Talk:Young firecat: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Umm, if the Young ones give a "milktooth", does that not still qualify as "skinable":yes? Well, for example Musk Hogs are skinable, and they yeild a Hoof, while Wood Trolls are not skinnable at all. --[[User:Callek|Callek]] 11:46, 24 April 2007 (CDT) |
::Umm, if the Young ones give a "milktooth", does that not still qualify as "skinable":yes? Well, for example Musk Hogs are skinable, and they yeild a Hoof, while Wood Trolls are not skinnable at all. --[[User:Callek|Callek]] 11:46, 24 April 2007 (CDT) |
||
The question wasn't if they were skinnable, but as to if said skin was tannable.--[[User:Naeya|Naeya]] ([[User talk:Naeya|talk]]) 11:48, 24 April 2007 (CDT) |
The question wasn't if they were skinnable, but as to if said skin was tannable.--[[User:Naeya|Naeya]] ([[User talk:Naeya|talk]]) 11:48, 24 April 2007 (CDT) |
||
:::Umm, ignore me then, memory lapse (as I did think nearly the same thing last night, but that it was changed to not skinnable, instead of not tannable) --[[User:Callek|Callek]] 11:50, 24 April 2007 (CDT) |
|||
Revision as of 10:50, 24 April 2007
Just a question, but if these firecat skins aren't tannable, which ones are? (for the firecat leathers)?--Naeya (talk) 09:25, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
- Muscular Firecats. The young ones give some sort of milktooth I think, and the supple cats give a flint-tipped claw. Only the musculars give actual skins.
- --Grindinghalt 10:55, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
Ahh ok thanks!--Naeya (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
- Umm, if the Young ones give a "milktooth", does that not still qualify as "skinable":yes? Well, for example Musk Hogs are skinable, and they yeild a Hoof, while Wood Trolls are not skinnable at all. --Callek 11:46, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
The question wasn't if they were skinnable, but as to if said skin was tannable.--Naeya (talk) 11:48, 24 April 2007 (CDT)
- Umm, ignore me then, memory lapse (as I did think nearly the same thing last night, but that it was changed to not skinnable, instead of not tannable) --Callek 11:50, 24 April 2007 (CDT)