PSA: ATTN - If you are bound in raid zones, read this

[Nirgon]

And for the record I took my own earlier advice

[Num1RecommendedByDentists]

oh my good fucking christ

i just skimmed through this thread, heartbrand has 50% of this thread's 140 posts and the average word count is 300+

telling me to step away from the keyboard the other day and then pulling this shit

you're a hoot heartbrand

oh man

hahahahahahahahahahah

[Num1RecommendedByDentists]

Originally Posted by Num1RecommendedByDentists [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

oh my good fucking christ

i just skimmed through this thread, heartbrand has 50% of this thread's 140 posts and the average word count is 300+

telling me to step away from the keyboard the other day and then pulling this shit

you're a hoot heartbrand

oh man

hahahahahahahahahahah

[p-niner]

Eho Who cares about fear

Damn your retarded

[heartbrand]

Originally Posted by p-niner [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Eho Who cares about fear

Damn your retarded

Because if this is an exploit it was used for an unfair advantage to avoid having to break into fear and to wipe other guilds in fear by binding on top of the north wall. But since those players who did this didn't have nihilum tags I guess it was ok amirite? Your logic isn't consistent.

[p-niner]

So your saying fear is an unbindable raid zone?

[Nirgon]

No more invis pulling in perma with gate and shit, stfu

[heartbrand]

Originally Posted by Nirgon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No more invis pulling in perma with gate and shit, stfu

Yet you had no problem "exploiting" this with our fear bound clerics big nirdawg. Gotta love the hypocrisy of the boards

[heartbrand]

Correct. I've never stated despite your poor reading comp that these aren't unbindable raid zones. Just that the intention and ruling by amelinda at the time was that those with the bind point need not change it. If Sirken has decided to now amend that rule that's fine, though I think we should reexamine the need for the rule to begin with and contemplate either removing it altogether or expanding it for the reasons I've written prior. However, calling it retroactively an exploit doesn't logically make sense to me, it's simply an argument of semantics with no real in game implications.

[Something'Witty]

Not that anyone cares what I think, but...

Define what constitutes a "raid zone" and expand current Sol B and Permafrost rules to those zones, or get rid of the restrictions. Arguments can be made for both options, but anything in between will just result in confusion and more of these kind of threads...

Now back to forumquest!