Talk:Order of Voln - Revision history

GEHAYI: /* Visions */

2018-04-03T21:35:54Z

Visions

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:35, 3 April 2018
Line 22:		Line 22:
	==Visions==		==Visions==

	Where do you get the visions in the Ta'Vaalor monastery? Visions are mentioned for the Landing and River's Rest monasteries, but not that one.		Where do you get the visions in the Ta'Vaalor monastery? Visions are mentioned for the Landing and River's Rest monasteries, but not that one. [[User:GEHAYI\|GEHAYI]] ([[User talk:GEHAYI\|talk]]) 16:35, 3 April 2018 (CDT)

GEHAYI: Questions about Voln visions

2018-04-03T21:35:29Z

Questions about Voln visions

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:35, 3 April 2018
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Excellent! I'm glad to hear that it's been checked. If memory serves, one receives 1/3rd normal favor from simply watching an undead die... But that could be way wrong, especially since I'm recalling that from 8 years ago, when the game was so different. It'd be easy to test for someone in Voln, though, knowing that the other values are correct! I'll also edit the little sentence on the linearity of favor gain. Thank you for the quick reply. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 19:36, 28 November 2006 (EST)		Excellent! I'm glad to hear that it's been checked. If memory serves, one receives 1/3rd normal favor from simply watching an undead die... But that could be way wrong, especially since I'm recalling that from 8 years ago, when the game was so different. It'd be easy to test for someone in Voln, though, knowing that the other values are correct! I'll also edit the little sentence on the linearity of favor gain. Thank you for the quick reply. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 19:36, 28 November 2006 (EST)

			==Visions==

			Where do you get the visions in the Ta'Vaalor monastery? Visions are mentioned for the Landing and River's Rest monasteries, but not that one.

GS4-KEIOS: 5 revisions: Krakiipedia Import

2015-01-01T01:32:27Z

5 revisions: Krakiipedia Import

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:32, 31 December 2014
(No difference)

Maintenance script at 00:36, 29 November 2006

2006-11-29T00:36:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:36, 28 November 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:
	I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)		I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)
	:I removed it because I saw Porcell verify that this was indeed the case. Also, it is the case that a wind wraith gives say 60 units of favor (or whatever level they are). So the note was just removed because your information is indeed correct ;). However, I'm not sure how much favor you gain just from watching something get pwnt. Also, even though that note is huge and f2cking red on the 925 page, I hate it. But that's just me. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 17:59, 28 November 2006 (EST)		:I removed it because I saw Porcell verify that this was indeed the case. Also, it is the case that a wind wraith gives say 60 units of favor (or whatever level they are). So the note was just removed because your information is indeed correct ;). However, I'm not sure how much favor you gain just from watching something get pwnt. Also, even though that note is huge and f2cking red on the 925 page, I hate it. But that's just me. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 17:59, 28 November 2006 (EST)


			Excellent! I'm glad to hear that it's been checked. If memory serves, one receives 1/3rd normal favor from simply watching an undead die... But that could be way wrong, especially since I'm recalling that from 8 years ago, when the game was so different. It'd be easy to test for someone in Voln, though, knowing that the other values are correct! I'll also edit the little sentence on the linearity of favor gain. Thank you for the quick reply. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 19:36, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Maintenance script at 22:59, 28 November 2006

2006-11-28T22:59:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:59, 28 November 2006
Line 15:		Line 15:
	NOTE: The following notes on favor are based on research performed in Gemstone III, not Gemstone IV. Facts about favor usage and costs should be re-verified.		NOTE: The following notes on favor are based on research performed in Gemstone III, not Gemstone IV. Facts about favor usage and costs should be re-verified.
	I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)		I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)
			:I removed it because I saw Porcell verify that this was indeed the case. Also, it is the case that a wind wraith gives say 60 units of favor (or whatever level they are). So the note was just removed because your information is indeed correct ;). However, I'm not sure how much favor you gain just from watching something get pwnt. Also, even though that note is huge and f2cking red on the 925 page, I hate it. But that's just me. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 17:59, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Maintenance script: Question about why a note on verification was removed from this article.

2006-11-28T22:17:22Z

Question about why a note on verification was removed from this article.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:17, 28 November 2006
Line 11:		Line 11:
	: Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked.		: Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked.
	: [[User:Anshou\|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou\|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST)		: [[User:Anshou\|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou\|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST)

			Why was the verification note removed from this page? It's very important that this information is out of date. I and Sigurd haven't done research for like eight years... The note was:
			NOTE: The following notes on favor are based on research performed in Gemstone III, not Gemstone IV. Facts about favor usage and costs should be re-verified.
			I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Maintenance script at 20:58, 28 November 2006

2006-11-28T20:58:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 28 November 2006
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Totally my bad. I'm very used to working on a mathematics page where every single time a term is referenced, it must be linked for clarity to at least a definition page, and at best a disambiguation page. It's super important for mathematics, I suppose, where every character can have a number of meanings. I'll clean up the links on this page and some of my other ones with this rule in mind later tonight. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 15:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)		Totally my bad. I'm very used to working on a mathematics page where every single time a term is referenced, it must be linked for clarity to at least a definition page, and at best a disambiguation page. It's super important for mathematics, I suppose, where every character can have a number of meanings. I'll clean up the links on this page and some of my other ones with this rule in mind later tonight. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 15:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)

			: Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked.
			: [[User:Anshou\|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou\|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Maintenance script at 20:17, 28 November 2006

2006-11-28T20:17:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 28 November 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:

	Where both favor and globe are linked excessively. On the [[Help:Style#Linking\|style]] page it says you only need to link them the first time you use them. If it's a long page, and hasn't been linked in awhile you can link it again, but don't need to. On the other hand, I don't tend to link things nearly enough, so who knows. Rafi knows, but he doesn't contribute often enough. Also, I removed all the links to the [[levels of favor]] page because I think that that doesn't need its own page and directing to a [[favor]] page is fine. That's just my opinion though. Otherwise, good start on a very important page, and I learned some things checking it over, which is fun. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 12:46, 28 November 2006 (EST)		Where both favor and globe are linked excessively. On the [[Help:Style#Linking\|style]] page it says you only need to link them the first time you use them. If it's a long page, and hasn't been linked in awhile you can link it again, but don't need to. On the other hand, I don't tend to link things nearly enough, so who knows. Rafi knows, but he doesn't contribute often enough. Also, I removed all the links to the [[levels of favor]] page because I think that that doesn't need its own page and directing to a [[favor]] page is fine. That's just my opinion though. Otherwise, good start on a very important page, and I learned some things checking it over, which is fun. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 12:46, 28 November 2006 (EST)


			Totally my bad. I'm very used to working on a mathematics page where every single time a term is referenced, it must be linked for clarity to at least a definition page, and at best a disambiguation page. It's super important for mathematics, I suppose, where every character can have a number of meanings. I'll clean up the links on this page and some of my other ones with this rule in mind later tonight. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 15:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Maintenance script at 17:46, 28 November 2006

2006-11-28T17:46:10Z

New page

So one thing I've noticed about this page, you linked the living hell out of things. So you have a passage that's like this:

* Access to a [[favor]]-measuring [[globe]]
* The ability to trade a [[deed]] for [[favor]] via the [[globe]]

Where both favor and globe are linked excessively. On the [[Help:Style#Linking|style]] page it says you only need to link them the first time you use them. If it's a long page, and hasn't been linked in awhile you can link it again, but don't need to. On the other hand, I don't tend to link things nearly enough, so who knows. Rafi knows, but he doesn't contribute often enough. Also, I removed all the links to the [[levels of favor]] page because I think that that doesn't need its own page and directing to a [[favor]] page is fine. That's just my opinion though. Otherwise, good start on a very important page, and I learned some things checking it over, which is fun. [[User:ALKALOIDS|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS|talk]]</sup> 12:46, 28 November 2006 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:36, 28 November 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:
	I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)		I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)
	:I removed it because I saw Porcell verify that this was indeed the case. Also, it is the case that a wind wraith gives say 60 units of favor (or whatever level they are). So the note was just removed because your information is indeed correct ;). However, I'm not sure how much favor you gain just from watching something get pwnt. Also, even though that note is huge and f2cking red on the 925 page, I hate it. But that's just me. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 17:59, 28 November 2006 (EST)		:I removed it because I saw Porcell verify that this was indeed the case. Also, it is the case that a wind wraith gives say 60 units of favor (or whatever level they are). So the note was just removed because your information is indeed correct ;). However, I'm not sure how much favor you gain just from watching something get pwnt. Also, even though that note is huge and f2cking red on the 925 page, I hate it. But that's just me. [[User:ALKALOIDS\|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS\|talk]]</sup> 17:59, 28 November 2006 (EST)


			Excellent! I'm glad to hear that it's been checked. If memory serves, one receives 1/3rd normal favor from simply watching an undead die... But that could be way wrong, especially since I'm recalling that from 8 years ago, when the game was so different. It'd be easy to test for someone in Voln, though, knowing that the other values are correct! I'll also edit the little sentence on the linearity of favor gain. Thank you for the quick reply. [[User:THIKKET\|THIKKET]] 19:36, 28 November 2006 (EST)