Why not have all or at least 90 percent of skills that are MAINLY for player vs player combat... to have them also usable on monsters.. since not all are pk'ers or even like the idea of pk'ing/pk'ed.

Hehe, I love when a new person suggests and idea that if it were possible would have happened long, long ago.

Ssooooo...

That's extremely complicated. And to prevent Roark and Hajamin from running in here and getting red in the face, I'll tell you the short version of why.

Mobs are not really complicated things, like players are. If we had all skills useable on them, they'd need to learn how to cure. They'd need to learn how to fight back appropriately, and we'd have to set up a system for them to be able to be wounded. To turn mobs into complex creatures like players are would take WAY too much time and energy.

Sure it's a neat idea, but it'll never happen.

1. the coding to have mobs worry about paralyse, stun, venoms, wounding, ext, would be extreme.

2. to balance things, the mobs would probably have to be as hard to kill as a player. Imagine a gorgog using healing vials and parrying.

Oh, eww. That'd be downright painful.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO -cries-



j/k



well it is understandable though.

On the up side.. if you don't want to PK you don't need credits for the most part.

Even if it were possible to code, can you imagine the strain on the server trying to process dozens of systems at once to have mobs fight back? It'd lag us all to hell and back.

Yeah. There's so many afflictions, with such a wide variety of effects, it would be impossible to do.

hmm.. thought you'd need credits anyway...

Well.. for tradeskills and perhaps transing a few skills to help your bashing ability or some skill you may want to learn for the hell of it, but other than that not really.

Not really. I mean, they help a little for bashing (not really essential though), and you need them for a trade skill, you can get on fine without. I played Achaea for over a year without seeing a single credit, and I enjoyed it a lot. You need tonnes for PK, but that's about it really.

Stop spelling "ton" wrong, Shiri.

Did you AND Sylphas PM/post that at me at the same time on purpose?

IT'S TONNE DAMNIT. *gets Oxford English Dictionary*

(t*squiggle*; occas. t*squiggle*,ni for distinction from 'ton'). 1877 A metric ton.)

Exactly - it's English/metric spelling. Hence it being wrong.

Shamarah, you and the rest of you colonials cannot spell. Get back in the fields.

aluminum
ton
colour

Hey, one out of three isn't bad, right?

Lisaera, you and the rest of your pompous nobility wouldn't recognize the future (not to mention correct spelling) if it smacked you across the face with a trout. Get back to your tea.

We're simply arguing about how many credits are needed for pk, tonnes or tons. Since they're different sizes and all.

Quite. A ton being 2000 pounds and a metric ton being about 2200 pounds.