. Guides and tips as you said are going to be slightly biased, but in some cases there IS a best way to approach a situation, which I wouldn't consider against the NPOV. If there is a best way to attack a monster, as opposed to a long drawn out fight that drains food, then I know I would like to read about it in the wiki. 21:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, the wiki pratically wouldn't exist if EVERY KIND of guide applied to NPOV, think about that. 06:08, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Since the best method information has been removed, why is this still NPOV challenged??? And for the record, I would like to know the best method for killing monsters. That's the entire point of a guide. If I wanted to flail around blindly, I wouldn't read guides. The real issue is, is the method listed as best actually best? Mamabear47 22:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

What was the deleted best method ? 14:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what was listed as "best" wyvern killing method in this wiki but from what I've found this guide on tip.it's forums is hands down the "best". 21:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Deflect Missiles at Wyverns
The only way they can hit you if your six squares away is a ranged attack, right? They seem to be hitting through Deflect Missiles, though. Do you think this is intentional, or a bug? --ItsMrPants 05:10, December 10, 2009 (UTC)