Difference between revisions of "Talk:Psychometry"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Comments) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Similarly to my comment on [[Two Arts]], is this really worthy of being classed as a [[:Category:Skills|skill]]? Were adventurers ever able to use it? This and the [[psychics]] article suggests ''someone'' was able to, but depending on ''who'', it might not need to be in the Skills category. ~[[User:Soludra|Soludra]] 20:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC) | Similarly to my comment on [[Two Arts]], is this really worthy of being classed as a [[:Category:Skills|skill]]? Were adventurers ever able to use it? This and the [[psychics]] article suggests ''someone'' was able to, but depending on ''who'', it might not need to be in the Skills category. ~[[User:Soludra|Soludra]] 20:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:At the moment, "Skills" is defined as "sets of like abilities." We'll have to agree on redefining our skills category as "adventurer-only" before moving the other three articles as you've suggested. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 01:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
::At the moment, the category says: ''Skills are sets of like abilities. Some skills, like Avoidance and Weaponry, are available to all adventurers, while others are unique to one's choice of class.'' It seems to imply adventurer-available skills, giving little provision to others. Would you agree with making the definition of Category:Skills more clear-cut, somehow? ~[[User:Soludra|Soludra]] 01:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::For now, I don't see why we need to split the category and differentiate between adventurer or not. Skills are skills. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 01:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::Like Bladefire, Eternal Capital Style, and the Sentaari Staff Styles, they're still skills and mentioned so having articles on them for historical value would be good. If we can ever get them done.--[[User:Corvax|Corvax]] 06:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:04, 28 January 2009
Similarly to my comment on Two Arts, is this really worthy of being classed as a skill? Were adventurers ever able to use it? This and the psychics article suggests someone was able to, but depending on who, it might not need to be in the Skills category. ~Soludra 20:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment, "Skills" is defined as "sets of like abilities." We'll have to agree on redefining our skills category as "adventurer-only" before moving the other three articles as you've suggested. Asara 01:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment, the category says: Skills are sets of like abilities. Some skills, like Avoidance and Weaponry, are available to all adventurers, while others are unique to one's choice of class. It seems to imply adventurer-available skills, giving little provision to others. Would you agree with making the definition of Category:Skills more clear-cut, somehow? ~Soludra 01:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- For now, I don't see why we need to split the category and differentiate between adventurer or not. Skills are skills. Asara 01:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Like Bladefire, Eternal Capital Style, and the Sentaari Staff Styles, they're still skills and mentioned so having articles on them for historical value would be good. If we can ever get them done.--Corvax 06:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- For now, I don't see why we need to split the category and differentiate between adventurer or not. Skills are skills. Asara 01:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment, the category says: Skills are sets of like abilities. Some skills, like Avoidance and Weaponry, are available to all adventurers, while others are unique to one's choice of class. It seems to imply adventurer-available skills, giving little provision to others. Would you agree with making the definition of Category:Skills more clear-cut, somehow? ~Soludra 01:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)