|
The grave situation makes absolutely
18.Jan.22, 06:45;
56;
0;
+0 |
0 |
-0
Amik would have a peerage if he is the ruler of the king's horse. That would also make Burthorpe into a principality. (I think the principality is huge and that it is just the capital).
As for the Kinshra: they were expelled from Falador and also on mountains (I'm thinking that the mountains separate Asgarnia and Misthalin from Wilderness... It seems odd to have one mountain by itself), so I'm guessing that Daquarius is the chief and marquess of the Kinshra.
This is logical since he holds the title of lord. Also what is the reason Sir Amik merely a knight compared to Daquarius and a Lord? What do you think? Would a knight really be allowed to lead a kingdom? Sorry for some unrelated parts. I simply copied and pasted it straight from a RSOF posting.
The grave situation makes absolutely no sense to me. for those who don't know, it's the arguement that gravestones won't be blessed as thieves will take your treasure. In ignoring the fact that prior to 07, it was precisely that but you didn't have the grace period of 6 minutes to pick up your possessions, I fail to see what's wrong with this.
One arguement that's come up is that the emergence of new bosses requires graves, does it? Does that really hold? Tormented Demons, an updated boss, came out in 2008. According to what I can tell, even if my partner and me bless each other (he is a blessing to me, however the latter has not yet passed away) I can always make the trip back within 3 minutes. The whole argument about gravestone blessing is meaningless. It's not really a matter of whether your grave is blessed. You can still return.
If you want to know more information about OSRS Gold , please lock on RSorder.com
|
Classifieds
Gallery
