Forgotten Tales

Arashiko wrote:That would have impaired the game experience for everyone! I want more fun, not less

So you were suggesting that pets perked a certain range away would be immune to monster attacks as well as noncombatants? Hmmm... Not sure if it would be fair from a pvp standpoint, as backpacks from pets would still give an advantage, but it would quite literally stop all pet killing reports.

Not a bad idea, not sure how it'd be an unfair pvp advantage though considering the only pets that really need to be parked for safety are the gold shop pets which everyone has access to.

Another idea is parked pets don't move. I told you to wait for a freakin reason dangit quit running away to go fight and let them come to you!

Cashew wrote:Not a bad idea, not sure how it'd be an unfair pvp advantage though considering the only pets that really need to be parked for safety are the gold shop pets which everyone has access to.

Another idea is parked pets don't move. I told you to wait for a freakin reason dangit quit running away to go fight and let them come to you!

Ah, but this is how pets were when first released.
Of course, players would park them places intentionally (well, unintentionally too), to annoy others.
Don't forget, how pets seem to pile up at gates and such, like at Silverwood's.
The whip icon was a huge help here.

Anyway, I would suggest what I originally suggested when pets were suggested: don't have them at all in the game.
*hides behind a wall to avoid incoming thrown objects*

Ok, joking aside, I've never liked pets, and I've never really supported their existence. To me, they've been nothing but a headache, as a player and as a GM. Yes, I have one on my swordsman, but only for show really; I did say, when Crazed Lions came out, that I would like one as a pet. Now I have one.

Well, I really can't say what idea is best. I don't really use pets. But, perhaps, some popular dungeons/spawning areas could have safe zones, or "daycares" where you drop off your pets, they're still effective as backpacks, but are completely safe from monsters. Perhaps, adding a babysitter npc, who could even charge a gold fee for watching them. If these are done, your pets could be "removed" from the map so they're not vulnerable (but still effective in grinding ways, not PvP; meaning, you can store stuff in your pack, but, removal of pots etc. is not available). Or even, adding guards with limited patrol routes to the area to protect the pets.

Best ideas I got. Personally, I still think the best solution is get rid of pets altogether (*again, ducking*), but I would very much like to see an end (or at least, a severe decrease) in the amount of crying over lost pets.

EDIT: my point is, pet killing for PvP purposes should be allowed; decreasing your opponents backpack capacity in PvP is actually a good tactic IMO; but, if you're just trying to grind, sure, why not have some protection?

I hate to say this, but I actually agree with you 100% Mad. I believe pets should be removed from the game altogether.

I would agree about removing them but it'd be more of an unfair nerf than fishing. (High level players getting items stockpiled before nerf that removed the only chance to get them easily and in duplicates, some at all)

Not unless you wiped everyone's level back to 0 and started all over. Sounds extreme, but xp gains with pets is VASTLY superior than without them and it would not be fair whatsoever to let the players that were able to use pets get to high levels and then all of a sudden take them out.

I'd agree to remove if there was a complete wipe of all levels for everyone. Plus refunds of course ;p

No I'm not against removing them, I just don't want it to be a repeat of fishing except on a more drastic scale. If you're gonna do it, do it right and FAIR.


Side note, it'd be a good time to instate a level cap as well

Cashew, I completely agree; removing pets at this point really isn't an option.
I just had to throw that in there, mostly for joking purposes.

I do think though, my ideas of a safezone or pet babysitter could be used in certain grinding areas. I specifically think of the blood mummies.

I do agree that pets have been nothing but a headache for everyone involved. I've even been called a pet killer simply by walking through an area and I spawned a couple of monsters. Of course I always stop to help kill these monsters but players are most of the time EXTREMELY HYPER SENSATIVE REGARDING THEIR PETS and are quick to accuse someone of trying to kill their pets. Also, many players accuse others of pet killing when it is actually spawn killing if a player intentionally tries to kill someone's pets while their pets are with them. This is just one of many issues that are caused simply by having pets in the game. Believe me, I could go on and on about why pets are bad for the game but I won't because this would become a long post indeed.

Ryaca wrote:I do agree that pets have been nothing but a headache for everyone involved. I've even been called a pet killer simply by walking through an area and I spawned a couple of monsters. Of course I always stop to help kill these monsters but players are most of the time EXTREMELY HYPER SENSATIVE REGARDING THEIR PETS and are quick to accuse someone of trying to kill their pets. Also, many players accuse others of pet killing when it is actually spawn killing if a player intentionally tries to kill someone's pets while their pets are with them. This is just one of many issues that are caused simply by having pets in the game. Believe me, I could go on and on about why pets are bad for the game but I won't because this would become a long post indeed.

i totally agree, happens to visit a new place without knowing the spawn points and cause a delirium of monsters, many players complain too much as they are the owners of the place;
when spawning is not intentional, a player cannot be called 'pet killer' .
Pets are not a bad idea, they often help lvl up, but as any pet, strong or weak , should be cared by the owner

at the beginning when happened such situation i offered something (a fancy item or similar ) in change, but after being treated in a rude way by some 'place occupiers' , i pay attention to what i do,
i help killing spawn, but that's all.

As a relatively new player I like the idea of pets. However I DON'T like how op they are compared to the actual player when it comes to leveling.

As bad as it sounds, if you don't plan on or actually can't buy pets... it's barely worth playing. Yeah you can technically play the game just fine, but realistically if you can't get pets you might as well just quit. That's my only dislike of pets really is that they give the primary xp gains, not just supplimental. Too late to change it now though lol



That all being said, a typical console game costs around $60. That's 10 sets of pets plus backpack, plus I think it gives you a spare set of pets in case one dies I'm just rough estimating btw I can't remember how much backpack is.

10 sets of pets, if you take care of themk should actually last you the entire game. As long as you take care of the pets (which you're supposed to) it can only take 4 sets to level 1500. (5 for mage, or also 4 depends on the player)

Warlock, stan, fairy, then halfling (mage should get worm, only time that pet is worth it imo). Some like to keep fairy and never use halfling and Ssme people like to use cyclop instead of stan, but I've never used em. Yes there's other good pets but for the most xp and least amount of "upgrades" that path is the best imo.

Point is yes pets are really unfair in the sense of how much they actually contribute, but on the other hand they're really not that expensive compared to blowing $60 on a game you can beat in a day.