/cast Paci Chat/atrium
#1
Posted 07 May 2006 - 06:06 AM
It would cost large amounts of mana and full stams to initiate, but would be a logical and useful tool that would allow requests for help in tackling harder areas, similar to a system message but tuned to paci's only.
#2
Posted 08 May 2006 - 08:04 PM
For me, it should be an ability you're able to turn on and off, providing you have stamina. Then, while active, it'd drain x mana every 30 seconds or so.
#3
Posted 08 May 2006 - 08:21 PM
#4
Posted 08 May 2006 - 10:02 PM
#5
Posted 09 May 2006 - 04:55 AM
/toggle paci chat would fix that in a hurry, besides why would some-one want to waste game time sitting on a paci in the park in resthaven ?
10 mana per 30seconds? for the duration that it's cast, sounds reasonable or not enough ?
#6
Posted 09 May 2006 - 06:49 PM
And what happens when someone discovers that they can annoy every pacifist in game by sitting in the park in Resthaven, drinking from the fountain, and flooding their screens with nonsense?
Trevayne, this has the same logic as friend/enemy chat, even clan chat, why were they put in?
If you don't like it, /ignore, /ignorepc, re-cast spell (which I would expect to turn it off).
Supported.
#8
Posted 09 May 2006 - 07:26 PM
You could argue that only pacifists that cast this spell can then use the communication channel... that is, that everyone who wants to talk or listen needs to have cast the spell. If this is the case, then why would anyone actually do this? Why not just use friend/enemy chat? Why pay mana for something you can get for free?
Why would someone waste time sitting in RH at the fountain? Why would someone waste time sitting at SGH? Is there really any difference?
#9
Posted 11 May 2006 - 01:46 AM
You know how annoying people can get in general chat, and then you /ignorepc and it was their brother or something.
^Not a good reason, but oh well^
Isn't the 'Pacifist' supposed to be a solo-class? Anti-social and an outcast class? If so, why would they communicate with other paci's, when they'd probably want to be way better.
#10
Posted 12 May 2006 - 02:03 AM
Isn't the 'Pacifist' supposed to be a solo-class? Anti-social and an outcast class? If so, why would they communicate with other paci's, when they'd probably want to be way better.
If there anti social why do they have the ability to help people?
#11
Posted 12 May 2006 - 06:56 AM
Edited by Äññöÿäñcë, 12 May 2006 - 06:56 AM.
#12
Posted 13 May 2006 - 05:08 AM
If you want to add it, do so.
#13
Posted 13 May 2006 - 08:11 AM
#14
Posted 13 May 2006 - 12:25 PM
Character Name: Wind on both servers!
#15
Posted 13 May 2006 - 08:10 PM
However, I do not support this idea of pacifists being able to have their own chat and use mana to do it. It's as trevayne said.. Why pay for something that you can get another way for free? It's just a waste of code.
#16
Posted 13 May 2006 - 08:46 PM
You people who tried to say he was wrong or that it would be easy to fix simply do not realize how many players in game go out of their way to be jackasses, and out of them, many really dislike the paci class.
-Proverbs 4:7
#17
Posted 13 May 2006 - 10:08 PM
#18
Posted 14 May 2006 - 09:41 AM
#19
Posted 14 May 2006 - 11:33 AM
#20
Posted 15 May 2006 - 02:42 AM
There is a huge difference between this suggestion and friend/enemy/clan chat. I purposefully put people into my clan/friend list/enemy list, which gives them the ability to chat with me and interrupt me when I'm playing. The spell as originally described would allow you to chat with all pacifists in game without them giving their consent. I'm absolutely opposed to that.
The main problem I have using my paci is that I don't know if there are any other paci's on at the same time, that might want to join me in the exploration of an area.
Friend/Enemy chat is usefull on my main crits, but doesnt help much on the paci.
If you didnt want to receive a message from any other paci, you'ld just set /toggle paci chat to off.
I dont like the idea of spamming the ./p (user name), to find find out which of the "There are 169 characters online, (52 users)." are paci's, and might want to come exploring.
This spell would make it easier for paci's to communicate with each other, regardless of whether their main crits are in enemy clans, and therefore, wouldn't normally communicate.
The mana cost would prevent ppl from using the spell to annoy ppl, as mana is the currency needed on a paci when exploring, and if it was abused then the staff could and probably would temp ban the offender....
How about a variation of the same idea
Maybe modify the spell so that it show's what paci's are on-line at that time, then the user can /p (user name) to communicate with them.
Now this variation isn't what I had in mind, but it would be better than nothing.....
#21
Posted 17 May 2006 - 03:19 PM
If this isn't possible then I like the 'Maybe modify the spell so that it show's what paci's are on-line at that time, then the user can /p (user name) to communicate with them.' idea
#22
Posted 26 May 2006 - 07:23 AM
#23
Posted 19 June 2006 - 05:59 AM
Would that mean that only Protectors could use and receive the communication using the spell? or would they be able to communicate with all paci's ?
I think that only Protectors should be able to use the spell, but they should be able to communicate with all paci's, not just other protectors.
I think that this would encourage people to train their paci's to protector so that they can use the spell.
#24
Posted 21 June 2006 - 07:23 PM
Think about it, if only the protectors can use it, but they can talk to normal pacifists in it, how do the rest of the pacifists see it?Would that mean that only Protectors could use and receive the communication using the spell? or would they be able to communicate with all paci's ?
I think that only Protectors should be able to use the spell, but they should be able to communicate with all paci's, not just other protectors.
I think that this would encourage people to train their paci's to protector so that they can use the spell.
I don't think it would motivate people any more to get to protector either.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users