Talk:Brutallus

Datamined

Aren't datamined images of unreleased content prohibited in the mainspace?--SWM2448 23:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, bummer. A cool-looking model anyway, good teaser for the forthcoming raid. -- Raze 01:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

No wait,he is in the model veiwe.And thats what he is calledUser:Airiph/sig 18:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The model viewer is datamining, as you're not accessing the content through the official game client. And don't trust the names of the models. They've been wrong before and will be wrong in the future. --k_d³ 18:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok User:Airiph/sig 18:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Images of unreleased content, including those obtained via WMV, are not condoned by Project:DNP. I would also refrain from posting any descriptions of WMV images. --Tyrsenus t c 19:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh I THINK that WMV gets there stuff from blizzard themself.User:Airiph/sig 22:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't worry too much about talking about WMV images of unreleased (and especially unannounced) content, and linking to them from talk pages would be passable. The problem is mainly with uploading them to the wiki. Kirkburn  talk  contr 22:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I personally don't like seeing information that isn't obtained through normal means (games/books/official site/interviews). There was a fit over adding Illidan's in-game quotes (indicating that he dies during the encounter) before he had been killed on a live realm. Even though people were trying to add the text and not the sound files, they were nonetheless removed as I recall. This is similar in principle :-\ --Tyrsenus t c 16:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Wooooooow.... I just checked WMV... Brutallus is coooooool... <333333333 --The Lich King- - - 14:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

His blades don't look rusty to me :-| (Duke Ragereaver 07:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC))

In-game Name

It seems in the game he is called Brutallus as on the isle you can see a fight between Kalecgos and a Pit Lord with his model named Brutallus and I doubt many Pit Lords look like that guy. http://boards.worldofraids.com/topic-10781-1.html Leviathon 05:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Is he determined anymore, admins?User:Airiph/sig 15:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Brutillus was a random pit lord name in WCIII, Brutallus is his model name, but Brutalicus is what he is said to be called. Airiph, the PTRs are live so we can post the images.--SWM2448 15:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

ok! =)User:Airiph/sig 15:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

From the test realm, it's Brutallus now. Should I get a screenshot to confirm, or something? Ambelen 16:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Theres plenty.User:Airiph/sig 16:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

An in-game screenshot?--SWM2448 16:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ya,it was on that website that has the bosses I beleiveUser:Airiph/sig 16:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

So, Tigole mispelled his name or what?--User:FireMaster/Sig1 18:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

The model name is not always right. Though the screenshot says it is. Tig may have been wrong...--SWM2448 19:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Or they could have changed it. -- Dark T Zeratul 21:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Changes??

I was busy looking up on a couple of websites, but then I stumbled upon this:

Changes to Brutallus encounter. HP increased from 7.3mil to 11mil. Much more armor than previously. Saber Lash Removed, replaced with Meteor Strike. Meteor Strike, hits for 2000 dmg (1st, debuff is placed after dmg). Increases fire dmg taken by 75%. 3 stacks = 20k dmg instant gibs tank.

Dont know if its true or not, but I suppose it makes the encounter slightly harder.. FireDragonX 18:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

---

Don't put strategies in the comments/correct section if you haven't actually completed or attempted the encounter please and thank you? That strategy was obviously copy/pasted in there by someone who's never even seen it or attempted it.

Also, enrage timer is 6 minutes & Brutallus has 10 million HP now. --Ailetha 14:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

threat on brutallus

to better clearify my wording, taunting sets the threat of the casting tank to 110% of the current target, hence why i said the blurb about taunt rotations. is there a better way to mention this in the post than how i did?

To clarify, you are wrong. Taunting sets the threat of the casting tank to 100% of the current aggro holder. Continous taunting back and forth will not increase your threat. MatsT 10:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it is you that are mistaken, taunt was changed back in 1.11 (specifically for the 4 horsemen encounter) to set the threat to 110%, this is highly documented in many places, namely elitist jerks.

Can the Brutallus in the Dead Scar be attacked?

I've wondered since the Isle of Quel'Danas was added: Can a raid group march into the Dead Scar (without going into the Sunwell Plateau instance) and attack Brutallus there? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WoWWiki-Tracer (talk · contr).

No. The debris in the Dead Scar (and a couple of invisible walls IIRC) block access to the area where Brutallus is. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 03:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

He could for one build in the PTR for 2.4.0... but then Brut getting enslaved by a lock and unleashed on Sun's Reach kinda changed that... See Brutallus#PTR glitch Don't forget to sign your posts, too. --k_d³ 03:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Brutallus Kill Time

The page says 6:28 is the "longest" kill. Bloodlines on Sargeras killed him at 6:31, with a resto shaman ankh'ing and getting the killing blow with a lightning bolt, but being hit by Brutallus at the same time. No one survived, not even Brutallus. Nbisby (talk) 07:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Split

Brutallus has no lore to speak of. There is no reason to split off a third page separate from the two encounters. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure anymore. Why was the Legion info removed and the Split tag remained? --Mordecay (talk) 22:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

The Legion info is on the page for his Legion encounter. The split tag is still there, since the split is under discussion. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Not all the Legion info. U removed his pre-World boss info (which u seem to call "no lore" and "no appearance"???). --Mordecay (talk) 22:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I just added it back in, but it literally amounts to "he was at the Broken Shore." -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:37, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

And? --Mordecay (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

That's not remotely enough to justify a separate page for lore. Those are made when the character has as significant presence outside the boss encounter, and Brutallus does not. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of having Brutallus-related lore in the Brutallus (Broken Shore) page. In my mind, "(<location>)" pages should always contain only gameplay-related information, while lore should be kept on the main page of an entity. Xporc (talk) 10:20, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that his only lore outside his two encounters is "he shows up very briefly at the Broken Shore," which really isn't enough for a dedicated lore page. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:41, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Is this "problem" backed by a policy here or is it just a personal feeling? --Mordecay (talk) 21:58, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

There's technically no policy regarding splitting lore and encounter pages at all; all of them are done on a case-by-case basis largely by what people feel is appropriate. The one constant, though, is that there needs to be a notable amount of content outside the encounter itself to make the page worth it. Virtually all of Brutallus's appearances and lore are his two raid encounters; the rest is just his brief appearance at the Broken Shore. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

What would the benefit of a third page be? Does he appear outside the Broken Shore in Legion? PeterWind (talk) 02:58, 14 July 2017 (UTC)