Deep 6 FaWtL


Off-Topic Discussions

231,301 to 231,350 of 280,811 << first < prev | 4622 | 4623 | 4624 | 4625 | 4626 | 4627 | 4628 | 4629 | 4630 | 4631 | 4632 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Good both work best for us.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Napier 698 wrote:
Which brings me in to ask the question. What alignment does the SA AP assume that the party holds? CN, CE, or NE? My opinion is that the AP is meant for a party of Chaotic Evil characters.

I don't know that APs ever post intended alignments unless they're specifically good (WotR) or evil (HV), but in the Player's Guide 2 of the 10 campaign traits have alignment requirements, and both of those require players to be good-aligned.

EDIT: Strange Aeons also holds the all-time record for, "This NPC is immune to Diplomacy and attacks the party if they try to negotiate."
Such writing is sheer vindictiveness against players who like roleplaying, in my mind. (On the other hand, having read the Advice forums once too often, I'm sure it's an overreaction to players building +40 Diplomacy PCs who just walk up and say, "Hey, hand me all your stuff, please.")


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Attack of the Swarm might be my new favorite Starfinder AP.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's not explicit, but rather a tendency I've noticed about the way stuff is written and the general expectation of a path of action through most campaigns.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Good both work best for us.

Your Chaotic Neutral is showing...


5 people marked this as a favorite.

That's actually my chaotic good.

If it was my chaotic neutral it would be in the middle of the page with political sloganeering and conspiracy theories thrown around like smurf dung.


Orthos wrote:
John Napier 698 wrote:
Which brings me in to ask the question. What alignment does the SA AP assume that the party holds? CN, CE, or NE? My opinion is that the AP is meant for a party of Chaotic Evil characters.

Paizo APs, unless written for a specific exception (like Wrath of the Righteous leans towards LG, Hell's Vengeance towards LE, etc.), tend to assume the party is CG, or at least CG-friendly.

But as NH has pointed out on many occasions, SA seems to keep assuming the PCs are willing to do non-good acts to make money and keep up with expected wealth. So... I'm guessing any of those three would work nicely, but I guess the default would be CN since it's not explicitly an evil campaign?

The iconics for the AP are:

- Feiya the CG witch of Desna from the Linnorm Kingdoms
- Erasmus the N Medium from Ustalav (the only native!)
- Quinn the LG investigator from Galt
- Alahazra the LG oracle from

So... nope! They just seem to have a very, very different idea of what LG is from NH, I'm guessing.

EDIT 2: Oh! Oh! Oh-oh-oh-oh-oh! Maaaayyyyybe they bought into the the hype that the medium is somehow overpowered due to versatility, and they just expect that after the lawful good types do their thing, he goes back and robs all the semi-baddies blind! Nailed it! First try!

EDIT: as an aside, I'm oft reminded of the Council of Thieves AP which, honestly, just works best if your PCs aren't lawful good. I mean, they certainly can be, of course, but it requires a lot of breaking-and-entering, theft, outright lies, and other exceptionally illegal or morally questionable activity. So, of course, one of the iconics for that AP is Seelah.

I mean, you can certainly reconcile the behavior and alignment, but it's worth noting that Paizo believes that being part of what amounts to a non-governmental "fight for freedom" group (definitely doing good for the local community, but who also, through illicit or specious means, assaults the mayor's manor - twice, technically, though they have permission the second time, as it's kind of... necessary - and attacks/ambushes/robs various lawfully-appointed government authorities, and generally behaves in a manner that could legally be defined as "terrorists" even if they keep civilians out of it) can do that sort of thing, while maintaining a paladin status. So, you know.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

RE: AP alignments: unless stated otherwise, most presume good or a mixture of good and neutral alignments. Some will specify what is appropriate for the campaign--e.g., in addition to the others mentioned, Skull and Shackles is a pirate campaign so presumes a lot of chaotic alignments and provides alternative actions for both heroic and dastardly PCs. And it outright says paladins are a bad idea because piracy just isn't going to really align with a paladin's code.

NobodysHome wrote:


Yet if they don't fight, they lose out on almost all of the loot in the AP.

I've noticed a LOT of game designers across the hobby have a bad habit of falling back on the oldskool dungeon crawl and/or video game concept that all treasure should come from winning a fight. One thing I've noticed I've had to do is throw more treasure into non-fight caches (or put non-fight related caches into the game) to make up for when the PCs keep finding a way to avoid a fight.

Of course my players often try to do everything they can to avoid danger (why they want to play a group of adventures I don't know, but this is what I have to work with). I do expect reward to result from risk taking--but it doesn't have to mean killing everything in sight.

Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

My PCs come up with clever ways to escape conflict. I am extremely unfond of writing that punishes them harshly for their ingenuity.

That IS ridiculous. Does it stop the narrative if the PC does anything else? Like something totally sensible like "walk away" or "make a Diplomacy or Intimidate check" or "cast Charm Person" etc? Or do you have to make the story take a sharp left to account for rational behavior?

This reminds me of the module I mentioned, Plunder and Peril.

Lengthy Rambling That is Not Worth Reading:

Which is AP relevant because it's supposed to serve as an alternative for Skull and Shackles part 2 if you want a more swashbuckly adventure. (And it is a better, more swashbuckly adventure until you get to the godawful third section.) In this one there's a point in the third section where you are following your rivals into a dungeon trying to stop them from getting to a big treasure before you do.

Early on you encounter the first rival, who was left behind by the others when severely wounded. You can kill or save him, and even convince him to accompany your party, but the module notes he is "too wounded to keep fighting." Or some nonsense like that. There are two problems with this. The first is of course the party could heal him fully. It gets better: the character is a bard whose statblock notes he has cure light wounds on his spell list. And the module gives NO guidance as to whether he is out of spells (or performance, etc.) or not--the most literal GM would work with the stats as exactly given and thus the bard would have all spells and performance left. Even more stupid, the narrative suggests he insists on leaving the dungeon if he can--except that's nearly impossible, because the door you enter is extraordinarily hard to open and closes one minute later (and to leave, you'd have to stand in front of incredibly hard to disable scorching ray traps while trying to trigger the opening mechanism. While the module does say he can go with you, it gives you zero guidance on what he does with your party, such as talk about what his rivals are up to or how he reacts to the fates of his own party as you discover them in the dungeon.

(But the module does take lots of extra time to describe all these fiddly details about the dungeon you are in that have ABSOLUTELY ZERO BEARING ON THE PLOT WHATSOEVER, including providing skill challenges that provide no real benefit to you at all.)

Then you encounter the second rival, who has gone mad from something he has seen and attacks the party. Of course my party who are both good aligned and "talk before fight" types would try to talk him down first. The module provides no guidance on this whatsoever. It doesn't say they CAN'T, but it doesn't tell you what might happen or how this affects the events in the area--you have to adjust on the fly. It seems to assume that the party will not only fight him, but to the death like that's the only possible way the PCs would act. Oh, AND the aforementioned bard you very likely have accompanying your party at this point has spells that could immediately pacify him if successfully cast.

I should add that while this is a rival party, your party has spent a considerable amount of time traveling with this group under up-until-recently friendly circumstances. While there may be bad blood between the groups, they may have also interacted enough to want to try to work it out or even know how to disable them. None of this is addressed.

Oh, but about those random Gholgan carvings that have nothing to do with the story, here's three paragraphs...


I'm not reading that spoiler... not because I don't want to, or don't think it's not worth reading, but because I might be a player, soooooo-

:D

Next time, baby!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nothing compares to the hot mess that is City of Seven Spears.

Such an amazing map of a lost city though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Nothing compares to the hot mess that is City of Seven Spears.

Such an amazing map of a lost city though.

I ran City of Seven Spears for a bunch of 13-year-olds.

It was WAY better than books 3 or 4 of Strange Aeons.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If the alternative is to let them beat you up for extralegal ends, that is not lawful or good, but stupid. Which is often what lawful and good ends up being.
You know, normally I kinda enjoy the little debates that go on here between you and those of us with more lawful mindsets, but this has crossed the line from silly banter to active insult.

I think it's a coastal thing. Freehold doesn't bother me at all, because I know it's meant as affectionate tweaking. Yet the guy who basically said, "Man up and be a real GM" really insulted me.

I don't mind Freehold's proddings. Because it lets me give him more spoiler than he wants to read. :-P

** spoiler omitted **...

Spoiler:

ENCOUNTER 1- Spellcasting with no reprisal from the people the spell is cast on is a bit weird. I know a lot of players who would not be okay if that was done to them, so it's a bit weird for these guys idly sit and let spells be cast upon their vessel and say its all good or even just to be humbled by the party and not want revenge. They may just be forgettable minor villains, but enemies you spare tend to make plans, even if it is just something as petty as dropping the party's name to a more powerful entity.

ENCOUNTER 2- "The govement of Galt?" The adventure path expects the party to take that sentence seriously? YOU take that sentence seriously? Last I read Galt's "government" changes on a weekly basis, and claims of being a "government agent from Galt" or some such is simply not taken very seriously by its neighbors, and is seen as a claim of active banditry in at least one of the River Kingdoms. Or have things changed there? More seriously though, I dont see why this guy would need to die/get into an actual fight unless he takes issue with the party having contact with his target, which he just might- it is certainly the case irl with bounty hunters. What you describe sounds a lot less like a "licensed and bonded bounty hunter" and a lot more like "hired killer". Again, this is just how you have described it, I do not own this AP and I am not rushing out to buy it tomorrow, but I just might read a friends copy just to be better informed. Then again, if I had a copper for every time lawful good types ended up on the side of a hired gun, I would be quite wealthy...

ENCOUNTER 3- This has to be the only one where I agree something sounds incredibly wrong here. You are on a recovery mission, you shouldn't help yourself to the guys stuff. Unless the people who hired you to get the body said you get his stuff for free as payment? I have seen that before in game, and I could see a lawful good sort saying that is little more than grave robbing, but that is such a cultural (not alignment) issue that it could be discussed essentially forever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We're almost done with the job on the edge of the swamp, it's turning out really nice.

I'm glad we got to finish it instead of handing it off to Captain Bob Ross.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If the alternative is to let them beat you up for extralegal ends, that is not lawful or good, but stupid. Which is often what lawful and good ends up being.
You know, normally I kinda enjoy the little debates that go on here between you and those of us with more lawful mindsets, but this has crossed the line from silly banter to active insult.
I'm not the one simply shrugging my shoulder and letting hired thugs beat me up because it seems to be the lawful (and somehow good) thing to do. Clearly there is something missing from the description of the situation, but this AP may be so poorly written that that is EXACTLY what happens. I was waiting for more info from NH on that wrinkle, but he hasn't really responded yet.

You're making some weird assumption that the PCs are supposed to allow themselves to get beat up.

They can just leave. They don't have to fight at all. In fact, they're on a river journey so it is tactically advantageous and easier to leave than it is to stay and fight a bunch of pointless thugs.

If you are playing a game where enemies have no memories and wont try to bring that back to them at the first opportunity, then...I guess that's how you roll.

Quote:
Yet if they don't fight, they lose out on almost all of the loot in the AP.

That's a bit unfair.

Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

That always ends well...people should ignore the immediate family of the people they have a potentially violent history with. Always walk away. No way that could EVER come back to haunt them or affect the child's life in any way!

Quote:
My PCs come up with clever ways to escape conflict. I am extremely unfond of writing that punishes them harshly for their ingenuity.

*cough* Whingey *cough*


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Orthos wrote:
John Napier 698 wrote:
Which brings me in to ask the question. What alignment does the SA AP assume that the party holds? CN, CE, or NE? My opinion is that the AP is meant for a party of Chaotic Evil characters.

Paizo APs, unless written for a specific exception (like Wrath of the Righteous leans towards LG, Hell's Vengeance towards LE, etc.), tend to assume the party is CG, or at least CG-friendly.

But as NH has pointed out on many occasions, SA seems to keep assuming the PCs are willing to do non-good acts to make money and keep up with expected wealth. So... I'm guessing any of those three would work nicely, but I guess the default would be CN since it's not explicitly an evil campaign?

The iconics for the AP are:

- Feiya the CG witch of Desna from the Linnorm Kingdoms
- Erasmus the N Medium from Ustalav (the only native!)
- Quinn the LG investigator from Galt
- Alahazra the LG oracle from

So... nope! They just seem to have a very, very different idea of what LG is from NH, I'm guessing.

EDIT 2: Oh! Oh! Oh-oh-oh-oh-oh! Maaaayyyyybe they bought into the the hype that the medium is somehow overpowered due to versatility, and they just expect that after the lawful good types do their thing, he goes back and robs all the semi-baddies blind! Nailed it! First try!

EDIT: as an aside, I'm oft reminded of the Council of Thieves AP which, honestly, just works best if your PCs aren't lawful good. I mean, they certainly can be, of course, but it requires a lot of breaking-and-entering, theft, outright lies, and other exceptionally illegal or morally questionable activity. So, of course, one of the iconics for that AP is Seelah.

I mean, you can certainly reconcile the behavior and alignment,...

Counterpoint: CoT just doesn't work, period. AP does a crap job moderating expectations right out of the gate, tone's weird throughout, and the Drovenges are just...aggressively meh as antagonists. It needs a steamroller of TLC to be run coherently.

But that gets us back to the point of "why am I buying this AP when I have to change everything anyway?"

It dovetails into NH's problems - the AP writers don't seem able to anticipate what to do if a party doesn't follow their specific flowchart.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeathQuaker wrote:


NobodysHome wrote:


Yet if they don't fight, they lose out on almost all of the loot in the AP.

I've noticed a LOT of game designers across the hobby have a bad habit of falling back on the oldskool dungeon crawl and/or video game concept that all treasure should come from winning a fight. One thing I've noticed I've had to do is throw more treasure into non-fight caches (or put non-fight related caches into the game) to make up for when the PCs keep finding a way to avoid a fight.

Of course my players often try to do everything they can to avoid danger (why they want to play a group of adventures I don't know, but this is what I have to work with). I do expect reward to result from risk taking--but it doesn't have to mean killing everything in sight.

I think this is a bad overreaction to this player philosophy on the author's part. It is EXTREMELY frustrating, but I have no idea how to fight it without having a Frank conversation before characters are rolled up about what to expect in the game. That said, I am a big fan of players having side hustles and even day jobs, so they are not forced into murderhoboing or just begging for cash.

Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

My PCs come up with clever ways to escape conflict. I am extremely unfond of writing that punishes them harshly for their ingenuity.

That IS ridiculous. Does it stop the narrative if the PC does anything else? Like something totally sensible like "walk away" or "make a Diplomacy or Intimidate check" or "cast Charm Person" etc? Or do you have to make the story take a sharp left to account for rational behavior?

One of these things is not like the other. Walking away is not Diplomacy or Intimidate or Charm Person and should not be treated as if it were.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:


Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

That always ends well......people should ignore the immediate family of the people they have a potentially violent history with. Always walk away. No way that could EVER come back to haunt them or affect the child's life in any way!

I'm not sure trying to use the Prequels to prove your point is at all helpful.


Scintillae wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Orthos wrote:
John Napier 698 wrote:
Which brings me in to ask the question. What alignment does the SA AP assume that the party holds? CN, CE, or NE? My opinion is that the AP is meant for a party of Chaotic Evil characters.

Paizo APs, unless written for a specific exception (like Wrath of the Righteous leans towards LG, Hell's Vengeance towards LE, etc.), tend to assume the party is CG, or at least CG-friendly.

But as NH has pointed out on many occasions, SA seems to keep assuming the PCs are willing to do non-good acts to make money and keep up with expected wealth. So... I'm guessing any of those three would work nicely, but I guess the default would be CN since it's not explicitly an evil campaign?

The iconics for the AP are:

- Feiya the CG witch of Desna from the Linnorm Kingdoms
- Erasmus the N Medium from Ustalav (the only native!)
- Quinn the LG investigator from Galt
- Alahazra the LG oracle from

So... nope! They just seem to have a very, very different idea of what LG is from NH, I'm guessing.

EDIT 2: Oh! Oh! Oh-oh-oh-oh-oh! Maaaayyyyybe they bought into the the hype that the medium is somehow overpowered due to versatility, and they just expect that after the lawful good types do their thing, he goes back and robs all the semi-baddies blind! Nailed it! First try!

EDIT: as an aside, I'm oft reminded of the Council of Thieves AP which, honestly, just works best if your PCs aren't lawful good. I mean, they certainly can be, of course, but it requires a lot of breaking-and-entering, theft, outright lies, and other exceptionally illegal or morally questionable activity. So, of course, one of the iconics for that AP is Seelah.

I mean, you can certainly

...

I love kingmaker and that was a game where the players can change things out of the gate. I had to throw out much of the later books because the party had just gone so far off the beaten path it wasn't funny.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:


Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

That always ends well......people should ignore the immediate family of the people they have a potentially violent history with. Always walk away. No way that could EVER come back to haunt them or affect the child's life in any way!

I'm not sure trying to use the Prequels to prove your point is at all helpful.

Meesa not know what yousa mean. Meesa new avatar of Desna!


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Jar-Jar Binks wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:


Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

That always ends well......people should ignore the immediate family of the people they have a potentially violent history with. Always walk away. No way that could EVER come back to haunt them or affect the child's life in any way!

I'm not sure trying to use the Prequels to prove your point is at all helpful.
Meesa not know what yousa mean. Meesa new avatar of Desna!

KILL IT KILL IT WITH ALL THE FIRE


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Scintillae wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Orthos wrote:
John Napier 698 wrote:
Which brings me in to ask the question. What alignment does the SA AP assume that the party holds? CN, CE, or NE? My opinion is that the AP is meant for a party of Chaotic Evil characters.

Paizo APs, unless written for a specific exception (like Wrath of the Righteous leans towards LG, Hell's Vengeance towards LE, etc.), tend to assume the party is CG, or at least CG-friendly.

But as NH has pointed out on many occasions, SA seems to keep assuming the PCs are willing to do non-good acts to make money and keep up with expected wealth. So... I'm guessing any of those three would work nicely, but I guess the default would be CN since it's not explicitly an evil campaign?

The iconics for the AP are:

- Feiya the CG witch of Desna from the Linnorm Kingdoms
- Erasmus the N Medium from Ustalav (the only native!)
- Quinn the LG investigator from Galt
- Alahazra the LG oracle from

So... nope! They just seem to have a very, very different idea of what LG is from NH, I'm guessing.

EDIT 2: Oh! Oh! Oh-oh-oh-oh-oh! Maaaayyyyybe they bought into the the hype that the medium is somehow overpowered due to versatility, and they just expect that after the lawful good types do their thing, he goes back and robs all the semi-baddies blind! Nailed it! First try!

EDIT: as an aside, I'm oft reminded of the Council of Thieves AP which, honestly, just works best if your PCs aren't lawful good. I mean, they certainly can be, of course, but it requires a lot of breaking-and-entering, theft, outright lies, and other exceptionally illegal or morally questionable activity. So, of course, one of the iconics for that AP is Seelah.

I

...

Not what I meant.

Kingmaker's designed as a sandbox...for the most part. CoT is not.

CoT:
Janiven's introduction in the first session has her outright calling for the overthrow of House Thrune. Which plants the idea in the PCs' heads that this is where things will go. The AP itself makes abundantly clear that This Is Not Happening, No Way In Hell, Nuh-Uh, Nope...at least in the resolution to chapter 6, where your best option is martial law not being declared.

Expectations as the DM is instructed to relay them to the party do not match the explicitly stated bounds of both AP and setting. This leads to disappointed players and frustrated DM.


EDIT:

ninja'd by Scint!

Scintillae wrote:
SPOILERS

I'll agree the AP needs love.

I found the <spoilers> to be very fine protagonists, but the problem is that there is virtually nothing given away about them - at all - to the point that the PCs are likely going, "Wait... who?" when the big reveal happens.

(This did not happen with my group, but only because I played relatively extensively in tying them to the city before getting into the AP.)

Also the whole fame system was a complete mess.

AP
Step One > "Here, wear masks so that literally no one can ever guess it's you - ever!" {{apply thoroughly for AP entries 1-4}}

Step Two > "Wait, you're those famous people what keep doing all the terrorism heroics! Sure, you take over kaythnxbai~!" {{apply to two people who are never seen again for entries 4-5}}

Step Three > "Oh, yeah, we aaaaaaalllllll know who you are and all about your super-secret base, which is why we never sent anyone to kill you, even though you presented a clear and present threat to our former regime. No, no one told us, we just know." {{Apply to entry 6}}

Step Four > "Here, own the city! (But stay loyal.)" and/or "You suck, you're the worst, burn them! Burn the heretic and cause them to lose the AP!" {{Apply to the very end of entry 6}}

And you're expected to keep points tallied from across all six AP entries, but they certainly didn't tally up any running totals!

And here's the thing, you can totally hammer stuff out and make it work. We sure did, and we even loved that AP; but there is no guidance on how to work with the politics and political elite, how to hand the secret identities v. public persona (that you definitely have), and how to handle the natural consequences of character action that you explicitly take throughout the AP.

For a non-spoiler version (emphasizing the problems):

- 1) START IT WITH A SEWER LEVEL + anti-government ambush (but don't kill anyone~!) + become radicalized "city betterment squad" (Secret Base/Hidden Identity: GET!)

- 2) become actors, get invited to a party, and screw over the one who invited you! (Weird MacGuffin: GET!)

- 3) breaking and entering and theft part two! Like a hero! (Hidden MacGuffin: GET!)

- 4) remember that one guy you screwed over (not literally, I hope, he's so gross)? Time to do that again! (This time it's kind of okay, though. ... though there is a very non-zero chance that you're directly the cause of the problem, too.) (Bragging Rights*: GET!)

* qualified by circumstances
[ooc]I do wish mythic had existed back then and been integrated into this entry, though

- 5) go on a side-quest that has no bearing on anything that's happened so far, but it sure does give you an info dump! Also MacGuffin from part 3 comes in handy and goes away forever! (Technical-AP-Goal-Completion-that-you-can-only-understand-in-context-of-pr evious-entries-in-this-AP-hope-it-hasn't-been-more-than-a-year-since-you-pl ayed-them: GET!)

- 6) I mean, by this point, the city is pretty much a ruin, so do whatever you want, I guess... I mean, uh, fight it out with <spoiler> you've literally never met and have no clue who it is, also this other person that you may or may not have seen. (Okay, so maybe for real this time: GET!)

... but there is still much to love. For its faults, the idea of two is fantastic... it just arbitrarily jerks the PCs around a bit, shows off some cool stuff (with a big DO NOT TOUCH sticker) and then tricks them into causing more problems (probably) if you run it as written.

captain yesterday wrote:

Nothing compares to the hot mess that is City of Seven Spears.

Such an amazing map of a lost city though.

Oh my word, this is so daggum true. I keep wanting that entry to be so good, and yet... and yet...


Scintillae wrote:

Not what I meant.

Kingmaker's designed as a sandbox...for the most part. CoT is not.
CoT: spoiler

Yeah, also there's stuff like this.

And that's much of the problem - the coherency of the AP is a bit all over the place, and tone and expectations are a problem.

ONE
"Hey, join a group; overthrow Thrune!" (By the way, GM, make sure the players know that this is a dumb and absolutely impossible; not gonna happen. This is supposed to be "work with the government" Now go run away from the cops and then lead an ambush on government authorities!)

TWO
"Hey, let's go completely anonymous and make sure no one can identify us!" {{four entries later}} "Hey, it's you! I know you from your heroics!"

THREE
"Hey, let's go do good in the city!" (Here, GM, they're supposed to ambush the authorities, become actors, and engage in breaking and entering. Also, most everything is a dungeon crawl or random encounters. Exceptions apply, see within for details.)

FOUR

Spoiler:
(GM, make sure they respect the city and the government in it.) "Let's rob the mayor! (but not too much!)"

There are really golden moments, but it's hard to describe them without BIG OL' SPOILERS, but those are parts I laughed at, as a GM and had to figure work-arounds for.

EDIT: another example and some spoilers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:


Quote:

EDIT: I was going to go on a big, angry tirade here, but it's FaWtL, so I'll be mellow:

An angry child walks up to a 20th-level paladin and says, "I hate you! You put my father in jail! I'm going to beat you up!"

Stating that the paladin's only two possible choices are to either
(a) Beat up the child and take his things, or
(b) Allow himself to be beat up because 'Lawful Stupid'
is a fundamentally false dichotomy.

That always ends well......people should ignore the immediate family of the people they have a potentially violent history with. Always walk away. No way that could EVER come back to haunt them or affect the child's life in any way!

I'm not sure trying to use the Prequels to prove your point is at all helpful.

watch some clone wars, get back to me.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
DeathQuaker wrote:
Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

It's so easy and it's practically bulletproof. The tilapia I get is individually frozen. So normally an hour before dinner:

* I rub a little olive oil on unpeeled russet potatoes (one each for Mom and Dad), stick them on a foil-lined 7"x11" mini-baking sheet, and slide them into the heated 400°F oven for an hour. If you use higher-moisture potatoes (like Goldust), stab them three of four times with a toothpick to help vent the steam, otherwise they will might literally explode in the oven.
* Then I start on prepping the still-frozen fish. I don't even have to thaw them first. I just arrange them on their parchment sheets and sprinkle on some Old Bay Seasoning & Italian dried seasoning blend. Add a slice of lemon or two, drizzle on a bit of olive oil, flip the fish over, season and drizzle the other side.
* Fold the parchment pouches up and arrange in the corningware baking dish. Once the timer for the baking potatoes has counted down to 40 minutes remaining, I slide the frozen fish pouches into the oven too.
* Then I just need to steam a bag of frozen corn or spinach in the microwave. If I'm having pre-made frozen hushpuppies like tonight, I use the toaster oven (they bake at 425°F for 14-16 minutes and I don't want to overcook the fish.)

It's probably the easiest meal I regularly cook.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

About to go home. Good night, everyone.


Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

It's so easy and it's practically bulletproof. The tilapia I get is individually frozen. So normally an hour before dinner:

* I rub a little olive oil on unpeeled russet potatoes (one each for Mom and Dad), stick them on a foil-lined 7"x11" mini-baking sheet, and slide them into the heated 400°F oven for an hour. If you use higher-moisture potatoes (like Goldust), stab them three of four times with a toothpick to help vent the steam, otherwise they will might literally explode in the oven.
* Then I start on prepping the still-frozen fish. I don't even have to thaw them first. I just arrange them on their parchment sheets and sprinkle on some Old Bay Seasoning & Italian dried seasoning blend. Add a slice of lemon or two, drizzle on a bit of olive oil, flip the fish over, season and drizzle the other side.
* Fold the parchment pouches up and arrange in the corningware baking dish. Once the timer for the baking potatoes has counted down to 40 minutes remaining, I slide the frozen fish pouches into the oven too.
* Then I just need to steam a bag of frozen corn or spinach in the microwave. If I'm having pre-made frozen hushpuppies like tonight, I use the toaster oven (they bake at 425°F for 14-16 minutes and I don't want to overcook the fish.)

It's probably the easiest meal I regularly cook.

sounds heavenly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

It's so easy and it's practically bulletproof. The tilapia I get is individually frozen. So normally an hour before dinner:

* I rub a little olive oil on unpeeled russet potatoes (one each for Mom and Dad), stick them on a foil-lined 7"x11" mini-baking sheet, and slide them into the heated 400°F oven for an hour. If you use higher-moisture potatoes (like Goldust), stab them three of four times with a toothpick to help vent the steam, otherwise they will might literally explode in the oven.
* Then I start on prepping the still-frozen fish. I don't even have to thaw them first. I just arrange them on their parchment sheets and sprinkle on some Old Bay Seasoning & Italian dried seasoning blend. Add a slice of lemon or two, drizzle on a bit of olive oil, flip the fish over, season and drizzle the other side.
* Fold the parchment pouches up and arrange in the corningware baking dish. Once the timer for the baking potatoes has counted down to 40 minutes remaining, I slide the frozen fish pouches into the oven too.
* Then I just need to steam a bag of frozen corn or spinach in the microwave. If I'm having pre-made frozen hushpuppies like tonight, I use the toaster oven (they bake at 425°F for 14-16 minutes and I don't want to overcook the fish.)

It's probably the easiest meal I regularly cook.

sounds heavenly.

My pulled pork is better (and still pretty easy).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Good both work best for us.
Your Chaotic Neutral is showing...

You call that Neutral?!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank goodness it's Friday!

With co-worker hobbled and the focus of the week being planting and beds I've been in charge of everything, which is always fun but can get tiring when you're an hour and a half from the shop and a half hour away from any civilization whatsoever for two weeks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I still remember my brother's (pick a brother, any brother) homebrew adventures and campaigns, so I'm eternally grateful to Paizo for Adventure Paths.

Warts, train wrecks and everything, it beats the alternative.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

It's so easy and it's practically bulletproof. The tilapia I get is individually frozen. So normally an hour before dinner:

* I rub a little olive oil on unpeeled russet potatoes (one each for Mom and Dad), stick them on a foil-lined 7"x11" mini-baking sheet, and slide them into the heated 400°F oven for an hour. If you use higher-moisture potatoes (like Goldust), stab them three of four times with a toothpick to help vent the steam, otherwise they will might literally explode in the oven.
* Then I start on prepping the still-frozen fish. I don't even have to thaw them first. I just arrange them on their parchment sheets and sprinkle on some Old Bay Seasoning & Italian dried seasoning blend. Add a slice of lemon or two, drizzle on a bit of olive oil, flip the fish over, season and drizzle the other side.
* Fold the parchment pouches up and arrange in the corningware baking dish. Once the timer for the baking potatoes has counted down to 40 minutes remaining, I slide the frozen fish pouches into the oven too.
* Then I just need to steam a bag of frozen corn or spinach in the microwave. If I'm having pre-made frozen hushpuppies like tonight, I use the toaster oven (they bake at 425°F for 14-16 minutes and I don't want to overcook the fish.)

It's probably the easiest meal I regularly cook.

sounds heavenly.
My pulled pork is better (and still pretty easy).

walks to florida

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Happy Friday FaWtLanteans! Hope everyone has a good day ahead, and an even better weekend. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Heres hoping today goes better than yesterday...

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:


One of these things is not like the other. Walking away is not Diplomacy or Intimidate or Charm Person and should not be treated as if it were.

Where did I say they were all the same thing? Where did I suggest even minutely that this was the case?

The only thing they have in common is they would all be much more likely and more logical reactions by PCs than attack a child or allow the child to attack you (which teaches the child they are right to solve all problems with violence, and would be almost equally likely to send it down a dark path). Of course each action and any other should each come with its own set of consequences.

But it's also not the GM's f$%$ing fault, nor the PCs', if the AP doesn't foresee the need to spell out alternate possibilities/consequences and thus the adventure may have to be rewritten on the fly. And while of course a GM should be able to adjust on the fly to allow for their PCs' actions--NO ONE is actually arguing with you on that actual point--it is pointless to use a module or AP, things that are in theory designed to make the GM's life easier by prepping everything ahead of time for you, when all it does is force you to have to change and rewrite the adventure anyway. If you have to do all the f%%~ing work regardless, you may as well not run an AP and just run an adventure where you can react on the fly to the PCs without having to fight pre-written railroad narrative the entire time.

You know what that situation is? It's the f~%+ing Billy situation in original Wasteland. You look for this dog, get attacked by it because it is rabid, and because the game forces you into combat, you most likely kill it before you are able to retreat (and at the time when you encounter it, your characters are very weak and it could kill them easily if they don't defend themselves). Then you go back to tell Billy what happened, and combat initiates automatically, you can't avoid it. (Also, if you do successfully run away from the dog, the game still assumes you killed it and Billy still automatically attacks you.) And using any sort of speech or other skill to talk him down doesn't work. You CAN run away from him more easily, but he will attack you if you run into him again, and the game--and its sequel which forces you to play out further "consequences" of this non-choice pressed upon you--presumes that you just kill him because that's what the game more or less tries to force you to do. And all because the game just wants to force you into a "gritty" situation to make you feel like you're in a dark world and should have innocent blood on your hands.

Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Amby, thanks for linking that tilapia recipe. I've been trying to eat more fish but am a novice still at cooking it.

It's so easy and it's practically bulletproof. The tilapia I get is individually frozen. So normally an hour before dinner:

* I rub a little olive oil on unpeeled russet potatoes (one each for Mom and Dad), stick them on a foil-lined 7"x11" mini-baking sheet, and slide them into the heated 400°F oven for an hour. If you use higher-moisture potatoes (like Goldust), stab them three of four times with a toothpick to help vent the steam, otherwise they will might literally explode in the oven.
* Then I start on prepping the still-frozen fish. I don't even have to thaw them first. I just arrange them on their parchment sheets and sprinkle on some Old Bay Seasoning & Italian dried seasoning blend. Add a slice of lemon or two, drizzle on a bit of olive oil, flip the fish over, season and drizzle the other side.
* Fold the parchment pouches up and arrange in the corningware baking dish. Once the timer for the baking potatoes has counted down to 40 minutes remaining, I slide the frozen fish pouches into the oven too.
* Then I just need to steam a bag of frozen corn or spinach in the microwave. If I'm having pre-made frozen hushpuppies like tonight, I use the toaster oven (they bake at 425°F for 14-16 minutes and I don't want to overcook the fish.)

It's probably the easiest meal I regularly cook.

Thank you. That sounds awesome. Imma pick up some frozen tilapia at Trader Joe's next time I go.

But please note, you do not EVER need to link/explain to a Baltimorean what Old Bay seasoning is. :) (I presume it was for others' edification and/or the recipe for those who can't find it.) I believe it is legally mandated in the city that everyone owns the spice for at LEAST seafood and french fry seasoning.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Scintillae wrote:

Not what I meant.

Kingmaker's designed as a sandbox...for the most part. CoT is not.
CoT: spoiler

Yeah, also there's stuff like this.

And that's much of the problem - the coherency of the AP is a bit all over the place, and tone and expectations are a problem.

ONE
"Hey, join a group; overthrow Thrune!" (By the way, GM, make sure the players know that this is a dumb and absolutely impossible; not gonna happen. This is supposed to be "work with the government" Now go run away from the cops and then lead an ambush on government authorities!)

TWO
"Hey, let's go completely anonymous and make sure no one can identify us!" {{four entries later}} "Hey, it's you! I know you from your heroics!"

THREE
"Hey, let's go do good in the city!" (Here, GM, they're supposed to ambush the authorities, become actors, and engage in breaking and entering. Also, most everything is a dungeon crawl or random encounters. Exceptions apply, see within for details.)

FOUR
** spoiler omitted **

There are really golden moments, but it's hard to describe them without BIG OL' SPOILERS, but those are parts I laughed at, as a GM and had to figure work-arounds for.

EDIT: another example and some spoilers.

Oh, yeah. CoT has some great moments.

Spoiler:
I love the concept of infiltrating through a play and the Asmodean Knot. The "yeah, our house is powered by a pit fiend" bit from book 4 is an incredibly interesting dungeon idea. But managing the expectations of "build goodwill with these people so you become influential!" versus "viva la chaos, murder all the things because they're corrupt!" is about as tonally dissonant as playing "Baby Shark" with a full, formal orchestra.

But it ultimately does fall into the category of "If I have to overhaul huge swathes of the AP to make it coherent - this is ignoring any alignment-based issues, just basic story structure - I might as well write my own thing since it's not saving me the time I hoped buying a published adventure would."

Yeah, it's great if you like homebrewing and reverse-engineering your plots because you want to do something different, but that's very different from being forced to do so for the sake of narrative integrity. It's like tricking out your car's engine versus having to stop every three miles because it's making scary noises again.


Quote:
You know what that situation is? It's the f!!%ing Billy situation in original Wasteland. You look for this dog, get attacked by it because it is rabid, and because the game forces you into combat, you most likely kill it before you are able to retreat (and at the time when you encounter it, your characters are very weak and it could kill them easily if they don't defend themselves). Then you go back to tell Billy what happened, and combat initiates automatically, you can't avoid it. (Also, if you do successfully run...

There is a (now very old) RPG that starts off similarly, but uses a FAR more dryly humorous situation than that. I'll see if I can find it.

Quote:
But please note, you do not EVER need to link/explain to a Baltimorean what Old Bay seasoning is. :)

Boy oh boy did I learn that!!

I am also patiently waiting for the day where we discover you are nothing more than a box of old bay seasoning piloting a humanoid.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

How to Recognize Someone Who is Not Doing Their Job:

E-Mail #1: "Hi everyone! I am pleased to announce that I'm moving on from Global Megacorporation! Thank you all for being so awesome!

"Reply All" Responder: "Dear xxx. I have completed my review of your material and it looks fine. I made these small changes, but otherwise you may proceed."

In other words, "I've created a copy-paste response for ALL emails from my colleagues, and I'm no longer even bothering to read their emails."

If *I* were that person's manager, a LOOOOONG heart-to-heart would be in order...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

How to Recognize Someone Who is Not Doing Their Job:

E-Mail #1: "Hi everyone! I am pleased to announce that I'm moving on from Global Megacorporation! Thank you all for being so awesome!

"Reply All" Responder: "Dear xxx. I have completed my review of your material and it looks fine. I made these small changes, but otherwise you may proceed."

In other words, "I've created a copy-paste response for ALL emails from my colleagues, and I'm no longer even bothering to read their emails."

If *I* were that person's manager, a LOOOOONG heart-to-heart would be in order...

REPLYALLCALYPSE


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

How to Recognize Someone Who is Not Doing Their Job:

E-Mail #1: "Hi everyone! I am pleased to announce that I'm moving on from Global Megacorporation! Thank you all for being so awesome!

"Reply All" Responder: "Dear xxx. I have completed my review of your material and it looks fine. I made these small changes, but otherwise you may proceed."

In other words, "I've created a copy-paste response for ALL emails from my colleagues, and I'm no longer even bothering to read their emails."

If *I* were that person's manager, a LOOOOONG heart-to-heart would be in order...

REPLYALLCALYPSE

*begins playing Caribbean music*

ReplyAllCalypso?

Sovereign Court

5 people marked this as a favorite.
gran rey de los surround sound wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

How to Recognize Someone Who is Not Doing Their Job:

E-Mail #1: "Hi everyone! I am pleased to announce that I'm moving on from Global Megacorporation! Thank you all for being so awesome!

"Reply All" Responder: "Dear xxx. I have completed my review of your material and it looks fine. I made these small changes, but otherwise you may proceed."

In other words, "I've created a copy-paste response for ALL emails from my colleagues, and I'm no longer even bothering to read their emails."

If *I* were that person's manager, a LOOOOONG heart-to-heart would be in order...

REPLYALLCALYPSE

*begins playing Caribbean music*

ReplyAllCalypso?

ReplyAll-

(•_•)

( •_•)>⌐■-■

(⌐■_■)

-Caruso?

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!


4 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

How to Recognize Someone Who is Not Doing Their Job:

E-Mail #1: "Hi everyone! I am pleased to announce that I'm moving on from Global Megacorporation! Thank you all for being so awesome!

"Reply All" Responder: "Dear xxx. I have completed my review of your material and it looks fine. I made these small changes, but otherwise you may proceed."

In other words, "I've created a copy-paste response for ALL emails from my colleagues, and I'm no longer even bothering to read their emails."

If *I* were that person's manager, a LOOOOONG heart-to-heart would be in order...

Those people need to be burned.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My Virginia trip is complete. Just about to eat lunch and head towards the airport. Where I will sit. Because FNG's flight leaves several hours before mine and we shared a car.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vanykrye wrote:
My Virginia trip is complete. Just about to eat lunch and head towards the airport. Where I will sit. Because FNG's flight leaves several hours before mine and we shared a car.

FOR NO GREYSKULL!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A Brief Review of Cultural "Progress" in the Last 42 Years:

As I was cleaning the kitchen this morning, an unfortunately-odiferous pile of dirty dishes made me think back to a scene in the hilarious Kentucky Fried Movie (a movie made by the same people who did Airplane!, but three years earlier. It's quite hilarious, but hit-or-miss, but usually hit, unlike their "sequel" Amazon Women on the Moon that was more miss than hit).

Anyway...

A stereotypical housewife opens the door to let in guests, and each one in turn says something more derogatory about the smell in the house, from (paraphrasing), "Wash day tomorrow?" to "Plumbing problems?", until at the end a little old lady walks in and says, "C****t! Did a cow s*** in here?"

It was hilarious at the time because it was such a non-sequitur to hear such language coming out of a little old lady.

And as I thought of that scene, I thought, "Y'know, these days such language and behavior would be perfectly normal, and most people wouldn't even bat an eye."

How "far" we've come...


5 people marked this as a favorite.

What does it say that my takeaway was "Oh, so that's where they got that Futurama episode title from"?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

A Brief Review of Cultural "Progress" in the Last 42 Years:

As I was cleaning the kitchen this morning, an unfortunately-odiferous pile of dirty dishes made me think back to a scene in the hilarious Kentucky Fried Movie (a movie made by the same people who did Airplane!, but three years earlier. It's quite hilarious, but hit-or-miss, but usually hit, unlike their "sequel" Amazon Women on the Moon that was more miss than hit).

Anyway...

A stereotypical housewife opens the door to let in guests, and each one in turn says something more derogatory about the smell in the house, from (paraphrasing), "Wash day tomorrow?" to "Plumbing problems?", until at the end a little old lady walks in and says, "C****t! Did a cow s*** in here?"

It was hilarious at the time because it was such a non-sequitur to hear such language coming out of a little old lady.

And as I thought of that scene, I thought, "Y'know, these days such language and behavior would be perfectly normal, and most people wouldn't even bat an eye."

How "far" we've come...

I know we work in very different fields but jesus christ, old people have had foul mouths for as long as I have known them professionally.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

A Brief Review of Cultural "Progress" in the Last 42 Years:

As I was cleaning the kitchen this morning, an unfortunately-odiferous pile of dirty dishes made me think back to a scene in the hilarious Kentucky Fried Movie (a movie made by the same people who did Airplane!, but three years earlier. It's quite hilarious, but hit-or-miss, but usually hit, unlike their "sequel" Amazon Women on the Moon that was more miss than hit).

Anyway...

A stereotypical housewife opens the door to let in guests, and each one in turn says something more derogatory about the smell in the house, from (paraphrasing), "Wash day tomorrow?" to "Plumbing problems?", until at the end a little old lady walks in and says, "C****t! Did a cow s*** in here?"

It was hilarious at the time because it was such a non-sequitur to hear such language coming out of a little old lady.

And as I thought of that scene, I thought, "Y'know, these days such language and behavior would be perfectly normal, and most people wouldn't even bat an eye."

How "far" we've come...

I know we work in very different fields but jesus christ, old people have had foul mouths for as long as I have known them professionally.

You're from New York. Being foul-mouthed is something toddlers learn before they can walk.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
NobodysHome wrote:

A Brief Review of Cultural "Progress" in the Last 42 Years:

As I was cleaning the kitchen this morning, an unfortunately-odiferous pile of dirty dishes made me think back to a scene in the hilarious Kentucky Fried Movie (a movie made by the same people who did Airplane!, but three years earlier. It's quite hilarious, but hit-or-miss, but usually hit, unlike their "sequel" Amazon Women on the Moon that was more miss than hit).

Anyway...

A stereotypical housewife opens the door to let in guests, and each one in turn says something more derogatory about the smell in the house, from (paraphrasing), "Wash day tomorrow?" to "Plumbing problems?", until at the end a little old lady walks in and says, "C****t! Did a cow s*** in here?"

It was hilarious at the time because it was such a non-sequitur to hear such language coming out of a little old lady.

And as I thought of that scene, I thought, "Y'know, these days such language and behavior would be perfectly normal, and most people wouldn't even bat an eye."

How "far" we've come...

I know we work in very different fields but jesus christ, old people have had foul mouths for as long as I have known them professionally.
You're from New York. Being foul-mouthed is something toddlers learn before they can walk.

no, this is outside of New York. I have travelled for work professionally. It's most old folks. Once they pass a certain age they dont care what anyone thinks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Siding with NH on this one. First time I heard a little old lady swear, it was An Event.

231,301 to 231,350 of 280,811 << first < prev | 4622 | 4623 | 4624 | 4625 | 4626 | 4627 | 4628 | 4629 | 4630 | 4631 | 4632 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Deep 6 FaWtL All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.