pstolarc at theperlguru.com wrote: > On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 01:28:42 -0400, "Todd Mitchell" wrote: > > >> Killpets works well, but I don't know if it is good that they drop their >> inventories (free money). Seems a bit cruel. Unsummon would be kinder. >> - but it was good work on a well needed function. > > > I think it's better that they drop their inventories. I often feed > specific items to a vampire, such as rings of War and so on, and then have > them fight for me. Unsummoning a pet that has player supplied items is > really quite annoying, and removes some of the functionality of the > command. As a note, if you killed your pets (or they otherwised died) without the killpets option, they would also drop their treasure. So the killpets option doesn't given you treasure you wouldn't have been able to get before - it just gives you a way to perhaps get to it easier. If this is considered a serious bug, then the pet summoning could probably get changed so that the items that get created as part of their summoning are not left behind (giving them startequip 1 should do that). But I haven't heard of any real abuses with regards to using this to get money. As for the command name, banish was originally suggested, but I thought that could get confused with a dm command (there isn't a banish command right now, but I could see something like that getting added). I thought killpets was reasonably short and to the point. At some level, the client could provide a better interface to this through its windows, eg, for the gtk client, under actions, it could have an action line 'dismiss pets', which then just sends the killpets command to the server.