Talk:Tower of Strength

Required to keep Mage alive?
My party completed the quest and left the area while some of the hostiles were still alive (we backtracked). A few minutes later, everyone mysteriously died. I theorize that as the Mage wandered aimlessly inside the tower, one patrol group came too near, aggroed, and killed the Mage, which kicked us out. Can somebody confirm that and update the article with a warning? It's hard for me to find groups that want to do this quest at all. -PanSola 06:48, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
 * PanSola, yeah I believe the Mage does indeed have to survive or the party gets removed, but like you, rare to find teams willing to go this far into FoW (most want the Forgemaster and then melt away), so not been able to test to be 100% sure. If you get a chance to test this before I do, could you also grab the quest Reward Dialogue. --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 20:21, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Is this necessary?
"...the Tower Mage (not named Eternal Sigil Mage as mentioned by Lord Taeres)...", is this line actually necessary here or can we remove it? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by GoddessWills (contribs).
 * Yes, would say is worth including, since Eternal Lord Taeres talks about "I will send Eternal Sigil Mages to force open the tower gates" in the initial quest dialogue, but when the player(s) comes to escort him, the NPC is simply called "Tower Mage", so worthwhile mentioning, in case newcomers to this quest (who are the most likely to be reading this article) don't make the link between "Eternal Sigil Mages" = a "Tower Mage" and so waste their time trying to find a NPC called "Eternal Sigil Mage". --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 20:21, 20 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Maybe it could just be rewritten then, because I completely misunderstood what was written there. Of course that wouldn't have happened if I read the whole page and realized that Lord Taeres was part of the quest and not some random poster here who once wrote something that turned out to be untrue.  Yes, I know, I'm insane.  It had been a very long night. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by GoddessWills (contribs) 22:24, July 23, 2007.
 * That's what happens when you "cherry pick" information from an article. :) Anyway, editted to hopefully make it clearer to "casual" readers. PS: Please sign your comments, by ending your comments with "--~" (there is also a button for it above the edit box), thx. --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 20:22, 23 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Thanks for that, it makes way more sense to my poor little brain now. As for the signing thing, I hadn't noticed that it was doing it, but is there a reason why typing "~" without the "--" part should result in a lack of signature?  I've never had that issue before... ...because the Goddess wills it so. 22:18, 23 July 2007 (CDT)