Oblivion talk:Houses/Archive 2

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search
Semi Protection
This is an archive of past Oblivion_talk:Houses discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Fighters Guild HQ

Can anyone check the Fighters Guild Tower top floor in Chorrol? The first time I checked the middle chest randomized and when I tried it again and it did not but then the one the right did. — Unsigned comment by Gadianzero (talkcontribs) on 4 January 2009

Every container in the main zone of the Chorrol Fighters Guild respawns, with the sole exception of the Guildmaster's Chest (items and gold are added to the chest, but it is a non-respawning container and as far as I can tell none of the scripts empty the chest -- although personally I'd be pretty wary about trusting anything to a chest whose contents are altered by a script). As for the tower, the majority of those containers are also respawning. The exceptions are the four sacks and two of the three chests. The two chests that are initially locked are non-respawning. And just to be thorough while I'm at it... in the basement only the three sacks are non-respawning. --NepheleTalk 01:01, 10 January 2009 (EST)
I've had funny results with the Fighters Guild HQ altogether. I tested every container for the three day spawn cycle in the main zone and nothing respawned. I left for the SI and when I came back everything was ranomized, I was probably gone a week. As for the Tower, the top floor left and right chests so far appear safe as well as all of the bags and sacks in the bottom floor. I'll test to see if anything can be held in the Guildmaster's Chest. (Gadianzero 02:48, 10 January 2009 (EST))


Cropsford

Theres a quest when you have to help two local fammilies get rid of some goblins so they can build there homes when they have finished theres two homes the bigger of the two has a reward chest that respawns with gold every week i think not shure as i last went there a while ago anyway you could kill 1 of the two families both or keep them alive and pretend to work for them up to you you can sleep in both houses not shure about storage if anyone can double check i think i could of found a couple of safe storage but not shure to furnish it with your own plates ETC you can steal all theres sell it to theves guild or dump it up to you and get some other stuff in there both have full furnishings and are realy cosy i would check it out these are only there after the quest is finnished if you ill any pf them to early you could end up with nothing and the reward chest is by the bed in the bigger house you can keep callia bincal your wife. .==NathanTHipgrave 12:13, 4 February 2009 (EST)

I doubt there would be safe storage, as everything will be under ownership of the house's respective family. You could place a few useless iron daggers, arrows. etc. in a container, go outside, wait 73 hours for the cell to respawn, and check then. It all gets down to if anything remains. I wouldn't call it a "free house", just a place to bunk down if you're in the area. --Oblivion nerd 21:47, 3 March 2009 (EST)

house prices

on the houses page its got the base value and expexts every single person who plays oblivion to have a high mercantile skill why not just lower it to the acctual upgrade price instead of those it just stupid how every person is supposed to have a high mercantile--NathanTHipgrave 14:46, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

No, it's not stupid. The base price is the only one that makes sense, since the price changes according to mercantile, haggling, disposition etc etc. It's far more useful to be able to see how much extra money you're spending because your skills are low and to be able to decide whether or not to put off the purchase until they're improved. –RpehTCE 14:48, 10 March 2009 (EDT)
Agreed. Base price is the only real way to list the price. As Rpeh said, it varies by many different factors. --Oblivion nerd 20:22, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Remove/unbuy upgrades?

Hi. I'd like to remove the furniture of houses. I downloaded the mod with Renzals Mannequins and would like to place these in my house, but when there is furniture everywhere, there are no good places to place them. How can this be achieved..?

In the best case scenario, I'd like to empty the basement in Benirus Manor (Anwil) and use it as my trophy room, but in that case, you of course don't buy the furniture. I tried using the CS to remove everything, but since it was part of the original Oblivion.esm, I couldn't save those changes...

The house I use otherwise is in Cheydinhal where I'd like to empty the bottom floor.

Thanks!

DimhoLt 15:35, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Since you're on the PC, probably the most straightforward way (and one that would work even in Benirus Manor), is to use the Console and disable any furniture you don't want to use. With the console up, simply click on an item you don't want (its name should appear at the top of the screen), then type disable. Just be sure to remove anything you have stored in any containers before you disable them ;) --NepheleTalk 15:49, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
Awesome! That did the trick! Thanks!
DimhoLt 17:43, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Rather unimportant, but perhaps worth noting.

The article says how nobody will go into your house or steal anything. Therefore I was pleasantly surprised when an Anvil beggar (the old imperial male one) entered it just after I cast a Frenzy up to level 25, 5 seconds on him. At first he didn't do anything (I was in sneak mode, chameleon) but when I cast it again out of sneak mode he ran off, entering Benirus manor (which I had already bought and de-cursed). Like I said, pretty useless but perhaps worth noting that the AI might let an NPC flee into your house. - Korunox - May 15th, 2009.

I was in Rosethorn hall when it happened to me...... Warning! Roleplaying Story!

I was pleasantly sleeping in my comfy double bed when I heard a crash. Some clumsy thief had knocked the painting i was working on to the floor. He ran up and muttered something about the chapel. He spoke jibberish so i struck him dead with my dragonsword. I fell back to my rest. Minutes later, my receptionist Eyja woke me up, saying the guard captain Dion was here. I hid my Skooma lab, threw my necromantic robes in the fire, and blew svenja's zombie(my own work) apart with my patented KillDeath power. Dion knocked my door down and asked me about Glarthir, some resident eccentric who had a fetish for the chapel....

In other words NPCs can enter your house if they are scripted, fleeing or battling. Defender of Lainlyn 05:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

basket position reset

So I moved the basket in the imperial city house and filled it with gems, then later, it moved back to its original position and the gems spilled everywhere.

I was wondering if I put things in it without moving it, if something different will happen such as making the items disappear? — Unsigned comment by 67.183.28.2 (talk) on 30 May 2009

They should be fine. This only happened because the basket went to its original position when the cell reset. If you keep it in its normal spot, it should be fine! :) --Mr. Oblivion(T-C) 20:22, 30 May 2009 (EDT)
Thanks :) — Unsigned comment by 67.183.28.2 (talk) on 30 May 2009

On the same note, concerning frame reset, after I got berenius manor, I customized the secret area in the basement, and got rid of all the necromantic junk and tossed it into a corner. Of course three days later it poped back up, around or inside of all my stuff. Its a little obnoxious, is there any way of stopping the necromancers/torture tools and the bones from respawning/resetting after three days?

If you're on PC, you can probably untick a "respawns" box somewhere (I don't know anything about it really, so I'm just guessing), but if you're on a console, your best bet is to just visit every other day. --GKTalk2me 23:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


To stop items from resetting their positions when the cell resets just pick up the items and drop them again (then you can move them around to your liking) and they won't reset again (i have ps3 version so i don't know if it will work on pc but on consoles it works fine)
The above comment is not correct, on the ps3 version very few items dont respawn in houses. such as the tome of unlife. Mikeyboy52 06:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Couldn't you just pick them up and put them into storage? Noidzar 02:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Fame

I was looking for the fame rating requirement to buy the houses, but it seems that only chorrol has a comment about it. Someone should probably add it here, and probably also on the house pages, too. It may have been relegated to the house buying quest pages, but it seems they were deleted, leaving redirected links from each city's pages. — Unsigned comment by 67.183.28.2 (talk) on 30 May 2009

I believe it's a renown requirement rather than fame, don't know the exact requirements unfortunately

It's referred to either as "renown" or "fame" in different places. I think the journal lists it as "fame". Only two houses have fame requirements, Chorrol (13) and Skingrad (15). Some of the NPC dialog (ex., Narina Carvain says she wants to sell only "to the right person") suggests otherwise, but most houses only require that the seller have a good disposition toward you (which is easier to fix than low fame). Anyone know if having infamy will prevent a sale? Phelaran 14:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I misspoke: Renown is a combination of Fame and Infamy. Phelaran 00:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Pirate Ship Moored in Imperial City Waterfront

I've not been able to confirm if the containers are safe (and, admittedly, do not even know how apart from empirical experimentation), but the structure itself is decent as a home, even if it does mean leaving large piles of belongings everywhere.


It may be easier (or at least safer) to get the Thieves Den Offical Mod, you also get a few trainers/fences (who sell unique items) and 3 crew members who will pillage for you (the money/items will be left in a chest in your quarters)

Marie Elena (Waterfront Ship)

(moved from the article)

After you complete the first Dark Brotherhood quest, loot the corpse of Gaston Tussaud who is the captain of the ship, take the key to the chest (or pick the Very Hard lock, your choice) and open it. You can take the goods and gold inside the chest, but ultimately you can use it as a safe storage container and there is a bed to sleep in. However, if you have just killed the captain, beware of the two pirates who will knock on the door and come in. If they see you, they will attack on sight. Leave the ship, get your next Dark Brotherhood quest, and then return to find the bodies have disappeared. The ship is now safe to use as a house, but all the other cupboards respawn so you can only use Captain Tussaud's Booty as a container for safe storage.

A location with only one safe container doesn't belong on this page. A decent amount of storage is essential before a place warrants inclusion. –rpehTCE 20:08, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Then why should the room in Aleswell Inn be included on the list, as that only has one safe container?80.229.154.146 20:53, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Touché, but at least that one is given to you. I'd be happy to see it taken off though. –rpehTCE 20:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I am conducting a test to see if any of the other containers are safe, i have left an item in each and will not return for four in game days (just to be sure) updates to follow. UPDATE: after 4 in game days the items i left inside the other containers are still there. Initially i still wouldnt trust them with you prized items, and save first if you do but they appear to be safe containers.— Unsigned comment by 67.167.229.227 (talk) at 03:42 on 11 September 2009

A more reliable method would be to open the cells in the CS and see if the containers are set to respawn. Rpeh seems to be missing the point of a free house. It's not just about safe storage, it's about having a place to sleep. Just because an NPC dies doesn't mean you can move into his house and take over. The game will not let you wait or sleep there, because you are still trespassing even though the owner is dead. This is not the case with the Marie Elena. All the beds are "sleepable", and you can wait in the interior cells. You can open any container or door without trespassing, and take any item without stealing. However, before the related Dark Brotherhood quest, the first mate and another pirate will prevent you from entering (unless they're dead), and after you start the DB quest the captain will be there along with any other living crew members. Once these obstacles are removed, you are free to sleep, wait, take any item, go anywhere (except into the captain's balcony, which has a nearly unpickable lock, you'll need the key), just as if you owned the place. Safe containers are fairly easy to identify, and can be confirmed in the CS (if you're so inclined). General "safety" rules apply:
  • Captain Tussaud's Booty, as a named (unique) container, is non-respawning
  • All open-topped grain sacks are non-respawning
Beyond this, you're free to experiment (and confirm in the CS) that these additional rules apply:
  • All containers labeled "Sack" are non-respawning
  • All chests are non-respawning (those labeled "ChestHouseTreasuryLower0X" or "ChestHouseArmoryLower0X"), with the exception of one on the middle deck (labeled "ChestClutterLower02")
  • All barrels are respawning
  • All crates are respawning
  • The captain's desk is respawning
  • All drawers are respawning
  • The captain's cupboard is respawning
So I don't see how the unsigned poster found "after 4 days" that all the containers are "safe", because they're not. Most of the containers are not safe. I am unable to determine if starting the DB quest will cause any containers to reset. If you really want a house with safe, reliable containers, the IC Waterfront House is a short walk away and it's officially yours in every sense. Phelaran 15:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Cloudruler Temple

Can anyone confirm if you would be able to use clouderuler temple as a house after you finish the mainquest and if you killed everyone? — Unsigned comment by 174.106.12.145 (talk) on 16 July 2009

No, the containers in the Temple respawn. That's a criteria for adding it to this article. --Timenn-<talk> 14:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

fast travel

is it worth noting that you can fast travel from inside your houses? or is it just my 360 glitching — Unsigned comment by 92.234.125.230 (talk) on 19 July 2009

Your house or your xbox has no problem.It happend to me too,that you can fast travel out of your houseOblivion1000 11:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
It probably is worth noting, it would also be worth noting that the only city house you can't fast travel from is Benerus Manor--RhomphaiaTC 17:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
No, its not a glitch, its just a really handy thing about houses. Just get what you need then fast travel to wherever you need to go, with their being no need to get outside first. As said before, Benirus Manor is the only house you cant fast travel from, which is a shame because it is the most cost effective house.Crvena-Zastava 03:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"For Sale"

I was wondering why only some of the houses (Leyawiin, Chorrol) for sale had an actual "For Sale" sign. I'm on the 360. Skink 22:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is a particular reason for it, other than that the developers didn't think of adding it to all houses. --Timenn-<talk> 13:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Upgrade Notes

Hey, I was just wondering if you have to keep the upgrades on you to have them in your houses, or if you can store them in containers or drop them after purchase. Thanks!

Yes, you are completely free to do what you want with the papers. --Darth NANAME 14:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


WARNING do not sell the notes back to the shop owner before you exit the bartering system (you will lose all of the items for your house and cannot get them back) it is fine if you have left and come back though

Dive Rock

It may not be main article worthy but Dive Rock is, essentially, a safe house as there is a bed and a non respawning container. --SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 22:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

But that's not a house in the general sense, is it? --Timenn-<talk> 14:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
True, its more of a camp, but it is a camp that the player can use. Which is nice in a role playing aspect. Like i said though, it may not be main article worthy. --SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 23:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

S'rathad

Why is S'rathad's house not listed here as a free house? It is not marked as owned, has some safe containers, comes with free furnishings and you can sleep in it. All you have to do is kill S'rathad or just take his key.— Unsigned comment by Mental Gear (talkcontribs) at 17:20 on 10 October 2009

I find that for a place to be listed as a house you need to purchase it i.e. Rosethorn Hall, or it needs to be "given" to you i.e. the room at the Aleswell Inn. I realize that's just my opinion and that there are not really any strong guidelines, but I feel that S'rathad's house should not be mentioned. Talk Wolok gro-Barok Contributions 20:57, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Contrarily, providing your information is accurate, i think it would be fine as a free house, i also think the marie elena deserves a free house listing because i have heard there is a second chest downstairs that's safe as well.--SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 00:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to point out to Wolok (politely) that serpents wake is never given to you, yet it remains on the page. But, Id also like to point out to mental gear (again, politely) that none of the other listed houses require you to kill outside of a quest.

J'baana's tent

J'baana is a khajit who lives in a tent in the prison district, to reach him you can just use the unlocked gate to the right. he is a member of the thieves guild so unless you want to share the tent or pay a blood price, killing him before joining is recommended. The tent has two sacks which cover the minimum two safe container requirement and a bedroll. its not like the tents you see at most camps rather its a large tent you can walk inside. there's other containers in there although I'm not sure if they are safe and there's a table with food and drink and a chair just outside. to my knowledge this meets all the requirements of an unofficial house and i request its addition to the main article. --SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 01:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Killing him isn't such a bright idea, as he's the Master Trainer for Security Volthawk 09:27, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
You don't need a master trainer in security unless you are trying to beat every singe mission, just get the skeleton key. --SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 12:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I already expressed my opinion on S'rathad's house. I don't think this house qualifies for the same reasons I mentioned above. I would say that a master security trainer is more valuable than another house. Talk Wolok gro-Barok Contributions 12:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
You could always kill him after the training and then take the tent but your point is noted--SneakyPenguin77 (also my Gamertag) 17:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

houses for sale outside of cities

One question,are there any houses for sale in the wilderness or outside the main cities?If there are please tell me how to buy one.— Unsigned comment by 96.24.196.76 (talk) on 27 December 2009

Not that I remember. The only houses that you can get outside the cities (if there's any) are houses that you need to clear out of enemies or are already alone i.e. you get them free. --MC S'drassa T2M 06:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


seperants wake

the seperents wake is not given to you?!— Unsigned comment by 24.32.60.120 (talk) on 1 December 2010

I don't know what you mean by "given". It isn't given as the quest reward, but after you complete the quest the ship is left alone since the owner (Varulae) moves to the Count's Arms inn. --MC S'drassa T2M 18:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Scripted NPCs

Okay time to discuss before an edit war starts. I qualified this as redundant because of the following. Please compare these two sentences, the first one is the original the second one is the new edit:

  • Although it is impossible to lock the door, no NPCs will enter your house when you are not there, nor will any NPCs steal anything from your house.
  • Although NPCs may be scripted to enter your house seeking you as part of a quest, or chasing or fleeing you in battle, no NPCs will wander into your house when you are not there, nor will any NPCs steal anything from your house.

What I'm just seeing here is an unnecessary sentence that adds nothing new to the original and is also a very obvious statement, but that's just my opinion. In what I agree is that the "although is impossible to lock the door" part is redundant but I think that the rest is fine as it is now (original version). --S'drassa T2M 23:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

It adds the fact that NPCs can be scripted to enter a player house as part of a quest. It adds the fact that NPCs can enter your house when you are in combat with them, or when they are fleeing combat. "wander" distinguishes passers-by from these quest or combating NPCs. It has been noted by at least two contributors to talk pages (on Sins of the Father and this article) that the language of Houses indicated that NPCs should not enter houses, and reported incidents of them entering houses as a potential bug. But then, I have already told you that, in summaries and on your talk page. Why treat repeated examples of a misunderstanding not avoided by the article's wording as though they were only the player's fault, and therefore nothing we should be concerned with, particularly when the solution is so easy to implement and concise? I find your repeated protestations of redundancy something more than an entirely unconvincing rationale. Anarchangel 00:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
S'drassa found your edit questionable; this is the proper course of action, discussing it on the talk page. While I agree with you that it might be helpful to readers to have it spelled out that NPCs can enter your house for a quest or when chasing or fleeing from you, I also understand why some might find that too obvious to mention. For the record, I'm for using the second version, though possibly edited some. The first version implies that under no circumstances will an NPC enter your home if you are not there, which apparently isn't true. I do, however, find the fact that you took offense to S'drassa's course of action troubling. Remember to assume good faith. --GKtalk2me 01:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, I sure do hate to scupper an argument that supports my edit, but I cannot tell a lie, it is not yet proven by anecdotal evidence that NPCs will not enter your home if you are not there, although it may yet prove to be so. The first thing to confirm would be, can NPCs that are fleeing the player enter, and if so, can NPCs fleeing from a fight with a third party enter.
I respect the original edit for that, that it specifically used that language to be not at odds with the facts. It just does not tell all the facts. I never will understand why people writing for a compendium of information to be useful to readers are so at pains to leave information out. It would be nice to have some neutral third rationale we could all agree on, but so far, this still really just does come down to, do we include info that is proven to be needed in the cases of some readers, or do we leave it out, for whatever reason.
I have taken no offense. I make no assumptions, including good or bad faith, or even knowing what you mean specifically by 'took offense'. Until I know, I can only speculate. I am guessing, 'entirely unconvincing rationale' is something you object to. This is how I learned Discussion on Wikipedia: We discuss and are either convinced or not by each other's arguments and we decide upon a consensus. We neither offer as argument nor criticize style or opinion; we categorize it as such, and therefore of lesser importance to the decision. There is everything about a logical discussion procedure, and nothing in the way of a personal attack about my assessment of S'drassa's rationale. Phrases like 'assume good faith' are a lot easier to use, than use well, and wishing there was no confrontation ever will not make it so. S'drassa has been here longer than I have, has earned your respect and already, mine (for attention to detail on the three 'Weakness to' articles and 'Damage Attribute'), but S'drassa is in the wrong in this case, and I owe it to myself and the truth to not say otherwise. Anarchangel 02:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Bad things usually come from people claiming to hold the truth. This is no simple case of logic, where you can (quite) objectively reason your point. "Obvious" and "redundant" are both terms that are influenced by personal opinion and experience. You argue that players will be surprised if the full sentence is not covered, while S'drassa argues that nearly all players will have deduced it for themselves. The only way to find the "truth" is to get an honest confession of every single human on this planet on whether they were surprised or not. It cannot be done, basically. There is no "truth" here, but we can try to find a manner of consensus on it.
As for why not every little detail is covered on this wiki; it basically comes down to Wikipedia's notability. Important facts tend to drown if they are surrounded by obscure details. An editor who adds his/her own view on a subject in an article may not always recognize that the addition is not notable enough, thus it is needed that other editors review the edit. Thus there is always the need to seek the balance between them. Understanding the other editor's position can be very helpful.
Like GK I feel a compromise between the two phrases works best. NPCs may steal something like a weapon when they need to defend themselves in your house, and they have been reported to enter your house when you are outside (but closeby, otherwise you wouldn't notice). I propose the following:
Although it is impossible to lock the door, NPCs will not enter your house when you are not around, nor will they enter to steal anything from your house.
It looks very similar to the first sentence, but this leaves the possibility of NPCs entering your house open. As it has not yet been proven they will enter when fleeing we should not note that. But we cannot guarantee that this will never happen. Since actors tend not to interact with their environment when you are one or two cells away (as there technically is no "environment") I feel it's safe to conclude no NPCs will enter your Skingrad house while you are in Leyawiin. --Timenn-<talk> 09:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
More bad things are allowed by those who ignore the truth exists and can therefore never find it than come from those who seek it and stand by what they find. But that subject is sort of a digression, isn't it? I was attempting to explain why I was motivated to stand by the implications of the facts of this issue, not attempting to buttress my already strong argument with wobbily truthiness.
Don't tar me with the same brush as S'drassa. Just because S's arguments of 'obvious' and 'redundant' are opinion, does not mean my arguments against them are not logical. Quite the contrary. I argue that players can read the text in an unintended way, because it is equivocal. Not that they will. And furthermore, that they already have, here and here. Really, seriously, look at the links. People have already been confused by this. Those are all facts. That is truth. Ok? Enough of this philosophical framing of my arguments as just some opinionated soapboxing. And what is with the 'interviewing the world' stuff? We already have evidence: the two unsolicited instances of confusion; the impossible thing would be to find people who have not been confused by it, as they will not tell us so on Talk. The people who have been confused, and have told us so are evidence of notability. But because there are conceivably people who have not been confused by it, diminished notability is a fairly strong argument, not bolstered at all by the assertion that the facts in this case would be 'drowned' by more facts.
GK was not for a compromise, certainly not the one you offered. S'drassa his/er self found the repetition of "impossible to lock the door" "redundant". Yeh, your version looks very similar. All but one word the same, in fact. It is a subtle and significant and therefore elegant change, considering it is one word, I will grant you that. But it is by no means the 'second version' that GK preferred. It is essentially the first version, and more of the same old 'saying something that avoids being untrue', when we could be spending our time and valuable storage bytes on the twenty bytes saying something that is true, and useful also (plus the twenty K to make the revision. Or we could carry on with umpteen discussion revisions at 20k a pop. See The largest amount of storage is revisions) . Anarchangel 12:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
All three conditions provided in the second proposal are covered in my version. For them to be chasing you in any way, you need to be inside your house, thus you are present. If an NPC is fleeing, then you must be present as well, as combat only takes place near the player character. My version summarizes them, rather than trying to list the various permutations.
I fail to see any point in you bringing up the amount of bytes required for a discussion. I feel it's similar to saying the discussion is a waste of time. This wiki was built on mutual cooperation and discussion, and if you can't work with that (not seeing the difference between your truth and "the truth") maybe a wiki is not the best place for you? --Timenn-<talk> 12:12, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
See 'Responding to tone', 'Contradiction', Straw Man and 'Ad Hominem'. Best of luck with the mutual cooperation and discussion. Anarchangel 16:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Prev: Archive 1 Up: Oblivion talk:Houses Next: Archive 3