|
|
qom_riyadh
Guest
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2007, 08:15:53 am » |
|
Yes, very interesting. Well-written. Especially liked the Ultima timeline.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
qom_riyadh
Guest
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2007, 07:32:36 pm » |
|
Yeh most people should age their character with the time line, but most people prefer to stay 19 for ten years. I think it's more fun to develop my character by the chart, because it just makes it more realistic. I mean.... Who see's a 19 year old holding a high NCO rank in life? No one that's who!
Yup, and that's a great point. But on the other hand, if going this way, chars should probably die after they got old...
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
qom_riyadh
Guest
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2007, 12:07:19 pm » |
|
Hmm, overall you're right... Except I would ignore year 289 as it is said to be incorrect. If someone will know the exact Britannian date of UO release... Would help alot. EDIT: The dates between the years -150 and 0 have been adjusted by +200 years. In the Ultima timeline Ultima II and Ultima III take place in these years. This doesn't happen in UO as UO's own timeline begins right after the destruction of the Gem of Immortality in Ultima I.
But saying the exact britannian date for today is IMO impossible without knowing the date of UO release, becuase using only year 314 you're forced to say that 01.01.314 = 30.10.1997. Except you will count dates only for UO - so 30.10.1997 = 01.01.01. Then it's easy. Although I'm at work atm so I don't have time to do the calendar maths
|
|
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 12:26:34 pm by Qom Riyadh »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|