Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
>>is going to get a complete re-write.
^This basically applies to all things Ranger: companions, beseeches, nature's pool, Ranger bonus, any sort of combat tactics, and while not just ours, stealth.
Soon
Player of Diggan, Ranger & Halfing of Aesry
<<So, we're considering moving Athleticism to the Intro slot for Wilderness Survival, and bumping HOL into a 2 slot Basic spell that does Skinning and Locksmithing.>>
During DR2.0, I always had HOL up for locksmithing, and WS. Made sense to me that having Lirisa's steady hands would work for opening for the boxes. And yes we still want out locksmithing boost. Most of us do our own boxes since we hunt in the middle of nowhere.
But I also worry that GMs are "balancing", tweeking the game to death. Yes this should make things easier down the road. It's always down the road. I can't think of another guild who has been waiting 10 years, plus (and that's no exaggeration) for a companion rewrite, have the new GM state he had the project ready to be approved---and then fall into oblivion.
I worry that Simu is using the GMs to develop their new games while not allowing GMs to develop the guilds here.
I love this game and will play it until I die probably. But I would love to see some ranger love and companions, and trails developed before I die.
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
During DR2.0, I always had HOL up for locksmithing, and WS. Made sense to me that having Lirisa's steady hands would work for opening for the boxes. And yes we still want out locksmithing boost. Most of us do our own boxes since we hunt in the middle of nowhere.
But I also worry that GMs are "balancing", tweeking the game to death. Yes this should make things easier down the road. It's always down the road. I can't think of another guild who has been waiting 10 years, plus (and that's no exaggeration) for a companion rewrite, have the new GM state he had the project ready to be approved---and then fall into oblivion.
I worry that Simu is using the GMs to develop their new games while not allowing GMs to develop the guilds here.
I love this game and will play it until I die probably. But I would love to see some ranger love and companions, and trails developed before I die.
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
>>But I also worry that GMs are "balancing", tweeking the game to death. Yes this should make things easier down the road. It's always down the road.
Small balance changes, tweaks and bug fixes are a fact of life in any game that sees development. We're still seeing some larger changes as we stabilize 3.0, but that should die down in the next few major pushes.
>>I can't think of another guild who has been waiting 10 years, plus (and that's no exaggeration) for a companion rewrite, have the new GM state he had the project ready to be approved---and then fall into oblivion.
For a companion rewrite? No. But there are plenty of systems that have been waiting that long or longer for development - some of which had a lot of work done on them at some point. It's unfortunate, but true. Ask Traders how long they've been waiting for... ah, anything. There's even more examples if you look outside specific guild development (I'm constantly finding half finished Rigby projects dating back to around 2000).
And, unfortunately, sometimes GMs leave staff suddenly or become unavailable for extended periods - also unfortunate, but when many projects are literally being carried by a team of one it's hard to pick up that slack when it happens. Ask Paladins about their Advocate Curse (It's real, I swear!)
>>I worry that Simu is using the GMs to develop their new games while not allowing GMs to develop the guilds here.
This is completely untrue. With the exception of Solomon (Who manages both DR and GS4) and the onsite GMs (Who do C code updates we can't do, maintain the forums, fix server crashes, character restorations and whatnot), every DR GM only works on DR. Some GMs do, occasionally, voyage over to GS4 to steal some of their code since (some things) can port between the two games without much work and they do likewise.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
Small balance changes, tweaks and bug fixes are a fact of life in any game that sees development. We're still seeing some larger changes as we stabilize 3.0, but that should die down in the next few major pushes.
>>I can't think of another guild who has been waiting 10 years, plus (and that's no exaggeration) for a companion rewrite, have the new GM state he had the project ready to be approved---and then fall into oblivion.
For a companion rewrite? No. But there are plenty of systems that have been waiting that long or longer for development - some of which had a lot of work done on them at some point. It's unfortunate, but true. Ask Traders how long they've been waiting for... ah, anything. There's even more examples if you look outside specific guild development (I'm constantly finding half finished Rigby projects dating back to around 2000).
And, unfortunately, sometimes GMs leave staff suddenly or become unavailable for extended periods - also unfortunate, but when many projects are literally being carried by a team of one it's hard to pick up that slack when it happens. Ask Paladins about their Advocate Curse (It's real, I swear!)
>>I worry that Simu is using the GMs to develop their new games while not allowing GMs to develop the guilds here.
This is completely untrue. With the exception of Solomon (Who manages both DR and GS4) and the onsite GMs (Who do C code updates we can't do, maintain the forums, fix server crashes, character restorations and whatnot), every DR GM only works on DR. Some GMs do, occasionally, voyage over to GS4 to steal some of their code since (some things) can port between the two games without much work and they do likewise.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
<<Companions are slated for a complete re-write. We just need a GM to actually do it.>>
Just so you know, Sithix has had the companion re-write pretty much finished and it needs to be approved. That was the status when everything stopped.
So Rin, PLEASE pursue companions. A decade is a long long long time to wait for this. And it is so close to being done.
Besides, I want a new wolf! ::glances at her raccoon:: In winter, a raccoon blanket just doesn't keep me warm. My hands, yes. : D
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow who wants a new person
Just so you know, Sithix has had the companion re-write pretty much finished and it needs to be approved. That was the status when everything stopped.
So Rin, PLEASE pursue companions. A decade is a long long long time to wait for this. And it is so close to being done.
Besides, I want a new wolf! ::glances at her raccoon:: In winter, a raccoon blanket just doesn't keep me warm. My hands, yes. : D
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow who wants a new person
>>I worry that Simu is using the GMs to develop their new games while not allowing GMs to develop the guilds here.
This is completely untrue. With the exception of Solomon (Who manages both DR and GS4) and the onsite GMs (Who do C code updates we can't do, maintain the forums, fix server crashes, character restorations and whatnot), every DR GM only works on DR.<<
I am so glad to see this. I was wondering, since the GMs are so busy. As for traders, they did shops, new customizable caravans and consortiums. But yeah traders need some love too.
**WARNING--THE BELOW IS VENTING SO FEEL FREE TO IGNORE THE REST OF THIS POST**
What makes the companion thing so bitter for me is, that when it was first talked about at Simucon ranger meeting, it was made to sound like it would really happen fast. Well not Simu Soon at least. Then there have been flurries of input on it on the boards, giving the impression that GMs are ready for actually fleshing out companions. This has happened at 3 times that I remember. Then finally Sithix is made new GM and tells us basically his "graduate thesis" for GMhood was on companions which really infused me with hope that finally, the day has come. I do understand folks leaving and that GMs have certain areas they like to do. However, I thought there was a proceedure in place for GMs copying their work and saving it in a central place so no GM picking up the pieces would have to go cold turkey.
Anyway, thanks for the fast posting, and the hope that before I die, I get a new wolf. And thanks for the opportunity to vent.
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
This is completely untrue. With the exception of Solomon (Who manages both DR and GS4) and the onsite GMs (Who do C code updates we can't do, maintain the forums, fix server crashes, character restorations and whatnot), every DR GM only works on DR.<<
I am so glad to see this. I was wondering, since the GMs are so busy. As for traders, they did shops, new customizable caravans and consortiums. But yeah traders need some love too.
**WARNING--THE BELOW IS VENTING SO FEEL FREE TO IGNORE THE REST OF THIS POST**
What makes the companion thing so bitter for me is, that when it was first talked about at Simucon ranger meeting, it was made to sound like it would really happen fast. Well not Simu Soon at least. Then there have been flurries of input on it on the boards, giving the impression that GMs are ready for actually fleshing out companions. This has happened at 3 times that I remember. Then finally Sithix is made new GM and tells us basically his "graduate thesis" for GMhood was on companions which really infused me with hope that finally, the day has come. I do understand folks leaving and that GMs have certain areas they like to do. However, I thought there was a proceedure in place for GMs copying their work and saving it in a central place so no GM picking up the pieces would have to go cold turkey.
Anyway, thanks for the fast posting, and the hope that before I die, I get a new wolf. And thanks for the opportunity to vent.
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
>>Just so you know, Sithix has had the companion re-write pretty much finished and it needs to be approved. That was the status when everything stopped.
Keep in mind I don't actually know how far along anything related to Companions 2.0 actually is, but glancing through posts in the Companions section of the forums hasn't led me to believe that Sithix ever indicated anything was close to being done. As far as approvals go, there have been a number of approvals already made for various aspects of companion work.
>>new Companions we have been asking for, for 10 years.
>>I think we are on what 10 years of wiating for it to be done?
>>They have needed to be completely rewritten for over 10 years.
>>A decade is a long long long time to wait for this. And it is so close to being done.
It's a shame that whoever does take up the mantle of this project will probably do so knowing full well that whatever thanks come from the effort will invariably be tainted with 'and it only took 10 years to do it'. Aside from that, and once again I don't have any idea how much code is written for Companions, a great deal of work with this sort of scope involves fully understanding the previous system, having a clear idea of each part of the proposed changes, putting that vision into code, and then breaking it and starting over. Even if step 3 was significantly completed, it would take quite some time for someone starting from scratch to even figure that out.
Currently, some of us are looking at creating a core framework that can be the backbone for all pets. Depending on how those ideas progress, it could have wide ranging implications for horses, familiars, companions, risen, and spell summoned pets. Regardless of whether this core takes steps forward or not, it's still a step forward toward getting up to speed on how far along companions actually are.
FGM Ricinus
Logistics Lead
Magic, Sentients Team Member
Cleric Advocate
Keep in mind I don't actually know how far along anything related to Companions 2.0 actually is, but glancing through posts in the Companions section of the forums hasn't led me to believe that Sithix ever indicated anything was close to being done. As far as approvals go, there have been a number of approvals already made for various aspects of companion work.
>>new Companions we have been asking for, for 10 years.
>>I think we are on what 10 years of wiating for it to be done?
>>They have needed to be completely rewritten for over 10 years.
>>A decade is a long long long time to wait for this. And it is so close to being done.
It's a shame that whoever does take up the mantle of this project will probably do so knowing full well that whatever thanks come from the effort will invariably be tainted with 'and it only took 10 years to do it'. Aside from that, and once again I don't have any idea how much code is written for Companions, a great deal of work with this sort of scope involves fully understanding the previous system, having a clear idea of each part of the proposed changes, putting that vision into code, and then breaking it and starting over. Even if step 3 was significantly completed, it would take quite some time for someone starting from scratch to even figure that out.
Currently, some of us are looking at creating a core framework that can be the backbone for all pets. Depending on how those ideas progress, it could have wide ranging implications for horses, familiars, companions, risen, and spell summoned pets. Regardless of whether this core takes steps forward or not, it's still a step forward toward getting up to speed on how far along companions actually are.
FGM Ricinus
Logistics Lead
Magic, Sentients Team Member
Cleric Advocate
>>Just so you know, Sithix has had the companion re-write pretty much finished and it needs to be approved. That was the status when everything stopped.
Keep in mind I don't actually know how far along anything related to Companions 2.0 actually is, but glancing through posts in the Companions section of the forums hasn't led me to believe that Sithix ever indicated anything was close to being done. As far as approvals go, there have been a number of approvals already made for various aspects of companion work.<<
Actually Sithix said he had most of it done. He said it was on hold till 3.0 is done, which obviously has not happened yet. He also said it would allow rangers to have 3 companions but only one in the lands at the time (3 types). He was telling me this when I was helping him test his tweaks to make scouting actually train again just as 3.0 was being kicked in. So yes even though there were no posts on the boards about it he did tell a number of rangers me included that it was mostly completed but some of the 3.0 stuff needed to be put in before it could even be usable.
Ranger Pfanston and his soggy pup
Keep in mind I don't actually know how far along anything related to Companions 2.0 actually is, but glancing through posts in the Companions section of the forums hasn't led me to believe that Sithix ever indicated anything was close to being done. As far as approvals go, there have been a number of approvals already made for various aspects of companion work.<<
Actually Sithix said he had most of it done. He said it was on hold till 3.0 is done, which obviously has not happened yet. He also said it would allow rangers to have 3 companions but only one in the lands at the time (3 types). He was telling me this when I was helping him test his tweaks to make scouting actually train again just as 3.0 was being kicked in. So yes even though there were no posts on the boards about it he did tell a number of rangers me included that it was mostly completed but some of the 3.0 stuff needed to be put in before it could even be usable.
Ranger Pfanston and his soggy pup
>Currently, some of us are looking at creating a core framework that can be the backbone for all pets.
Consdering how deja-vu this statement is (unless it's the same people from a few years ago still looking into it), I think pets in general just have a bad internal development documentation problem. :/
Because Necromancers.
-TEVESHSZAT
Consdering how deja-vu this statement is (unless it's the same people from a few years ago still looking into it), I think pets in general just have a bad internal development documentation problem. :/
Because Necromancers.
-TEVESHSZAT
>>Consdering how deja-vu this statement is (unless it's the same people from a few years ago still looking into it), I think pets in general just have a bad internal development documentation problem. :/
They suffer from two common problems in DR development - the problem where you have many systems that look like they should be roughly the same but are totally different under the hood (developed at different times by different GMs for different reasons) and the problem of bad documentation.
Both of these are things we've been working in the past few years to reduce, but there's still 15+ years of bad development practices we're struggling with and the older the code we're talking about (and companions are nice and old) the more we run into them.
>>Actually Sithix said he had most of it done. He said it was on hold till 3.0 is done, which obviously has not happened yet. He also said it would allow rangers to have 3 companions but only one in the lands at the time (3 types). He was telling me this when I was helping him test his tweaks to make scouting actually train again just as 3.0 was being kicked in. So yes even though there were no posts on the boards about it he did tell a number of rangers me included that it was mostly completed but some of the 3.0 stuff needed to be put in before it could even be usable.
This can be a very misleading statement, even if not intentionally so. There are dozens of projects over the years that are "nearly done" that really aren't even close to release for a variety of reasons (the largest being the GM(s) working on it left and left behind little to no documentation).
Take the Gnome Village as an example (Since that's something I'm more familiar with than companions) - there are forum posts dating back at least 5 years, and IIRC more like 8, saying it was in various states of "nearly done". It's been passed through at least three sets of GMs and I finally found it on a whim earlier this year. It is nearly done, but before I could release it I'd need to walk through and reQC every room (Much of which is redundant work but I have insufficient documentation to trust exactly what has and hasn't been QC'ed in 2005 or whatever), find every script associated with it and get them reQC'ed and make sure they conform to modern development standards (given that they were written 10 years ago in some cases they likely don't), finish the one creature I found for the area which sort of works but needs some major work on it's core mechanic and won't work under 3.0 without updates, replace the other hunting creature which I can't find any documentation on but apparently existed, figure out if the path connecting this all to the rest of the world exists or not, figure out what - if any - events were planned for release and if I want to do those or something different and that's before we even consider anything else I find that isn't finished along the way (Justice, unfinished shops/rooms, things 10 years of game development broke etc). And this is a case where I do have some documentation to use as a starting point (though not much and I can't trust that most of it is current).
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
They suffer from two common problems in DR development - the problem where you have many systems that look like they should be roughly the same but are totally different under the hood (developed at different times by different GMs for different reasons) and the problem of bad documentation.
Both of these are things we've been working in the past few years to reduce, but there's still 15+ years of bad development practices we're struggling with and the older the code we're talking about (and companions are nice and old) the more we run into them.
>>Actually Sithix said he had most of it done. He said it was on hold till 3.0 is done, which obviously has not happened yet. He also said it would allow rangers to have 3 companions but only one in the lands at the time (3 types). He was telling me this when I was helping him test his tweaks to make scouting actually train again just as 3.0 was being kicked in. So yes even though there were no posts on the boards about it he did tell a number of rangers me included that it was mostly completed but some of the 3.0 stuff needed to be put in before it could even be usable.
This can be a very misleading statement, even if not intentionally so. There are dozens of projects over the years that are "nearly done" that really aren't even close to release for a variety of reasons (the largest being the GM(s) working on it left and left behind little to no documentation).
Take the Gnome Village as an example (Since that's something I'm more familiar with than companions) - there are forum posts dating back at least 5 years, and IIRC more like 8, saying it was in various states of "nearly done". It's been passed through at least three sets of GMs and I finally found it on a whim earlier this year. It is nearly done, but before I could release it I'd need to walk through and reQC every room (Much of which is redundant work but I have insufficient documentation to trust exactly what has and hasn't been QC'ed in 2005 or whatever), find every script associated with it and get them reQC'ed and make sure they conform to modern development standards (given that they were written 10 years ago in some cases they likely don't), finish the one creature I found for the area which sort of works but needs some major work on it's core mechanic and won't work under 3.0 without updates, replace the other hunting creature which I can't find any documentation on but apparently existed, figure out if the path connecting this all to the rest of the world exists or not, figure out what - if any - events were planned for release and if I want to do those or something different and that's before we even consider anything else I find that isn't finished along the way (Justice, unfinished shops/rooms, things 10 years of game development broke etc). And this is a case where I do have some documentation to use as a starting point (though not much and I can't trust that most of it is current).
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
That is fine and dandy Raesh but I think we are a bit off content here. The issue is WOTP, keep it or leave it. In my opinion leave it, make it more worthy of the name, and tie it into companion development. Then get on the companion development and have it make more sense, calling on the pack to help increase hunting, use the animals to hunt with you. Use the animals to help you scout a larger area to help increase scouting learning. There are a myriad of cool things to do, I would think most of the framework is in place since there are many items things out there that work in the similar fashion. While I wouldn't jump up and down and say I am a super coder I just wonder how difficult it is to steal the basic framework and use it elsewhere.
I guess it would just be cool to get WOTP to work as a pack spell not just to help pick a lock.
Arct
I guess it would just be cool to get WOTP to work as a pack spell not just to help pick a lock.
Arct
>tie it into companion development
See, I personally, don't wish any of our spells be "a companion spell" simply because I think the three systems (Companions, Spells, and Beseeches) should be independant of each other and should not have to rely upon each other to be effective/useful.
Companions, to me, should be the ultimate pet. They should be like having an extra set of hands in the sense that they function not only to help us do what we do better, but also provide us with access to whatever natural abilities they possess. A good example of this is the wolf's ability to track people down and the raccoon's ability to help us forage better. Currently, they really don't live up to the awesomeness that they should be. We all know this.
Beseeches, in my opinion, should be a more raw way of dealing with nature in order to bypass our own limitations. Petrify, Cradle, Refresh all fit this idea, though things like Sing or Echo might be better as companion abilities. IE: Bats or Owls.
Spells are something I think have been approached fairly, which is why I'm not really bent out of shape that there hasn't been much work done there for Rangers. Being that magic is not a guild focus, I can totally understand having a small slice of it available to us. I've always seen the guild as being one of the most independant, so any development which allows Rangers to function better when in the wild is good with me.
You must be wearing the dried fishskin in order to eat it.
See, I personally, don't wish any of our spells be "a companion spell" simply because I think the three systems (Companions, Spells, and Beseeches) should be independant of each other and should not have to rely upon each other to be effective/useful.
Companions, to me, should be the ultimate pet. They should be like having an extra set of hands in the sense that they function not only to help us do what we do better, but also provide us with access to whatever natural abilities they possess. A good example of this is the wolf's ability to track people down and the raccoon's ability to help us forage better. Currently, they really don't live up to the awesomeness that they should be. We all know this.
Beseeches, in my opinion, should be a more raw way of dealing with nature in order to bypass our own limitations. Petrify, Cradle, Refresh all fit this idea, though things like Sing or Echo might be better as companion abilities. IE: Bats or Owls.
Spells are something I think have been approached fairly, which is why I'm not really bent out of shape that there hasn't been much work done there for Rangers. Being that magic is not a guild focus, I can totally understand having a small slice of it available to us. I've always seen the guild as being one of the most independant, so any development which allows Rangers to function better when in the wild is good with me.
You must be wearing the dried fishskin in order to eat it.
>>The issue is WOTP, keep it or leave it.
WOTP will bonus Wisdom and Tactics in 3.1 and is Advanced now.
Locksmithing bonus has been moved to HoL, which bumps to 2 slots, and moved to Basic.
Instinct, which was bumped to 2 slots is also Basic now.
The Intro spells that replace HoL and Instinct are Athleticism and STW.
>>tie it into companion development
If companions get to the point to make having a spell interact with it in some fashion, WOTP could certainly be increased to 3 slots to add in the additional feature. Though it would be more likely that a new spell would develop from that particular possibility. Either way, we're not at a place where writing any such tie-in is needed. And quite frankly, I'd prefer that companions do everything they are intended to do without having to go through additional steps.
>>I just wonder how difficult it is to steal the basic framework and use it elsewhere
Sometimes not very hard, sometimes it is. Keep in mind it's not always just a chunk of code we can cut and paste over. Certain systems use in-game objects/rooms/tables, not to mention there are a ton of systems designed to have different effects based on such a framework, and if you create a new similar framework, you then have to go back to all those calling systems and have them be able to deal with both. Then if you need to make changes later to how all of the similar frameworks operate, you have to make changes in even more places. So, aping some system to get a job done may be quicker and easier, but in the long run we can end up doing more by sitting down and building something that uses the same frame for many purposes.
FGM Ricinus
Logistics Lead
Magic, Sentients Team Member
Cleric Advocate
WOTP will bonus Wisdom and Tactics in 3.1 and is Advanced now.
Locksmithing bonus has been moved to HoL, which bumps to 2 slots, and moved to Basic.
Instinct, which was bumped to 2 slots is also Basic now.
The Intro spells that replace HoL and Instinct are Athleticism and STW.
>>tie it into companion development
If companions get to the point to make having a spell interact with it in some fashion, WOTP could certainly be increased to 3 slots to add in the additional feature. Though it would be more likely that a new spell would develop from that particular possibility. Either way, we're not at a place where writing any such tie-in is needed. And quite frankly, I'd prefer that companions do everything they are intended to do without having to go through additional steps.
>>I just wonder how difficult it is to steal the basic framework and use it elsewhere
Sometimes not very hard, sometimes it is. Keep in mind it's not always just a chunk of code we can cut and paste over. Certain systems use in-game objects/rooms/tables, not to mention there are a ton of systems designed to have different effects based on such a framework, and if you create a new similar framework, you then have to go back to all those calling systems and have them be able to deal with both. Then if you need to make changes later to how all of the similar frameworks operate, you have to make changes in even more places. So, aping some system to get a job done may be quicker and easier, but in the long run we can end up doing more by sitting down and building something that uses the same frame for many purposes.
FGM Ricinus
Logistics Lead
Magic, Sentients Team Member
Cleric Advocate
>>Companions, to me, should be the ultimate pet.
IIRC, the order of functionality was familiar < companion < risen, with a lot of it doing with the time to create/upkeep/manage/etc.
But, that's also when I think there were thoughts to have all pet type critters run on the same rails (including things like empath avengers and maybe mounts?), but I don't know if that's been scrapped.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
IIRC, the order of functionality was familiar < companion < risen, with a lot of it doing with the time to create/upkeep/manage/etc.
But, that's also when I think there were thoughts to have all pet type critters run on the same rails (including things like empath avengers and maybe mounts?), but I don't know if that's been scrapped.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
About companions---just so you know---we don't consider our companions as pets! Sithix envisioned us being able to barely befriend it at first, then through interaction with it over time, the companions learns to do things like tracking and perhaps harassing the critters we hunt so they are distracted. (Actually he said he wasn't too sure the later would happen, but I can always hope).
As far as WOTP, it makes sense that this ties into our "pack". And just because it might tie into companions, doesn't mean you need to have companions and use that particular feature.
About Sithix saying things were done---please look into whatever notes are left, and if necessary, please pull up the log from the last ranger meeting we had (held in Boar Clan some 2 years ago?). That meeting had a lot to say about companions and our concerns as well.
About working on the companions and getting whatever thanks with a 'and it only took him 10 years to do it'....If you do actually get us companions 2....You will be thanked profusely by us and I bet not one of us would hold it against you about 10 years. Well maybe Arct will, but...he's Arct!
Oh yeah and before I forget---Falkonis wants his falcon companion and Hawkman wants his hawk for a companion and I would love a dragon companion!
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
As far as WOTP, it makes sense that this ties into our "pack". And just because it might tie into companions, doesn't mean you need to have companions and use that particular feature.
About Sithix saying things were done---please look into whatever notes are left, and if necessary, please pull up the log from the last ranger meeting we had (held in Boar Clan some 2 years ago?). That meeting had a lot to say about companions and our concerns as well.
About working on the companions and getting whatever thanks with a 'and it only took him 10 years to do it'....If you do actually get us companions 2....You will be thanked profusely by us and I bet not one of us would hold it against you about 10 years. Well maybe Arct will, but...he's Arct!
Oh yeah and before I forget---Falkonis wants his falcon companion and Hawkman wants his hawk for a companion and I would love a dragon companion!
Zinaca and her full-grown raccoon, Shadow
<<Oh yeah and before I forget---Falkonis wants his falcon companion
Pretty sure this is a required understanding for anyone GM to be allowed to work on companions.
<<Hawkman wants his hawk for a companion
I dont even think Hawkman is still around...
<<and I would love a dragon companion!
No. But perhaps a drake or wyvern.
Falker
Pretty sure this is a required understanding for anyone GM to be allowed to work on companions.
<<Hawkman wants his hawk for a companion
I dont even think Hawkman is still around...
<<and I would love a dragon companion!
No. But perhaps a drake or wyvern.
Falker
I'd like to see WOTP become some type of group spell with other rangers that cast it.
Like...gives combat bonuses to rangers that hunt together.
We all howl to our packs to see our bonus, and such...doesn't it make logical sense that if it will be tied to tactics...it can be used in conjunction with other rangers that cast WOTP too...for wolf pack type battle.
