Difference between revisions of "Talk:Remember Place"

From DWPriests
Jump to: navigation, search
(Remember Removal)
(Remember Removal)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
:Oops! Does it show that I'm a clueless oldbie who's hopelessly out of touch with the modern priesthood?
 
:Oops! Does it show that I'm a clueless oldbie who's hopelessly out of touch with the modern priesthood?
 
:I remember the Good Olde Days when everything was possible... [[User:LaoTzu|LaoTzu]] 10:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 
:I remember the Good Olde Days when everything was possible... [[User:LaoTzu|LaoTzu]] 10:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 +
::A little ;)  This way is Better, though: "scour" lets you remove '''exactly''' what you want (remembered location, imbued ritual or wards) rather than anything and everything, as "consecrate" did.  Consecrate still seems to be bugged, though, and quite happily uses 50 GP to give you an error message saying that the item is already consecrated :P -- [[User:Mishal|Mishal]] ([[User talk:Mishal|talk]]) ([http://discworld.atuin.net/lpc/secure/finger.c?player=mishal MUD finger]) 13:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:49, 7 November 2008

Remember Removal

Re-consecrating an item no longer removes the location it remembers. You have to use "scour places from <object>". -- Mishal (talk) (MUD finger) 13:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Oops! Does it show that I'm a clueless oldbie who's hopelessly out of touch with the modern priesthood?
I remember the Good Olde Days when everything was possible... LaoTzu 10:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
A little ;) This way is Better, though: "scour" lets you remove exactly what you want (remembered location, imbued ritual or wards) rather than anything and everything, as "consecrate" did. Consecrate still seems to be bugged, though, and quite happily uses 50 GP to give you an error message saying that the item is already consecrated :P -- Mishal (talk) (MUD finger) 13:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)