Comically enough, I think that the installer put that file in my battlefield vietnam directory. =P Either that or BFV just happens to use the same dll... either way, I copied it and it seems to be working
-Eric

Kendaro, I realise that one person casting a spell on a whole group is common, and even beneficial. What I was criticizing, however, was having multiple casters cast the same thing for a heightened effect. I admit that the multiple strike idea for fighters would be a good way to balance this, but I still fail to see how such a system could work. All the charecters would have to hit the same attack, at the same time, and the server would have to see the players doing that, and calculate accordingly. I just don\'t think it would be that easy to pull off. Also, what about non-casters and non-fighters? What could some of the other types of charecters get? Rogues doing a combined sneak attack doesn\'t seem logical. Archers doing simultaneous shots might work though. And what about non-combat type charecters? Would several smiths be able to combine efforts and create better armor than one person alone? Now that I think about it, this could lead to guilds forming out of common profession, rather than just for power. All this sounds cool, but some method needs to be put in to synchronize the abillities/effects.

I\'m definately going with the smith idea. Although I agree that most of those sound very appealing(with the exception of the spoiler one.) If people have the opportunity to do which ever one of those they like, then I think that this game will be increadible.

Vengeance, the balance is hard to find, but it exists. In gambling, the odds are stacked against you, yet people still flood casinos for the chance of winning. Stealing should be the same way. Make it so you could get a lot, but if you keep it up you\'re guarenteed to loose in the long run. I agree with Fiere, that the majority of stealing should be geared towards dungeon raids, and npc stealing, but i think it should be possible for a thief to try their luck on a pc. Maybe get something, more likely loose something. It\'s a risk, but if the odds aren\'t too grossly disproportional, there will still be a number of people willing to try.

I agree that it\'s a good idea Klept_o, but if theres prizes for the victors, that creates an imbalance for non-fighting classes. Than, if there were no prizes, what would be the point?

Another question: How would crafting competitions work? When you craft something a random quality value will be assigned, that has a higher chance based on higher skill levels? That doesn\'t sound that interesting. That type of competition would be best if people could custom design weapons, clothing, food, etc... But it\'s already been established that that level of customization won\'t be in the game. It\'s simply too difficult, and a competition based almost entirely on luck isn\'t very fun. You might as well goto a cassino.

Even with the pvp lending, someone could take a loan out on a fake charecter. The only time you\'d lend someone money, would be if you knew and trusted them already, in which case, why have a lending system? There really is no way to avoid exploitation. It\'s a great idea, and would be very nice to see in game, but only if they could figure out how to cut out the exploits.

Guild symbols would be very nice. Maybe, instead of custom designing clothing, you could just custom color it. Like in UO, where you could wear several layers of cloths on top of your armor, and color it in a unique way to set your guild appart. This way, people wouldn\'t have to load custom 3d renderings, or textures, they\'d just have to apply a color to a pre-existing model.

Yes, you\'re right Link. If people have to buy items, and then re-sell them, it simply won\'t make sense. These shops are only valuable for people that gather the materials, by mining, lumber jacking, or whatever, and then make the items themself, for no cost, just time. People that can craft high quality items will be in demand, and thus, those shops will get good business.