my packy's dead and there's no tamer in sight

[MadTexan]

<blockquote><hr>

The template I am talking about would be the legndary mage with a combat squirrel.

[/ QUOTE ]You have a pet you use for combat and don't have the skills to correctly care for said pet? Shame on you.

Back to your other argument. The ability or inability of a PC character to get rezed can be a game stopper, this is why NPC healers Rez. The inability to get an NPC pet rezed at a certain time is not really a game stopper. You can always do something else in game with that character.

 

[MysticSim]

time and time again we see this thread pop up. How many times does the player base have to say no?? Seriously... how many of you read these threads and dont remember the last thread on this very same topic that resounded no??

Get over it, there should not be any type of tamer NPC that rezzes your pets. If your that desperate to have a pet rez, you can just (presumably) log in your second account and rez it.

when are we going to see the next thread on this same topic?? 2 or 3 months from now? Sorry if this seems like a rant, but it seems like when someone is inconviencied here, they come here and rehash ideas that have been floated around before.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Actually ... this thread proves the exception ...beyond the "predictable" hash/re-hash of a same-o-idea ...

Basara proposed an actual solution ... one NOT met with a resounding "no" ... a win-win middle ground ...

worthy of a fuller re-write and archiving ... in the Ideas den ..

Instead of a flat out change to a system ...
a modification TO the system that preserves "choice" on the part of players ...
Minimal impact on ALL existing templates ...

Like I said ... this thread proves the exception.

 

[Basara]

I just posted a version on Ideas Den.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

voted /Aye ...
Linky added to draft template NPC Rez solution

again:
<blockquote><hr>

<center>Excellent idea

</center>

[/ QUOTE ]

 

[Olahorand]

Could already help to overcome some time constraints if we could stable pet ghosts without having to log off - simply to free up the control slots and reucing the risk of the ghost going wild and disappear while no tamer can be found.

In context with another proposal - to share all available stable slots and pets through all chars on an account an tamer on the account could pull off the dead pet from stable and ress it as bonus for having the own tamer in the accounts family.

*Salute*
Olahorand

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

The trick is to make many friends before your pet dies. Perhaps even ones that play at various times of the day.
This is all besides the fact that you can always release the pet and buy another one...

[/ QUOTE ]

So yeah, just run on, interrupt whatever your friend is doing to either get their tamer/log on their tamer to help rez your pet...And what a great friendsship based on "hey, I just keep you around so you can ress my pets" *rollseyes*

[/ QUOTE ]
The only one who's suggesting you only call upon your friends when you need a pet res is you.

[/ QUOTE ]

You posted it as a solution to the problem, which means for the person the only difference between now and to effectuate your suggestion is a need for a pet resser.

Its a really poor solution and I am not quite sure of your motives to try and lessen the enjoyment of the game for others.

 

[Guest]

Would be a great idea if it didn't have such utterly crazy amounts

<blockquote><hr>

This breaks down to....
1 slot Pet: 1,000 gold for normal pets, 100 for mounts
2 slot pet: 10,000 gold for normal pets, 1,000 for mounts
3 slot pet: 100,000 gold for normal pets, 10,000 for mounts
4 slot pet: 1 million gold for normal pets, 100,000 for mounts
5 slot pet: 10 million gold for normal pets, 1 million for mounts

[/ QUOTE ]

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>




You posted it as a solution to the problem, which means for the person the only difference between now and to effectuate your suggestion is a need for a pet resser.

Its a really poor solution and I am not quite sure of your motives to try and lessen the enjoyment of the game for others.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nice to try to twist it around like that Chaos. I think the posting public is smart enough to figure out that the more friends you have the more likely it will be that one of them will have at least one character that can res your pet in a pinch.
If you really believe I am trying to lessen the enjoyment of the game for other people you're sadly mistaken and seriously confused.

You don't bother me as much as you think you do Chaos. Give it up and move on. Really, after all these years...

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Nice to try to twist it around like that Chaos. I think the posting public is smart enough to figure out that the more friends you have the more likely it will be that one of them will have at least one character that can res your pet in a pinch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Still gotta be someone you can call in at the time and they have to come. Even in the case you get additional friends to fill the gap, its still a pretty poor solution to the problem

<blockquote><hr>

If you really believe I am trying to lessen the enjoyment of the game for other people you're sadly mistaken and seriously confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are opposing the idea, aren't you?

 

[UncleSham]

thank you for your idea . kind of allong the lines of what im asking for so sure lets go with that. i dont mind the 3600 delay as i usually head for the bank first and TRY to find someone . the prices are kinda high . i was trying to make this accessable to anyone . newer players arent going to have that kinda money.

10 mil for a ridable 5 slot ? thats just nuts ... however my idea was not to let non common pets do it at all so ... sure why not ?
however 10k for a bonded blue beetle is, i think too much. perhapse less of a percentage in the scale would be in order.

if poeple want to take issue with bigger pets being "taken out of a fight" for pvp, maybe we should put in a delay for those . (or is that what your 3600 is for?)

all in all i do think some common ground is achievalble here . altho i would still like to see this affordable to everyone including newbs . if poeple use it alot great . more money for the sink in the long run

 

[Guest]

Of course, we didn't always have the advantages of a bonded pet. Remember? Once upon a time we had to *gasp* just get a new pet when one died. The world didn't implode either, surprisingly enough. If you don't want to call upon a friend, that option is still there for you. Or use JOAT to tame your own.

Maybe for the sake of peace and quiet, we should ask stable masters to sell pets ready-to-bond so a crafter can buy new pack critters as required. That'd suit the "must have now" groupies

If you want to maintain a bond with your pet and keep the advantages that brings (and there are advantages), then the very least you should expect is a fee at the NPC vet's which ties a small gold sink to the bonded pet benefit. If being bonded wasn't important, this thread wouldn't need to be here, as those players would simply get a fresh pet.

It's funny with UO, the more benefits players get, the less those perks are appreciated and the more they expect in return. I'm still glad that I can bond my pets in the first place.

Wenchy

 

[UncleSham]

well , most of my blue beetles are trained up at least some . id like them to be able to survive a little on their own . so buying even a bond ready pet is not what im looking for .

yes we used to have disposable pets . we also used to be able to run as many of these as we could handle. i still have macros to controll 5 seperate pets .. can i have my 5 dragons back ? (not serious) but lets not get into what we USED to have . i love my bonded pets and dont have any wish to go back to disposable pets.

 

[Basara]

so how is 100 GP to rez a horse "utterly crazy"?

10,000 may be a little steep for a beetle, but crafters and merchants are the ones tending to use them, and the ones more likely to afford it. Besides, a smith doesn't NEED his fire beetle rezzed, except to stable it. That's because you can SMELT ORE ON THE GHOST OF A FIRE BEETLE.

The amounts above that are to discourage PvP tamers with a limited stable from going completely without Vet.

How many people do YOU know that have 4 or 5 slot pets (or 3-slot pets that aren't mounts), that AREN'T Tamers?

 

[Guest]

Oh don't get me wrong, I love my bonded pets too. But I can easily protect my pets by taking special care if I know few people are around to res them. That would be when I'd take out a disposable pet instead. If my blue bugs get in over their head I tend to mount and leg it. My fisher has had 2 trained to kill deep sea serps, and still uses the bug with a kitsune friend to fish. She's training vet now, but has relied on others for years.

Would I pay to get a res? Sure. I'd happily pay 5k to keep those pets. Even with a second vet account, it's less hassle than turning on the laptop to get that second account. If they weren't worth that to me, I'd just buy another. But I don't take bonding for granted and expect ever more perks. That's the difference.

I do think it would be useful if we could stable dead pets then have the option of swapping out for a live beast. But that would only be viable for some folks if they got more stable space. 2 slots is crazy for any crafter IMO.

Wenchy

 

[imported_Ozymandies]

Rezzing a horse has to cost more than buying a new one.

I would suggest 1k or 2k per pet slot.

Miners and chars with mounts need this. Tamers with high end pets should have enough vet. Its pretty hard to keep a high end pet healed with just magery. Is the fear that tamers will drop vet and attempt this? Methinks they would have tried this already with vet on a separate char.

As for player interaction, this is not a big source of it. It just isn't.

OZ

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

Imo stablemasters should be able to rez any pet that a non-tamer can own and ride (horses, dogs, cats, blue beetles, fire beetles, and so on) for a small fee, much smaller than buying the same animal, if it is sold on the stablemaster.

The pets that require the taming skill or Bushido to own could continue to work as they do now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Additional points and change being made to this suggestion:

The tamer template does not appear to be intended as a crafter, it's a form of combat skill. The idea of making 'pet rez deeds' which can be sold on a vendor moves it a bit in that direction. Whether or not that's a desireable change is one of the things that the UO people would need to evaluate.

Whatever's done (if anything), it appears best for the existing pvp balance to not allow any means to rez a tamer-owned, PVP type pet without the actual veterinary skill being used. Allowing this would devalue having Veterinary on PVP templates even further, which could have undesired results.

I had initially suggested the Bushido birds should require veterinary skill to rez and not have it rez off of an NPC stablemaster, but on reconsideration, I don't think this setup is best after all. I have two characters that use Bushido off and on and am pretty familiar with Lesser use on them.

The Bushido template is an oddball in that it is never expected to carry veterinary and animal lore and is never expected to tame the pet itself, and yet, it does use a medium-level pet. It's more similar to the faction pet use than it is to normal pet ownership.

I'm now thinking that it may be ideal for players with 90+ Bushido skill to be able to rez Lesser Hiryus themselves if they have an available bandie and the owner of the Lesser Hiryu has 90+ Bushido skill. This covers the Bushido person being able to rez his own pet and potentially those of other Bushido masters, but not allow him to rez Lesser Hiryus that may belong to a tamer with no veterinary skill on the template. An implementation that caused Bushido people to only be able to res their own Lessers this way would also work fine.

A second alternative would be to allow Lessers to be rezzed by a stablemaster if the owner has 90+ Bushido. Tamers would not be able to rez their Lessers this way, only Bushido masters.

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

I suggested long ago that they should make the pet trainer in Brit the one and only NPC pet rez station.... then it would be both in Fel and in Tram....

[/ QUOTE ]

Keeping in perspective that the Fel one is within guard zone, this wouldn't work in Fel because you'd have problems with blues camping it with the intent to PK any reds who showed up. The fact that it's in guard zone makes it worse than even the Chaos shrine has the potential to be, as at Chaos, the reds' friends can move in to protect their own.

Blues could also harrass the reds by simply one-shotting the reds' fresh-rez pets to death. With the current flagging system, I don't think the blues who did this would even flag aggro to the red pet owner?

There is no one-station solution for Fel. At an absolute minimum there would need to be two, one that is not in guard zone to give the reds a chance of getting their pet rezzed, and another with guards to keep the reds off of the blues.

On the Fel side, I feel that having the pet ressurection possibilities be more distributed, like red healers are now, makes much more sense. Having all stablemasters be able to do it gives both blues and reds with a pet good chance of actually getting it done, even while being red within guard zone.

Related topic:

The days of penalizing reds for being red should be considered over and done with, if you ask me. This game now encourages PVP (and eventual redness) through the UO people's own design of "protection" of champ spawns. It's now possible to go red and stay that way without being a classical "PK".

As long as it's possible to take counts while defending a champ spawn, and at the same time, a blue cannot choose to set his area effect spells and fields to catch both reds and non-guilded blues, it doesn't make sense to punish reds. Having a mix of reds and blues is functionally forced in the current system (and most Fel players have a mix of both in their character lineup).

It's true that a lot of the red players do PK. But at the point where the game's design is requiring red players to do certain jobs, plus game-supported jobs turn them from blue to red without the need to be a classical, punishable "PK", the whole concept of punishing reds falls apart.

On a last note, a UO friend who is apparrently moving to WoW made this comment to me: "in UO you get red for being good at PVP, but in WoW you get cool titles". I don't suggest WoW as a framework for UO to work within, but, the things which resulted in this intended UO-derogatory remark being made are worth considering.

 

[UncleSham]

i am rather curious though, what exactly is a 5 slot mount ? did they put in a super cu when i wasnt looking ?

 

[Olahorand]

<blockquote><hr>



i am rather curious though, what exactly is a 5 slot mount ? did they put in a super cu when i wasnt looking ?

[/ QUOTE ]

look in the tamers forum and focus on the small word "dragon"

 

[BajaElladan]

I wish to reply to this poster about the "difficulty" of getting pets rezzed in Felucca.

I created a "healer" character. This character was designed solely and specifically to be a healer and rezzer of characters and their pets IN FELUCCA.

However, every time I have taken this character into Felucca it has been murdered by one character after another. After being rezzed, and murdered repeatedly...I simply gave up.

Minimal "rules" need to be formulated and AGREED to by Feluccan's if they truly hope to ever see folks return there. Until those rules are adopted and enforced by Felucca's population...complaints about lack of char's to rez pets falls upon deaf ears with me.

 

[Guest]

The first slot is fairly sensible, but then you go completely crazy with the numbers afterwards. Much lower numbers would still discourage templates without vet (especially since the pet would die more since you can't vet heal).

The cost for beetles and lesser hiroys is just way too much.

 

[imported_revenant2]

<blockquote><hr>

I wish to reply to this poster about the "difficulty" of getting pets rezzed in Felucca.

I created a "healer" character. This character was designed solely and specifically to be a healer and rezzer of characters and their pets IN FELUCCA.

However, every time I have taken this character into Felucca it has been murdered by one character after another. After being rezzed, and murdered repeatedly...I simply gave up.

[/ QUOTE ]

... You bet...

Fel isn't the kind of place where you can attempt to pass out favors to people like that. It's a war zone.

People don't necessarily want a rez from a stranger. People I don't trust occasionally try to rez me in Fel and I turn it down every time. I'd sooner rez later, alone, in relative safety, than be the butt end of someone's rez kill joke. I'd also not like to be the one who is standing around as a fresh-rez when the rezzer's buddies charge up...

If some blue I didn't know ran up to me while I was on a red and tried to rez me, and one of us had spirit speak, I'd be like "Do you think I'm stupid?" and keep going. And if my guildmates came upon us as you were asking, they would kill you first and then rez me second (they might gate you to chaos afterward, at least...).

A char like the one you describe would be alien in Fel and certainly get killed like any other char who opens himself up to attack. It's not about the citizens deciding anything together, it's the nature of the place.

 

[Guest]

I regularly rez pets for red players in fel, usually in Skara Brae or at a moongate. They usually contact me via icq if friends, or irc, where they simply ask 'can anyone rez my pet please?'

At one time a question like that on a shard board would have gotten a response in minutes too

 

[UncleSham]

ok . i went.
i looked.
i looked again .

no mention of any mountable dragon except swamp dragon and thats not 5 slots .

did i miss something?
(if you try to "mount" a super dragon your gonna be in for a rude suprise)

edit= ok i guess you could call a hiryu a dragon . even so thats 4 slots

 

[Basara]

The idea is to be inclusive, so if a 5-slot mount IS ever introduced, there would already be a cost assigned to them.

 

[Guest]

A res for us at the healer is free.

Repairing weapons/armor is almost free, deeds are cheap and easy to get.

Why should a pet be treated any differently?

 

[Basara]

Beetles, maybe.

Lesser Hiryus, probably not worth 10k, but shouldn't be that cheap (100 gold).

This is especially true in light of a bug (not sure if it's still going, or if it comes and goes), that allowed non-Samurais to get the birds.

The numbers I chose in my suggestion are negotiable, but were suggested as they were for simplicity to code more than anything else.

I wouldn't be opposed to making all 1-slot pets 100 gold, and making fire and giant beetles the same. Lesser hiryus could be 500 or 1000 gold.

But, most of the remaining pets are intended purely as combat animals for tamers, and should have the option available, but at a price that would encourage using their own skill. The amounts I listed were a bit high, and could be reduced some (maybe to 10% of their shown amounts), but it should still be much more expensive.

There is a form of PvP "tamer" I've heard about (never seen because I aviod Fel dueling grounds and spawns), that uses a template without Vet, relying on the huge pet's massive HP and the occasional close wounds or Greater heal to keep it alive - and logging to keep it from death via auto-stable, when they are dead. These types typically have at most 3 or 4 pets in their stable, so they aren't so worried about stable slots they lose from not having the skill (or at a low skill to occasionally get a bandage in, but not be able to rez). This broken template is what the numbers I suggested were meant to discourage.

Heck, you could even add a choice of "help me resurrect my pet" for tamers to the NPC, where it only cost about 1000 gold, and work 100% - but no chance for skill gain for the vet, and they'd have to have at least 50 or 60 vet to use the service.

 

[Lady-Tor]

I can solve this problem for you ALL

Get rid of bonding!

If they remove bonding and repair deeds, imagine the interaction people would have to do, it'd be FANTASTIC!

 

[Olahorand]

<blockquote><hr>

ok . i went.
i looked.
i looked again .

no mention of any mountable dragon except swamp dragon and thats not 5 slots .

did i miss something?
(if you try to "mount" a super dragon your gonna be in for a rude suprise)

edit= ok i guess you could call a hiryu a dragon . even so thats 4 slots

[/ QUOTE ]

well I mixed up the words mount and pet - may happen, since English is not my natural language.
Sorry for the confusion

 

[Fluffi]

<blockquote><hr>

Oh don't get me wrong, I love my bonded pets too. But I can easily protect my pets by taking special care if I know few people are around to res them. That would be when I'd take out a disposable pet instead. If my blue bugs get in over their head I tend to mount and leg it.

[/ QUOTE ]


With respect Wenchy, if I were to follow the "taking special care" suggestion, I wouldn't take the squirrel into Despise bottom until I had IM/ICQ'd you, Petra, Nico, and the other Europa tamers, just to confirm that one of you was available for a res.

I would be limited to hunting in lower-level areas, which is not fun. Killing Lizardmen with him is as exciting as killing them with Fluffi, or the with the legendary pally, or the tamer with the Cu, etc.



<blockquote><hr>

Would I pay to get a res? Sure. I'd happily pay 5k to keep those pets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? You don't have to pay to get your character ressed. You don't have to pay to get your sword repaired.
Why should non-tamer pets be treated differently?



<blockquote><hr>

Even with a second vet account, it's less hassle than turning on the laptop to get that second account.

[/ QUOTE ]

Second accounts which contain legendary tamers are of no use when the pet belongs to another character on the same account.



<blockquote><hr>

If they weren't worth that to me, I'd just buy another. But I don't take bonding for granted and expect ever more perks. That's the difference.


[/ QUOTE ]

Then buy another kryss when the one your fencer uses wears-out - it is after-all, insured, which is the weapon version of bonding. (applies to non-Siege only)



<blockquote><hr>

I do think it would be useful if we could stable dead pets then have the option of swapping out for a live beast. But that would only be viable for some folks if they got more stable space. 2 slots is crazy for any crafter IMO.

Wenchy

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be happy with a GUARANTEED safe stabling of a dead pet.



At the moment, I'm feeling rather bitter about many of the anti NPC-pet resser arguments; as I've yet to see one which follows the same guidelines as other existing game mechanics:


1) Make friends who will res your pet...
Fine, give me your phone number, and be prepared to rush to the aid of my squirrell at any hour of the day.
This ridiculous demand of mine is only necessary as pets are the only "item" ingame which cannot be ressed/repaired by an NPC or a secondary character on the same account.

2) Don't let the pet die...
Any player character who has ever over-stretched themself and died in combat has no right to use this argument.

3) Put vet/lore on the character...
When every weapon user puts smith/tailor/arms lore on their character to repair their weapon &amp; armour.

4) Stone the skills over temporarily...
Like "gimping" sampires? Many people consider that an abuse of soulstone mechanics, yet it's being advocated as a reasonable solution here.

5) Pay a sliding-scale fee for an NPC pet res...
When NPC healer charater ressurrection costs an equivalent sum. 1K for a journeyman, all the way up to 100K for a legendary character.

6) Wait-out a timer before a NPC pet res...
When the same timer applies to NPC healers.

7) It's not ingame at the moment, so there is no reason to introduce it...
Petball changes, crafting changes and the next PvP balance are not ingame yet either. No need to introduce them then.

8) It will lessen player interraction...
See point 1. When there are no tamers around, there can be no interraction.


What is it about pet ownership which brings out such antipathy in people?

 

[Guest]

Well to compare player resing to pet resing, think of it like having to walk to the healers or having the convenience that another player is there to help you. If someone helps me out in a dungeon I've often dropped the gold from my next kill for them as a thank you. So in both situations, yes, I'm happy to pay a bit of gold for the convenience of a res. I've spent much longer trying to find an aptly named wandering healer after death than I have with Molly's pets lol. They have to be free, their service is atrocious!

Don't get me wrong, I've sat and waited for a tamer too, I'm sure everyone has. Molly can barely vet, but hunts serpents out fishing with her bug. I know you can't prevent every pet death, but if you're out mining, you can mount a fire bug to save it. That's more what I mean about being careful. But a tiny gold sink to me, isn't too harsh.

I know the trend is to turn UO into a single player game, but I simply don't want that to happen. All I'd like is a tiny incentive to a player, so they try seeking out a tamer before going to the NPC vets. That is not a lot to ask

I really enjoy helping others with my tamer, often it's started friendships, so while you're welcome to disagree with me, that's just how I feel.

Wenchy

 

[imported_Tina Small]

RTLFC

I like the idea of being able to use the veterinarian in Britain (or perhaps one outside of town in Fel) to get a pet rez. I'd also like to suggest that one be placed in New Haven and have the added feature that it explains that characters with veterinary skill are also capable of rezzing dead pets.

I think the days are long past where it could be considered a good thing for the game to force folks to have to interact with others for something like rezzing a pet. I also don't think it's worth worrying that providing two or three NPCs per shard that can rez pets is going to lead to a huge increase in PvP tamers with no vet skill. Those characters already exist and mooch off their guildmates for pet rezzes and apparently are not overly concerned with the skill loss their pets suffer because of their owner's lack of vet skill.

I have tamer characters (sometimes two or three of them) with 80+ vet skill on eight or nine shards and I also have UO installed on more than one computer so I can be fairly self-sufficient in UO, if I choose. I'm also the type of person that will switch to one of my tamers to provide a pet rez if I happen to go to the bank and see someone who needs a pet rez. However, I've also been in the situation where I was playing on a new shard at what was a really early hour for the "locals" and had no choice but to wait days before I could find someone logged on and responsive that could rez one of my dead pets. I've also many times seen someone with a dead beetle or pack animal go to the Brit bank during prime time on one of the busier shards where that bank still draws a crowd and not one of the tamers sitting there on their fancy colored cu sidhes could be bothered to step forward and provide a rez.

Player interaction in UO can be a wonderful thing; it can also be something that some people prefer to avoid when they can (e.g., they spent the whole day on conference calls at work or had to deal with tough customers all day or perhaps just had another frustrating conversation with their teenage kids). However, I truly don't understand why a few people seem to think that this one small addition is going to be the last straw for UO and kill it completely. Providing a few NPCs that can rez pets is certainly not going to stop tamers from being able to rez pets, but it could make the game less frustrating for (1) folks who play UO at non-peak times or on sparsely populated shards, (2) people who simply don't feel comfortable having to approach another player to ask for a pet rez, and (3) people who are new to the game and don't yet know about pet rezzes by characters with vet skill.

 

[Fluffi]

*snips and rearranges to answer some interesting points*

<blockquote><hr>

Well to compare player resing to pet resing, think of it like having to walk to the healers ..... All I'd like is a tiny incentive to a player, so they try seeking out a tamer before going to the NPC vets. That is not a lot to ask

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have no problem with dead pets being non-recallable / non-gateable, as long as I knew where I could get a ressurrection.
Put a ressing NPC at the virtue shrines, and I will happily walk there from whichever dungeon the pet died in. If I pass through a town on the way to the nearest shrine, I'll stop-off and wait a while in case a tamer is around; but I want a fall-back position



<blockquote><hr>

Don't get me wrong, I've sat and waited for a tamer too, I'm sure everyone has.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my point entirely: YOU die, you find an NPC. If that fails, then 95% of mages and bandy healers will be able to res YOU. In most circumstances, you don't even need to leave a dungeon... showing yourself as a ghost and saying OOooOOoo will almost always get a res from the nearest person.
No tamers in the dungeon = pet is buggered.
No tamers in town = pet is even more buggered.



<blockquote><hr>

I know the trend is to turn UO into a single player game, but I simply don't want that to happen. I really enjoy helping others with my tamer, often it's started friendships, so while you're welcome to disagree with me, that's just how I feel.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong; I would rather be pet-ressed by a player. (If for no other reason that it gives Petra and Nico et al a chance to laugh at my stupidity, and therefore gives me a chance to have a dig at them in return. *Friendly banter FTW!!!!*

However, the point remains... my pets are my only "item" that cannot be healed/ressed/repaired by an NPC or another one of my characters, so, when Petra and Nico are happily tucked-up in bed but I'm still playing, I want to be able to heal my pet.

 

[Guest]

Why is it that almost everyone in this thread expects tamers to just be haning around cities waiting to res peoples pets? Aren't most tamers out playing the game and not banksitting drones? Perhaps if more folks would look to where the tamers "might actually be" instead of expecting them to be banksitting, more pets would get ressed and this would be a non issue.

 

[UncleSham]

well , i gave this some time . but still no word from bob ?
7 pages of discussion and no dev imput . come on guys give me a yes , no , maybe , wait till jer gets back ... something?

this is a change that many would like to see . some have showed resistance to it , but others have come up with middle ground ideas . can we get some official response please ?

if bob is incapable of making an informed comment i understand . it appears i chose a bad time to bring this up . when will jer be back ? just tell me and ill be quiet and bring this up again then.

--------

and flutter no i don't want to run thru every dungon and surface spawn trying to find help. there are so many possabilities , by the time i get there they could have farmed their weight in gold and been gone many times over.
(not to mention most crafters or the newbies i keep speaking of probably wouldnt survive the trip to most places my tamer plays , especially on foot with a dead pet in tow)