Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play: Double-Take

Monday, July 29, 2013

In another week we will see the newest version of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, the document that lays out the baseline rules, assumptions, and adjustments for playing in the organized play campaign. Over the past few months, whether by podcast, convention panel, or cryptic response to a forum post, Mike and I have hinted at many of the updates. By now, for example, practically everyone knows about the disappearance of the Lantern Lodge and Shadow Lodge. The new format for Pathfinder Tales novel boons has been available for download for several months. We even spoiled the new system for wealth and "playing up" during a panel at PaizoCon a few weeks ago. There is, however, at least one thing that we have not teased: Replay.

Already I can hear the hissed intake of breath from some worried readers. We've read, heard, and sometimes even personally made the argument that replay opens the door to myriad forms of abuse. I agree that unlimited replay of more than just Tier 1 scenarios and Tier 1-2 modules would be disruptive. I still remember meeting a Pathfinder Society player who proudly boasted that he and his group had just run through The Godsmouth Heresy six times in the course of a weekend simply to level-grind a host of characters to 2nd level. Campaign leadership has been very careful in exploring replay so that we might avoid classic pitfalls.

What tipped the balance for us was realizing that replay might also address an ongoing push to expand rewards for GMs who have dedicated their time to the campaign. In my estimation, most GMs who have at least one star have had to "eat" a scenario by preparing and GMing it before having the chance to play it. In my experience, those who habitually GM for organized play also have considerable practice when it comes to suppressing personal knowledge. In my time as a volunteer and employee, I find that those who GM first and play later are also among the most dedicated to wanting the whole group to have fun and enjoy experiencing a scenario without spoilers. That got the gears turning.

When Version 5.0 of the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play goes live, campaign participants who have been recognized for their efforts as a GM by receiving GM stars will be able to replay or "re-GM" a limited number of scenarios—specifically one scenario for each star earned. In this way a participant may earn a third Chronicle sheet from a given scenario: one for playing, one for GMing, and one for either playing or GMing that scenario a second time. No character may ever have two of the same Chronicle sheet, so one must apply each sheet to a different character each time. When earning a third Chronicle in this way, the GM should write "GM Star Replay Credit" on the Chronicle sheet.

Let's say you're a two-star GM—thank you for your help, by the way. You can now replay or re-GM (for credit, that is) two scenarios once each. Perhaps you thought Pathfinder Society Scenario #3–14159: Death by Pie was amazing when you played it the first time, but you are sad to have missed the opportunity to play it with your pastry totem barbarian who took the mathematical prodigy trait. You replay it for credit using one of your replay credits, and now you have one replay left. If you later use that to replay #5–513: The Doppelganger's Prey, you are now out of replays until you earn that third star. Only then would you be able to replay #4–117: All the Doors are Trapped for credit.

At this time, the Guide does not say anything about gaining more replay credits each season. For now that's alright by me; let's see how this works for one season before making promises about what will happen a year from now. As many as five replays won't be enough to make a character completely unbalanced. Instead I envision this being for those who have played/GMed almost everything, managed tables for most of a convention, and saved the last slot to just play.

There may be other rewards tied to GM ties in the Guide, but we'll just have to wait to see those when the new document goes live next week.


Amiri and Ezren are both replaying the scenario pictured above, and our iconic barbarian is trying to remind the wizard not to spoil what's about to happen next for the other players. Ezren is just aghast that all of the other characters put on the masks without first discovering the black lotus extract smeared on the interiors. What a great (nonexistent) scenario...

John Compton and Mike Brock
Developer and Campaign Coordinator

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Society
101 to 150 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
4/5

I realize that this necessarily means you'll have to figure out what this bonus gold is for scenarios of previous seasons (before 5). Any chance you'll change the gold on chronicle sheets that is far below average (especially season 0)?

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Death by Pie? I want to GM, play, then eat this scenario! Hopefully it's raspberry...mmm...pie.

The Exchange 2/5

This is nice. This is really nice. Sincerely--thank you.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

John Compton wrote:
Quote:
Can we do this for a module?
At this time the text just says "scenario." Mike and I will discuss this when he's back in the office later this week, and from there we'll decide if the text should read "scenario and module." Beyond wanting to revisit a module or three, is there a good reason to include or not include modules in the replay pool?

I'm for imcluding it. Some modules might have flavor reasons which will, after the fact, make the character you brought less fun than another.

For example Ksenia is only 6th level, while Talyn is 9th. While "Witchwar Legacy" is WAYYYYY off for both of them, it would be more fun to play it with my Irrisen Winter Witch than my Lore Warden.

(As an aside, I'm trying to get an all Taldor/Cheliax party of PFS characters for Broken Chains)

Now as to Adventure Paths... No, clearly no replay there.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

TimrehIX wrote:
I love this as an incentive for GMs. However there are SO many scenarios out there that I think only being able to replay a max of five (a season?) is not enough. A one star GM may hold on to their one replay and miss some really nice play opportunities. Please think about making it twice the number of stars. So a one star would get two replays and a five star would get ten. Ten replays is a lot but you have to GM a lot to get that 5th star.

Slow and steady. I feel the one replay per star is a good step. Give it a year and we'll see.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Xuttah wrote:
Death by Pie? I want to GM, play, then eat this scenario! Hopefully it's raspberry...mmm...pie.

Mine!

Sovereign Court 5/5

Garble Facechomper wrote:
Xuttah wrote:
Death by Pie? I want to GM, play, then eat this scenario! Hopefully it's raspberry...mmm...pie.
Mine!

Somebody teach that goblin to share!

Sovereign Court 3/5

Todd Lower wrote:
Garble Facechomper wrote:
Xuttah wrote:
Death by Pie? I want to GM, play, then eat this scenario! Hopefully it's raspberry...mmm...pie.
Mine!
Somebody teach that goblin to share!

Why bother? The Decemvirate just make enough copies of individual items to sell to each member of the team who found it.

Grand Lodge 5/5

El Baron de los Banditos wrote:
Todd Lower wrote:
Garble Facechomper wrote:
Xuttah wrote:
Death by Pie? I want to GM, play, then eat this scenario! Hopefully it's raspberry...mmm...pie.
Mine!
Somebody teach that goblin to share!
Why bother? The Decemvirate just make enough copies of individual items to sell to each member of the team who found it.

All the pie is mine! Kingdom of Zog will have all the pie in the world!

Sovereign Court 5/5

Garble Facechomper wrote:
El Baron de los Banditos wrote:


Why bother? The Decemvirate just make enough copies of individual items to sell to each member of the team who found it.

All the pie is mine! Kingdom of Zog will have all the pie in the world!

Thems fightn' words Facechomper.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Todd Lower wrote:
Garble Facechomper wrote:
El Baron de los Banditos wrote:


Why bother? The Decemvirate just make enough copies of individual items to sell to each member of the team who found it.

All the pie is mine! Kingdom of Zog will have all the pie in the world!
Thems fightn' words Facechomper.

MESS WITH GARBLE, BITE YOUR HEAD,

CHEW YOUR FACE, TIL YOU BE DEAD!

Grand Lodge 2/5

Wow a replay per star, that was unexpected but definitely appreciated.

Sovereign Court 5/5

Garble Facechomper wrote:
Todd Lower wrote:
Thems fightn' words Facechomper.

MESS WITH GARBLE, BITE YOUR HEAD,

CHEW YOUR FACE, TIL YOU BE DEAD!

(Fighter walking away) Stupid goblins, stupid diet! :-)

Silver Crusade 4/5

Like others, I like this idea, and its implementation. I'd say include modules, for the reasons others have said - you might learn after playing an adventure once that a different character would have been perfect for it. And for now, one replay per star is plenty, but maybe in a year or two, revisit whether that should be per season or lifetime.

But back to the main topic:

PIE EATING CONTEST!!!

4/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

Yep. And Garble gets to re-eat a pie for EACH STAR!

Sovereign Court 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

YES! Now I can replay The Disappeared and not fail the scenario in the first 15 minutes! But do I want to spend a replay on that...

Dark Archive 2/5

Oh this changes things....

Hard to say what I rather have...a 3rd VC character, or taking down the Runelord of Sloth twice...

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BYC wrote:

Oh this changes things....

Hard to say what I rather have...a 3rd VC character, or taking down the Runelord of Sloth twice...

Be a 5-star and do both!

Liberty's Edge 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now to work on my stars!

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

John Compton wrote:
Quote:
Can we do this for a module?
At this time the text just says "scenario." Mike and I will discuss this when he's back in the office later this week, and from there we'll decide if the text should read "scenario and module." Beyond wanting to revisit a module or three, is there a good reason to include or not include modules in the replay pool?

Even if replay of 3XP modules is ruled as too great a bonus for this new rule, Free RPG Day modules only give 1 XP, so are on a par with scenarios; allowing replay for those would not represent any 'advantage' over replaying scenarios.

OK, yes, so I want to play WBG2 for credit again...

Shadow Lodge 2/5

What a carefully-thought-out idea! You have given people some more credit, and I, for one, will vow never to abuse it!
(Incidentally, Shadow's Last Stand has been my favourite two-parter, and I just might be able to replay it all with my detective character before he leaves the highest possible tier for it)

Shadow Lodge 2/5

Myles Crocker wrote:

Hello DixieLandau,

Is that Lamashtu mother of gnolls and monsters you have as your avatar?

I don't know if the "Star" replay will be extended to Modules. It may be extended in the future, I don't know.

I think the general idea is to introduces something in a limited way, in this case being able to replay as a reward for your service (#replayes=#GM Stars), so they can see how it affects the campaign. I think it is far easier to introduce something smaller, an then consider expanding it, rather then introducing something broader and then trying to narrow it.

Congratulations on your first star,

Myles

Hi Myles! Hope you've been well!

That sure is! I'm super excited to see we can have evil deity-themed icons. And gnoll gods are the best gods. :D

Well that's okay. I can deal without it, I just figured I'd ask! ^^

It definitely is! That's probably the best way to take it - use it for those nights when you arrive to play, only to find out the tables that need you, you've already played! And yes, small steps are the best. I hope this ends up being a successful experiment!

Well thank you! It took a while, but I'm finally here! And at the rate I'm going, I'll be at my second before too long! ^_^

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

Here is what I hope the next edition of the Guide changes: the rules for character audits.

Right now, they say that GMs are supposed to look over each character's sheet and previous Chronicles before the start of each game. I'm discovering that I'm a very odd person (and, indeed, that by many I'm viewed as antisocial and unfairly questioning of the honor of my players) because I've been trying to do this. I started with PbP, where we had players keep all their chronicles online and it was easy to just go look at any time.

Before PaizoCon 2013, I was very careful to print out all of my chronicle sheets and have them all in order for the games I was playing in... and they weren't requested by any of the GMs I played with.

Now that I'm getting in VTT games, I'm finding out that I'm acting in at least a strange, and perhaps even a bad, manner by asking players to send me their sheets and chronicles before a game.

From the forums, it sounds like character audits are very much the exception rather than the standard practice.

One of two things needs to happen. Either, something is seriously broken and the campaign leadership needs to take serious steps to get everybody who's playing PFS to obey the rules. Honestly, that sounds impractical, and would probably do far more harm than good. The other option is that the rules should be written to be what's actually intended, instead of something that "everybody knows" (except for crazy people like me, evidently) isn't really strictly followed.

What I would suggest is removing the requirement to look over character sheets and chronicle sheets from the list of GM duties. Instead, put in a rule that players' need to have character sheets and chronicle sheets ready for review if the GM requests them.

Liberty's Edge

Barratt Moy wrote:

Pathfinder Society Scenario

#3–14159: Death by Pie
#5–513: The Doppelganger's Prey
#4–117: All the Doors are Trapped

When are the expected release dates for these modules you have teased on?

Barratt

Seriously. The first and last sound like they could be perfect continuations for the We Be Goblins series. Make it so, Paizo.

Shadow Lodge

rknop wrote:

Now that I'm getting in VTT games, I'm finding out that I'm acting in at least a strange, and perhaps even a bad, manner by asking players to send me their sheets and chronicles before a game.

From the forums, it sounds like character audits are very much the exception rather than the standard practice.

While actually performing character audits isn't actually the norm, you are fully in the right to try to do something that you're supposed to be doing.

Doing character audits aren't "bad" (or "bad manners", if that's what you meant), and any player who gives you crap for doing your job needs to have a nice, long talk with a VO.

Grand Lodge 4/5

@RKNop: Robert, many GMs don't have the time, space or even ability to look over character sheets or previous chronicles, other than a quick glance.

Also, as the Guide says, that is for conventions (that is to laugh. Barely have time to setup the table for the game, myuch less look at 3- ot 7 PC charcater sheets, not to mention up to 33 chronicles per PC...) or in-store event. And the in-store event is going ot be limited as how much can be done, as well, by start time, time for the event, clean-up time, and when people have to leave by.

Online play isn't even covered by those rules.

@SCPRedMage: No one objects to the PC audits, just that many of us who play online dono't have scanners, smart phones or even a digital camera (or the skill to make it work well enough) to handle PCs whose history is a mix of FtF, online and GM credits.

Not to mention the sketchiness that chronicles can get into during a convention, if you play the PC more than once during the con...

Spoiler:
As an example, I don't have a scanner available (I own one, but it is currently in storage about 1,800 miles away from where I now live), my phone is a very dumb flip phone without any sort of camera, my tablet only has a camera set in the side that the user is supposed to be looking at (for online video, I guess?), and, while I have a digital camera I inherited, between the light levels in my pklace (I am light sensitive, so have lower light settings than many people do), and the impression I have that my camera use is cursed (cameras die, give half-black pictures, or act up in almost any way imaginable that creates bad pictures), my camera shots of chronicles are ... ugly.

Liberty's Edge 4/5

Mark/Mike/John looks great!

Mike

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber
kinevon wrote:
Online play isn't even covered by those rules.

However, the campaign organizers and the online VO, have said repeatedly here in these message board that online play, where you publicly post the game and people reading a public list can sign up for it, is to be treated as a game-store game.

They've also made it clear that players are expected to be ready to show those sheets and chronicles to online GMs if the online GMs request it. It may be hard-- but however you do it, figuring out how to do it is part of your responsibility for playing online, just like keeping your chronicles with your character is your responsibility for playing face-to-face games.

The Exchange 2/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Just in case, I would love to write "All the Doors are Trapped". I'm assuming there will be kobolds in this scenario.

I think Jim Groves has already written "All The Rooms are Haunted" which leaves the third and fourth in this series "All the Villains Run Away" and "Can't we all just get along" for the perfect quartet of zero-combat scenarios.

5/5

I assumed it was obvious, but haven't heard it mentioned:

This rule needs to be in the reporting system!

The system could allow a duplicate report per star (per year - your programmers will thank you if you give them a head's up on this potentiality), or there could be a checkbox to indicate "GM Double-Take" that counts 'em up. Either way, it needs to be in the system, or every game could be thought to be a double-take.

1/5 **

I recently bumped someone from a table because they didn't have their chronicles, and would do it again. On the flip-side, I wouldn't even try to play a character for which I did not have my chronicles.

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
On the flip-side, I wouldn't even try to play a character for which I did not have my chronicles.

I've done that once. Table wasn't going to go off, I was available, had my character sheet on my phone. Other than squinting a lot and having no available gold to spent, it went okay.

1/5 **

Kyle Baird wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
On the flip-side, I wouldn't even try to play a character for which I did not have my chronicles.
I've done that once. Table wasn't going to go off, I was available, had my character sheet on my phone. Other than squinting a lot and having no available gold to spent, it went okay.

Obviously it's situational. When I show up to play, I bring my chronicles and generally expect others to do the same. If it were to make a legal table, I'd probably just warm the person that boons/gold might not be available for use. The individual in question in this case rarely if ever brings his chronicles, and has even tried to play without a character sheet(!) on several occasions.

I don't actually *try* to be difficult. ;-)

Sovereign Court 5/5

bugleyman wrote:
I don't actually *try* to be difficult. ;-)

To some it just comes naturally I guess. (Sorry, it was a floater right over the plate.)

1/5 **

Todd Lower wrote:
To some it just comes naturally I guess.

Mom always said it was important for me to be good at something...


Garble Facechomper wrote:
All the pie is mine! Kingdom of Zog will have all the pie in the world!

You mean Albania?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zog_of_Albania

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston

Rknop: I think that, for many players, there is a fear of running into a GM who just doesn't understand a legal build, and gives you grief over it. Frankly, there are certain classes that I just don't understand, and I don't feel competent to audit those characters. I would also be greatly concerned if a newer GM were to audit my magus at higher levels. He will be using a number of odd abilities from obscure books, including one ability that will still be legal, but will not be in any extant book after the new guide comes out. (I'm keeping a copy of Guide 4.3, of course). It's not that I have any illegal options, it's just that I don't want to have to explain how Arcane Strike works yet again, why spell damage is multiplied on a critical hit or how Dervish Dance operates.

I also don't feel like most GMs have time for full character audits. I know I don't. I'm relatively quick with my GMming, but auditing every player at a 6-man table would take as long as the scenario or longer if you are unfamiliar with the class. This is boring for other players at the table and is generally unproductive in my opinion.

Dark Archive 4/5

Kinda wish this was spelled out more. Instead of people that I have played with already proclaiming "it's in the system so I can do it" hur hur.
It makes me face palm more because this gentleman than acclaimed his four star status.

4/5 *

When in doubt, go with the GM's call. At last PaizoCon I sat down at a table and (as required by the Guide) told the GM I had already run the scenario, but that I would not spoil the plot for the table or contribute to puzzle-solving. He was relatively new to PFS, and told me that he didn't think that was legal. The other VO at the table spoke up to assure the GM it was legal, but I realized it was making him uncomfortable (darn red shirts!) and gracefully moved to another table (where I had my best play experience of the weekend.)

(And for what it's worth - I don't think it's "in the system" yet: the new Guide doesn't go live until Monday, and so this rule is not yet in force.)

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Netopalis wrote:
I also don't feel like most GMs have time for full character audits. I know I don't. I'm relatively quick with my GMming, but auditing every player at a 6-man table would take as long as the scenario or longer if you are unfamiliar with the class. This is boring for other players at the table and is generally unproductive in my opinion.

What you need to do is involve all the players in the audit. Have every player pass their character sheet and chronicles to the next player, and then tell them what to look for. This allows them to learn what they need to be looking for on their own sheets, and get to know who they are sitting with if they are at a con or gameday with strangers.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Netopalis wrote:
I also don't feel like most GMs have time for full character audits. I know I don't. I'm relatively quick with my GMming, but auditing every player at a 6-man table would take as long as the scenario or longer if you are unfamiliar with the class. This is boring for other players at the table and is generally unproductive in my opinion.
What you need to do is involve all the players in the audit. Have every player pass their character sheet and chronicles to the next player, and then tell them what to look for. This allows them to learn what they need to be looking for on their own sheets, and get to know who they are sitting with if they are at a con or gameday with strangers.

I feel like that's even worse. There is a lot of variance between player abilities at a table, and I can just envision the mess that were to occur if a new player got an extremely complicated sheet. More importantly, it then creates a social situation in which nobody wants to be "the rat". The GM is a neutral party, so it is more socially acceptable.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

If you finish early, you could have everyone roll a d20 - low score get's cornered by a Pathfinder Society accountant who want's to discuss their expense report i.e. the GM does an audit on that single player, randomly chosen by their luck (or lack of it).

I wonder if PFS management would object if you also gave them a +5 circumstance bonus on their day job check, to make it a bit easier to swallow the audit medicine.

Sovereign Court 5/5

Mistwalker wrote:

If you finish early, you could have everyone roll a d20 - low score get's cornered by a Pathfinder Society accountant who want's to discuss their expense report i.e. the GM does an audit on that single player, randomly chosen by their luck (or lack of it).

I wonder if PFS management would object if you also gave them a +5 circumstance bonus on their day job check, to make it a bit easier to swallow the audit medicine.

I like the randomness, but not the bonus. Audits don't take that long, and the worst that could happen is that you correct someone's character so that they are playing a fair character. Most times I see players asking if what they have done is OK so that I review their sheet for them as a service, not a punishment.

Edit: Though to be honest the +5 to day job isn't really that much. Meh, what ever.

Grand Lodge 3/5

Netopalis wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Netopalis wrote:
I also don't feel like most GMs have time for full character audits. I know I don't. I'm relatively quick with my GMming, but auditing every player at a 6-man table would take as long as the scenario or longer if you are unfamiliar with the class. This is boring for other players at the table and is generally unproductive in my opinion.
What you need to do is involve all the players in the audit. Have every player pass their character sheet and chronicles to the next player, and then tell them what to look for. This allows them to learn what they need to be looking for on their own sheets, and get to know who they are sitting with if they are at a con or gameday with strangers.
I feel like that's even worse. There is a lot of variance between player abilities at a table, and I can just envision the mess that were to occur if a new player got an extremely complicated sheet. More importantly, it then creates a social situation in which nobody wants to be "the rat". The GM is a neutral party, so it is more socially acceptable.

How I handle it my events is like this. For new players I offer to create the character with them, if they already made a character I check it over. Then when they get their first few levels I'll try to go over it with them . I also hand out business cards that have my email on it for them to send me messages any time they have questions.

For established players I only look at their stuff when they do something wonky. If I think a character is completely messed up I'll either look over it in detail after then event or make a copy of their sheet and their past couple chronicles to look over at home. (now I haven't had to do this that is just my plan)


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The reason that I was suggesting a small bonus was to address some comments that I have seen about some players getting defensive about audits or GMs looking over their characters.

+5 to day job is small enough not to have a major impact, but is still a bonus

Shadow Lodge

Mistwalker wrote:
+5 to day job is small enough not to have a major impact, but is still a bonus

Unless they don't have a day job...


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
SCPRedMage wrote:
Mistwalker wrote:
+5 to day job is small enough not to have a major impact, but is still a bonus
Unless they don't have a day job...

There is that.

Do you have another idea for a small bonus for having "suffered" through an audit?

Sovereign Court 5/5

SCPRedMage wrote:
Mistwalker wrote:
+5 to day job is small enough not to have a major impact, but is still a bonus
Unless they don't have a day job...

Just give them a bonus day job roll. In that case the most they could earn would be 50gp. Again meh, whatever.

Shadow Lodge

Mistwalker wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Mistwalker wrote:
+5 to day job is small enough not to have a major impact, but is still a bonus
Unless they don't have a day job...

There is that.

Do you have another idea for a small bonus for having "suffered" through an audit?

Bring cookies.

Scarab Sages 5/5

John Compton wrote:
Quote:
Can we do this for a module?
At this time the text just says "scenario." Mike and I will discuss this when he's back in the office later this week, and from there we'll decide if the text should read "scenario and module." Beyond wanting to revisit a module or three, is there a good reason to include or not include modules in the replay pool?

The problem we're having locally is I ran a bunch of people through Academy of Secrets under the old module rules. Now we have a bunch of people wanting to play under the new rules since they can actually level up past 12.

1 to 50 of 233 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paizo Blog: Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play: Double-Take All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.