Riftwarden

Campbell's page

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 139 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The General feats in the CRB are just pretty lackluster. Regardless of class there are often cases where you are better served by a skill feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

This is a spoiler for Absolam Initiation, the introductory Pathfinder Society Scenario for Second Edition.

Spoiler:

There is an out of control ritual at one point in the scenario that the Player Characters must try to stabilize. Correcting the flaws in the ritual was an Occultism check. Failure meant these nasty shadow tendrils (that would invade your space and try to grapple you) would spill out.

As mada_gib says generally when interfacing with anything magical you use the skill for the relevant tradition. Like with Recall Knowledge you might grant the ability to use a skill for one of the other traditions at a higher DC. The skill chapter also covers using different attributes for a skill at GM discretion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

If the item is intelligent I would just use the normal social influence rules. Either stat it out as a creature or just give it a Will Save and an initial attitude. That way players could deceive it with Lie, Coerce it, or Convince it or even use Charm and other spells against it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Besides some that were deliberately removed like war priests that were just as good at melee combat as fighters and disarm specialists I think mostly reflecting the more versatile classes from First Edition like Rangers and Paladins can be difficult to realize.

On the flip side any concept that is more skill dependent seems easier to model. You can build a strong Assassin or Knight off the Fighter chassis with a lot less work. You can build a very thief like Illusionist without multi-classing. Also multi-classing into a caster feels way better to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Generally speaking the 80/20 rule applies to most martial classes in PF2. Your pure throughput options are generally low level feats. Higher level feats are all about responding to unusual tactical situations.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Here's what the Lost Omens character Guide has to say on Uncommon Ancestries:

Lost Omens Character Guide wrote:


While these ancestries are uncommon in the same way a magic item, a feat, or a spell is, an ancestry is something you choose at the beginning of the campaign. Specific campaigns might provide a list of uncommon ancestries that are particularly appropriate for that setting, such as hobgoblins in a campaign set near Oprak, or lizardfolk for a campaign in the Mwangi Expanse, and grant access to those ancestries. In other games, these ancestries are as available as your group desires them to be.

Basically it just signifies an ancestry that might not be appropriate for every campaign and might not be part of "civilized" society. It's basically a matter of your GM making them available by default based on where the game takes place or asking your GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

It's not really spelled out anywhere in the rules. Treat Wounds is the only skill action I can see in the rules that has this sort of if Expert you can do this thing. This sort of thing is fertile ground for an FAQ question.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I might be missing something, but my response as a player here would be ready an action to Grapple one of those suckers as soon as they got close. Then we would smash it so it cannot do that crap anymore. The other orcs should get the message.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

One of the reasons I personally like rarity and additional content being at the GM's discretion is the creative freedom it provides to Paizo to create niche content. Fairly early in the life cycle of Second Edition we are getting playable Lizardfolk, Hobgoblins, Orcs, and Kobolds in player facing books. In an environment where everything is open by default we would probably not be getting those things.

When you open things by default nearly every option has to fit nearly every game. Taking this tact means Paizo is free to experiment and provide things that are a strong fit for some tables, but would not be a good fit for other tables. They get to create subversive and potentially disruptive material that they would otherwise not get to write because its inclusion is based on GM judgment.

In my experience Fifth Edition is played in a very open way. Because of that Wizards of the Coast has a very rigorous approval process that means most niche content is either cordoned off in GM centered material or just does not get printed. I do not want that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
if your using a weapon attack to point out the square I hope it's a thrusting weapon. Otherwise a slashing or bludgeoning weapon really only narrows it down to a few squares.
How wildly are you swinging your club if we can't work out what you're aiming at to within a few feet? Normally you'd need a Cleave feat to swing your weapon across multiple squares.
How precisely can you watch someone else without expending actions to do so?

Exactly. Seek is an action. I think you would be justified in using it close to the area your ally attacked, but you would still need to use it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Font is strong and healing is nice, but even if your Cleric never casts a single offensive spell there is lots of nasty stuff to remove in this version of the game. You will want Wisdom for Remove Disease, Remove Curse and all sorts of other important spells. Not to mention if you intend to be a full service healer and not just a combat healer you will probably want to invest in Medicine.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Neovancian spell casting also makes the wizard play almost exactly like the Sorcerer. It also has a massively constrained casting environment where any spell with a meaningful duration cannot be cast with other spells that have any kind of duration. Even then spell casters feel entirely too flexible to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Your Wisdom also impacts your DC when someone tries to counteract one of your spells. Having a low Wisdom on top of your lower spell casting proficiency is a recipe for having your buffs be dispelled away easily. If you play in a game where dispel magic does not get thrown around its less of a big deal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

You should also be getting spell scrolls as treasure during your adventures and be able to acquire spells in downtime. You get the two for free, but your a wizard. Be resourceful.

Basically work with your GM.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think they should have implemented runes for shields maybe with hardness being one rune and improvements to shield hit points being another.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Make sure you really want to do this. Then let them know that standing back is usually a good idea. Then if they do not move to the back smack them, but make sure they have a hero point. Explain why they got smacked. Do not be subtle about it.

Of course that might not actually work because wizards can actually have a decent AC in this game and can have fairly decent hit points, particularly at first level. I mean a human wizard might have 15 hit points compared to a human rogue's 17 hit points and the rogue is expected to be part of the melee scrum.

It's also very possible depending on the fight that if they stand to far back additional enemies might engage them with no meaningful way for the front line to peel the enemies off them. This is not always the optimal tactic.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think there is plenty of system mastery (perhaps a bit too much) to the game. It is just mostly weighted towards the round by round decisions you make. The tight math and degrees of success built into the game means small differences in the math have huge impacts. Things like knowing when to feint or demoralize, flanking, targeting weak saves, exploiting a monster's weakness, timing your attacks and spells, and the like all make a huge difference on success or failure.

Here exploration, build and spell selection can have a significant impact on success, but it is not the same sort of impact it had in First Edition where it decided success or failure all on its own. It's more that your build provides you with a set of tools that you have to utilize to win the day. Some builds will be more suited to a given encounter than another, but you still have to execute. As an example a monk who has elemental fist has the ability to pretty much target a wide variety of monster weaknesses with their ki strike, but actually executing on it involve a series of choices made while playing the game that they would not have access to with a different build.

Character build in this game is more like building a Magic deck. You can build the best deck you know how to, but you still have to play the game, might get some bad draws, or run into decks that have strong counters to what you can do. Does that make any sense?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

So my suspicion is that granting 4 boosts instead of 1 or 2 is mostly in place to keep the math relatively tight. My assumption is that the developers basically assume most players will be investing in their primary plus at least Constitution and Wisdom with many also investing in Dexterity to keep defenses from going pear shaped at high levels like they do in other editions. You can opt not to and make tertiary investments in Charisma or Intelligence, but for the most part the more math critical Ability Scores will generally be chosen.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

In exploration mode when what a character is doing is not part of a defined activity it is left up to the GM to define what happens. Just like when you attempt something in combat not covered by the rules. There is guidance that says when improvising look at how often they are performing they activity. It says doing an encounter mode action frequently might be limited or cause exhaustion. The GM is supposed to apply judgement when making this determination. Obviously they should be looking at the fiction when they make that decision.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think there is a fundamental difference between a game that fundamentally requires GM intervention to even function much like how ability checks function in D&D 5th Edition and one where GM judgement is applied in specific cases called out by the game like Apocalypse World. Pathfinder 2 as written reminds me a lot more of Apocalypse World than Fifth Edition.

Broadly the game is very good at providing tools to help the GM make the calls they need to make.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

No one can really tell if a given stand alone adventure will be appropriate for their game without actually getting it, reading through it, and often making alterations to make it fit the sort of game they are looking to run. The blurb only tells us enough to tell if an adventure is worth looking into.

Adventure Paths are another matter entirely. Part of running an Adventure Path involves substantial buy in. You are opting to follow the setting, tone, themes, and pacing of the Adventure Path.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Season finale? Does that mean future seasons might be in the cards?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Generally even if you do get a designer response it will not be with official weight. Mark Seifter has said on numerous occasions that he can talk about how he would handle it, but that his words are not an official response. When Paizo wants to clarify things officially they will do so through more formal channels.

I am actually really glad they take this stance because it means designers are more free to engage with the community.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't really think they intend for there to be an official answer. Much like encounters per day in this edition individual groups are expected to find a cadence that works for them, the skill levels of the players, and the decisions players make.

In many ways I think the answer for how long should we rest is whatever we can get away with according to the situation. I think it is meant to be a decision for players to make based on the risks involved.

Honestly I am seeing somewhat of a return to the mentality of earlier editions of Dungeons and Dragons in Pathfinder 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The primary reasons for a Wizard to multi-class into fighter are because they want weapons that do not suck and fighter feats. If you are an elf you can already get weapons that do not suck without using valuable class feats.

The issue is that wizards are much closer to the martial classes than they have ever been. Their hit points and armor class already do not completely suck in comparison. They have little reason to multi class for survival reasons. So the only compelling reason is to be better at using weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Part of the reason to use a Bastard Sword instead of a Great Sword is that with the Bastard Sword you can release your grip as a free action in order to do a combat maneuver and still have a useful weapon. It's a d8 instead of d12, but it is still useful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I would note that you cannot be hidden/undetected and ready an action. As soon as you ready you are not doing any exploration activities so avoiding notice does not apply. When you are hidden/undetected doing anything except step, hide, and sneak makes you observed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

My reading is that Swipe is a single attack that counts as two for the purpose figuring out MAP once resolved. The language is just like Power Attack.

It also makes sense in the fiction. Swipe is described as a single wide arcing swing of your weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I am fine with readied actions as long as the trigger is something in the fiction and characters who do so do not do anything else. I am not fine with trying to justify a trigger of initiative. I ready an action to attack the first creature who comes through this door is fine. Initiative will still be rolled when someone intends to immediately act against the other and if the trigger occurs before their turn players will be free to use their reaction.

If your intention is to immediately attack and try to word a trigger to do so my response is that we are going to be rolling initiative possibly with a small penalty for the monsters if the monsters are unaware of your presence.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

As a player it can both be true that I want to seek out every advantage at my disposal to tip the scales in my favor while also wanting to experience an element of risk, danger, and drama. I want it to be the case that we need to bring our A Game in order to win while there is still a chance we might not.

I want things like flanking to really matter not be something that is nice, but might not have an effect. Against an equal level opponent flanking might mean you score a critical hit on an 18 instead of a 20 and hit on a 9 instead of an 11. That's huge!

The impact of Raise Your Shield is likewise extremely significant.

I want knowing how to exploit monster weaknesses to be the reason we might win or lose an encounter. It was awesome that in Knights of Everflame Omelette was able to trigger the zombie's weakness twice when she attacked with her axe that was filled with positive energy from her rage and burst it wide open.

Still I want the whole affair to still feel tense and dangerous if we are fighting monsters at our level or higher. I like the gut punch of being hit by an owlbear, grabbed, and then having it attempt to disembowel me. I want this stuff to feel dangerous and I want winning to require all the skill at our disposal and maybe a little luck.

I want to have to play hard and not have it be because my build obviates the challenge.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Kasoh wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

I'm actually a little curious, do people believe that a high bonus to skill in PF1 equals the 'skill-monkey' vibes to someone maxed out in the same skill in PF2?

Can we do as much with skills in PF1 as in PF2 in the end?
Not counting class abilities, is it more skillmonkey to never fail the DC, or to be able to use skills in ways other can't even attempt?

If someone is going to claim to be a skillmonkey, then I would expect them to be as good at skills as the wizard is at casting spells, as they're fighting for the same niche in the party (non combat problem solving). So a skill monkey should succeed at whatever skill it is they've been brought on the job for.

I don't care what they can do with the skills so long as they succeed at doing it when we need them to do it. That's why they were brought along.

Performance on command, at the drop of a hat. That's the kind of reliability that I expect from someone who claims to be a skillmonkey.

The game is designed to highlight a sense of risk, uncertainty, danger, and drama.

This is as true for spell casters as it is for skill users and martial classes. Spells that once guaranteed success like Knock, Discern Lies, True Seeing, Nondetection, Mind Blank and Cure Disease now either improve your chances or give you a chance to counter powerful magic using the new countering mechanic.

Many spells have variable effects on saves using the same Critical Failure, Failure, Success, and Critical Success breakdowns. They do tend to have a small impact even on failure, but they use a pool of much more limited spell slots.

Additionally spell casters can no longer stack their save DCs sky high to guarantee success and targeting poor saves no longer means automatic success because saves scale much better.

No one gets to obviate challenges on command anymore. You have to engage with the game and take risks. This is true for everyone.

You might not like it, but I am thrilled by it. Spell casters and feel more engaging than they have ever been. You need to make decisions and consider the risks carefully.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

3 Dedications do not require 3 class feats. They require you to spend 3 class feats per dedication. You could get to the your third fighter dedication by 14th level, but at that point you have only your first level fighter feat. You are barely a fighter.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

As someone who likes to play spell casters I am a fan of most of the changes to spell duration because I like when I cast spells to matter. I like that to get the most of my spells I must make tactical and strategic decisions. I like that I could make the wrong call.

Playing a spell caster should be engaging.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Honestly Medicine is likely to be the forte of most healing focused Clerics as well. They are likely to have the highest Wisdom in the party and due to corresponding themes can use Treat Wounds and Refocus at the same time. Honestly being able to use Medicine rather than spell slots for out of combat healing feels like a win to me.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

There's a reason why recovery from combat is broken up into specific actions instead of abstract short rests. It's because you are expected to prioritize and manage your time. Do you refocus or get your wounds treated? Do you have enough time to repair your shield? If you have one character who is trained in medicine whose wounds get treated first? Some of our spells are still up. Do we progress or recover? Is someone going to search the room?

This stuff is not meant to be automatic. You will not always have the time to properly recover. If that was the expectation Barbarians would not have a class feat that let them use rage a second time.

This is supposed to be part of game play.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

One of the fundamental issues with level by level multi-classing from a design perspective is that you cannot grant powerful class defining features at first level. This means you are several levels in before your character really feels like their class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Pants are part of armor obviously. If you are an alchemist with a thing for unstable mutagens I recommend purple pants.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

There is some coverage for using different Ability Scores with skills. This is explicitly mentioned in Recall Knowledge, but there is no specific coverage for Craft. I personally would probably use Strength for Blacksmithing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Monsters in Pathfinder 2 are built to be roughly equivalent of a PC of the same level. What we have seen so far from caster types in the Bestiary is they have defenses and hit points that are pretty similar to what one would expect from a Wizard or Cloistered Cleric of that level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

So far the more monstrous ancestries are marked as Uncommon, meaning they explicitly require GM approval to use. This was not the case in 4e where they were implicitly core.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think what I will do for those spells is to allow those specific bloodlines to be treated as evil or good regardless of their actual alignment, exude an evil alignment aura, and take damage from good damage. I'm unsure if I want to invite the possibility of multiple auras in the case the caster's actual alignment is good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
whew wrote:
Yes, I'm just saying that you should be comparing wizard damage to archer damage, not melee fighter damage. Do fighter archers do as much damage as melee fighters?

It's also a comparison in terms of optimal melee damage. Do you know how many of these monsters knock you about, eat your insides, poison you, give you diseases, have passive damage auras, grab you, frighten you, or knock you on your ass? Then there's the whole smack you around bit and movement dropping your damage.

It's hard out there for melee.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

There are magic shields. They just do not receive an item bonus. Instead they get more hardness and hp for the blocking. All the listed ones are specific magic shields. They do not use runes.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Here's the thing about auto scaling Armor Proficiency. For the vast majority of the leveling experience spell casters have the exact same level of armor proficiency as martial characters who are not monks and champions. Some reach Mastery at 17. Some like the Rogue, Ranger, and Barbarian do not get Master proficiency until level 19. The rogue finally reaches Expert in leather armor at 13. Armor proficiency is also a really big deal for some casters. A war priest trades away spell casting potency in part for access to medium armor and a favorable weapon proficiency schedule. It's also a big part of the conceptual identity for Bards.

When it comes to weapons those are also a big part of class identity for a number of casters. It's part of the space that separates Bards and Clerics from the other casters. It creates a middle ground between more martially inclined casters and less martially inclined casters. When it comes to unarmed combat the monk is supposed to be the undisputed master. and they reach master at level 13 and do not get any better.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Agency is about the ability to make decisions that have an impact. Class choice in this edition has a strong impact. It means something to play a fighter, monk, or a barbarian. The experience of playing one or the other will feel meaningfully different at the table. The sorts of decisions a monk makes at the table will be colored by active abilities they have that a fighter does not share.

Within each class there are a host of decisions that one can make that will impact the actual experience of play, particularly in classes like the Barbarian, Monk, and Champion. Even relatively simple choices like the Barbarian's Instinct have ripples that impact available choices down the road. A Giant Instinct Barbarian is fundamentally different from a Dragon Instinct Barbarian.

The skill system has also dramatically opened up. Any class can serve as the party's face. Any class can track, although a Ranger will be slightly better. The skill feat system also allows characters to specialize in ways that open up new options to them where even two characters who are good at Diplomacy can be good at it in different ways.

There are a number of concepts that were phenomenally difficult to implement in Pathfinder 1 that are phenomenally easy to manage in Pathfinder 2. Just yesterday I built a Barbarian who was meant to represent a refined bastard son of a noble family who falls prey to a foul temper because his father bathed him in the blood of a red dragon as a baby. He has nightmares where he hears the whispers of the dead dragon. I built him as a Skilled Human with the ancestry feat that grants two additional trained skills with the noble background. His class feat allows him to use Demoralize while raging.

16 Strength 14 Constitution 12 Dexterity 10 Wisdom 10 Intelligence 16 Charisma

Trained Skills: Diplomacy, Intimidate, Deception, Society, Athletics, Lore (Heraldry), Lore (Dragons), Arcana

This character is not far behind an optimized character in combat capability and incredibly skilled in social encounters. In combat he can make use of Demoralize and Feint far better too. There are opportunity costs. He does not have Sudden Charge and could have an additional class feat and general feat if I went that route, but I have a hard time imagining how I could create a character like this at first level in any other modern version of D&D.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The cantrips you gain with Bard Dedication come from the Occult spell list. Inspire courage is a composition cantrip that is exclusive to the Bard. Abilities like inspire courage are class defining.

Here's the way I look at it: the first level in a class is the most formative. You do not level up from being 0 level to 1st level and pick a class. It represents years of dedication or it's who you have always been. One does not simply become a champion, fighter, wizard, or monk.

On a game design level if a game is designed with free multi-classing in mind we would not get such powerful features at 1st level. It would take several levels for the class to feel like the class. I am personally not alright with that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I would much rather the answer to a character fundamentally changing who they are result in effectively retraining their class and rebuilding that character as if their new class was always their starting point. A war priest who has the multi-class archetype for fighter transitions to the opposite or maybe a champion. As long as I can square the fiction I am fine with this.

From where I stand your class is not just indicative of a particular skill set. It represents who you are, who you see yourself as, how you address the world. This does not change easily. Being a fighter requires dedication, daily practice, and a commitment to honing your martial skills. Abandoning that path and mentality means that you are no longer in your core a fighter. You have given it up. It should be a big deal. Your entire life up to that point has all been in dedication to skill at arms. I think transitioning from one class to another is the best way to handle what should be a big story moment.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Here's the thing: in order to take advantage of medium armor effectively you have to dedicate boosts to Strength or suffer some pretty heavy penalties. If a cloistered cleric puts those same boosts into Dexterity they will end up at the same AC value over time. It's difficult to do at first level, but it's also pretty difficult for the war priest. Over time you will end up with the exact same AC.

It's also important to realize the casting proficiency does not just matter when it comes to saves. You use it for anything that utilizes the counteract mechanic including remove curse, remove disease, true seeing, and dispel magic. Your higher caster DC also makes it much harder to dispel the powerful buffs you cast.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think it's a balancing act. Obviously we want to support people playing the characters they want to play, but we also want to support a meaningful reward for players playing the game well. One of my favorite parts of this edition is that the three action economy includes a space for players of martial characters to play the game well at the table. Things like movement, properly managing your reactions, knowing when to use combat maneuvers, handling resistance, and weapon choice all matter.

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>