laxman | Wed 02-Jun-10 04:52 PM |
Member since 18th Aug 2003
1867 posts
| |
|
#32907, "RE: disagree"
|
If your criteria is doing something as a pledge then obviously guy two would not make the cut since he didn't do anything and if thats your number one criteria make it your first question and if he fails shuffle him off to accomplish that then talk to the next.
When you add things like this it supports the idea of forcing a char to be a pledge at least 10 hours before talking to them. (kind of like the gayness that is forcing a village app to rank to 25 before interviewing them that is prevelant now that they get truesight as apps at that rank)
|
|
|
Idea for the Members Command
[View all] , Ageryn, Wed 02-Jun-10 02:33 PM
You take this s**t way too seriously. ~,
_Magus_,
03-Jun-10 09:01 AM, #11
RE: Idea for the Members Command,
Zulghinlour,
02-Jun-10 08:00 PM, #8
RE: Idea for the Members Command,
Ageryn,
02-Jun-10 06:02 PM, #6
RE: Idea for the Members Command,
Zulghinlour,
02-Jun-10 08:01 PM, #9
RE: Idea for the Members Command,
Ageryn,
02-Jun-10 10:00 PM, #10
How is not defending as a pledge bad behavior?,
Splntrd,
03-Jun-10 09:37 AM, #12
Depends on the cabal,
Valkenar,
04-Jun-10 11:47 AM, #13
I agree.,
sorlag (Anonymous),
04-Jun-10 11:55 AM, #14
But there are already downsides to not showing.,
Splntrd,
04-Jun-10 02:46 PM, #15
What I'd rather see.,
sorlag (Anonymous),
02-Jun-10 04:58 PM, #4
disagree,
laxman,
02-Jun-10 02:46 PM, #1
RE: disagree,
Ageryn,
02-Jun-10 02:54 PM, #2
RE: disagree,
laxman,
02-Jun-10 04:52 PM #3
RE: disagree,
Ageryn,
02-Jun-10 06:00 PM, #5
OH NOES!,
sleepy,
02-Jun-10 06:34 PM, #7
| |
|