>>Ask *Tacticslion* to Favorite ALL Your Posts Here!!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

1,801 to 1,850 of 2,228 << first < prev | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Pathfinder Jedi Knight build, brought to you by Queedo, "Han s&$@ first"

Telekineticist, with a level dip in fighter, armed with a Plasma Blade (compliments of AP#100 Songs of Silver)


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

Pathfinder Jedi Knight build, brought to you by Queedo, "Han s!!% first"

Telekineticist, with a level dip in fighter, armed with a Plasma Blade (compliments of AP#100 Songs of Silver)

I think your phone granted you a "Type-O" boon, and it is hilarious (if gross).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

In fairness to my phone, I saw it before I posted. :-)


If you need to Gestalt, you might as well throw Mythic on top of it, and do like a 50 point build, because if you want to Mary Sue, make sure you Mary the Hell out of that Sue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
If you need to Gestalt, you might as well throw Mythic on top of it, and do like a 50 point build, because if you want to Mary Sue, make sure you Mary the Hell out of that Sue.

... nope. That isn't how that works at all. Each of those systems do very, very different things with the system and serve different purposes. Rarely, have I seen them used to "Mary Sue" in ways that aren't possible with a full faster already. And all of those times have been online.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, there are a myriad of ways to stack dazing effects on your spells.

In terms of action economy, Time is the sphere you want. At its most basic, it effectively grants the 4E commander's strike at-will at a range of touch: touch the barbarian, and he swings again. You can eventually work up to the point where you can simultaneously haste your allies, slow your enemies, and attach rider effects to the casting which would enable even more additional actions for your party members. Granted, sustaining such an array of effects is taxing in terms of both concentration and spell points, but a Final Fantasy 'time mage' parallel is the pinnacle of the "Highest initiative = Victory" comment I made earlier.

The +1 CL part isn't alarming at all -- every basic power scales reasonably well with level. I just find it so impressive just because its impact on the smallest of things is so pervasive. The italics there were more about "cool" than "oh, turds".

We still haven't hit our PQ the last few times we've meant to gather to field test the particulars of the system, so this is still moderately informed speculation on my part, primarily. That being said: a Destruction-focused full-caster can accomplish things I would have never dreamed in 3.5/Pathfinder. I can't wait to play it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Mary Sue"?? Huh??

@greentea --

There's no need to gestalt, per se. But it is fun.


EH, I disagree.

If I want to play a game where I always dominate, I'll just as the GM to let me be five levels higher than the enemies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:

EH, I disagree.

If I want to play a game where I always dominate, I'll just as the GM to let me be five levels higher than the enemies.

From a great deal of personal experience, I don't find that as anything resembling a truth about gestalt games. What gestalt does is extend the character's day. More hit points/BAB, better saves, and spells per day -> longer days; what it doesn't generate is "dominating characters" - at least beyond any characters that would, by default, dominate anyway without gestalt. Gestalt changes nothing about action economy, nor about early access to more powerful abilities - the numbers are generally the same, but there are more that are "the same" than otherwise. Effectively, gestalt narrows the gap between characters and their options.

But I find the same strategies that dominate normal games dominate gestalt and to the same degree - we just end up with characters that are more confident about their survival if something outside their primary wheelhouse.

Gestalt without doing everything else isn't all that powerful - at best, it's an average of +3 hit points per level and two skills and a save, or +2 hit points per level and a save and feats, or more spells. Nothing else is really that big a change for casters... and even those are able to be imitated by their spells that they have already.

Again, all of that? That's equal or less than an advanced template.

As an example: if I'm a Druid-wizard, and I can either pump INT and be nearly invincible though a kind of crappy Druid, pump wisdom and be an invincible Druid and a crappy wizard, or balance the two and be somewhat mediocre at both. Either way, I'm going to be a master of Conjuration and Polymorphing, unless I just don't care - exactly the same as a normal game.

On the other hand, mythic changes the dynamic entirely. Your abilities are altered onnanfundamental level, your action economy changes, and you have better numbers than you would by level across the board - that is, unlike gestalt where your numbers are going to roughly equal someone else's, in mythic, they're higher than an equal-leveled character across the board. Beyond that, the dynamic of what those numbers do is altered - your spells and feats do things they literally could not do, or your skills have lower DCs by default and you have bigger numbers, or you can make people do amazing things. All that and you have altered WBL and more of everything (spells, hit points, healing, stats, skills, etc.). It's entirely different dynamic.

Really high point buy is okay. Around fifty, just take all 14s and season to taste with your extra 20 points to maximize one or two scores (though it's still rough on fighter-types). Of course, Could roll that, too. Of course, again that's about the same as an Advanced template.

102 point buy is where it's at, though*. >:)

Regardless, while mythic might** permit successful solo play, gestalt doesn't, outside of pure casters that could mostly (behind the early levels) do that either way.

* This is a math joke. About point buy. Yep. I know what I am.
** Depending on how you use it/what you allow.

Point Buy, from memory:

10/11/12/13/14/15/16/17/18
00/01/02/03/05/07/10/13/17


1 person marked this as a favorite.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Fair enough. I'm mostly working with theorycraft from years ago, to be honest.

It is pretty weird that an obscure ruleset variant from an optional book the edition before this one is so popular. Must have something going for it for that to happen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Syrus Terrigan wrote:

"Mary Sue"?? Huh??

@greentea --

There's no need to gestalt, per se. But it is fun.

Mary Sue.

Basically a self-insert wish-fulfillment character.

Of course, since we're talking about a literal fantasy game where you literally play the role of something else, it can only mean "more" of that than standard RPGs.

That said, it's really rarely been a problem for me.

I'm will not say that it cannot be a problem: it self-evidently can be problematic, as it has been. But I do not accept that it is inherently problematic, nor unbalancing beyond what is mentioned above.

Also, allow me to clarify: mythic is "get a ton of awesome"... but it is not a, "you can do anything" pill that instantly makes things easy. Only that it has much more potential to do so by altering the nature of the game, than gestalt.

A gestalt game
A mythic game
And a mythic gestalt game

... would each play vvvveeeerrrrryyyyy differently from the other.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mythic gestalt games are frustrating to DM.


thegreenteagamer wrote:

Fair enough. I'm mostly working with theorycraft from years ago, to be honest.

It is pretty weird that an obscure ruleset variant from an optional book the edition before this one is so popular. Must have something going for it for that to happen.

For us, it was what allowed us to attempt solo games, until mythic came along.

Now I just grant the mythic agile+<select one> template for a similar (and simpler) effect.

It also permitted character concepts that were either non-viable or explicitly sub-optimal or even detrimental, without it.

Some combos are... not a great idea, though. A barbarian wizard inherently shuts down one of its classes features to use the other. It works as a self-buffer and has great hit points, but a magus does it even better, because a magus is faster and it's abilities blend better. Don't get me wrong: it can be quite fun, but it's just not self-synergistic. That said, it allowed you to play a Jekyl/Hyde (and successfully) before the alchemist and vigilante classes came along, without being a drain on the party.

Other combos just get very powerful. A cleric-Druid gains little bit more spells and profociencies... but it gains a hecka-lotta awesome spells, can CoDzilla twice a as often as a basic cleric or Druid alone, and needs exactly one ability score. Buuuu~uuuut, it can't actually do anything that a cleric or Druid of its level couldn't do, and can't do it earlier. It just will almost never run out of options until everyone else is long done. Which is, really, what gestalt gives you: "you may take two point five more combat encounters, today" is almost exactly whatit does in our games.

That said, one of the key ways it throws things out of whack is expectations. Playing a rogue-wizard like a rogue with a few spells is a vastly different experience from playing like a wiazard with a few tricks and more skills: the latter of those two is much more powerful, and can take GMs by surprise. Something like that happened to me, once. It's just about understanding your players and their abilities, but the same tactics and tendencies still work, in general.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:

Fair enough. I'm mostly working with theorycraft from years ago, to be honest.

It is pretty weird that an obscure ruleset variant from an optional book the edition before this one is so popular. Must have something going for it for that to happen.

I'll be totally honest: I fell in love with gestalt just because it let me build Syrus Terrigan the way I dreamed him to be. Or, almost. I still haven't figured a way to get full +5d6/+5 skirmish on a full-BAB class with enough cleric-ness to be a favored devotee of Erythnul, but the warpriest/slayer combo is pretty close. I just have to pick which side to take a one-level dip for lion totem barbarian to get pounce. Nearly livin' the dream; the hitch is that the classes that most closely fit the concept require nutso ability arrays/points/rolls. As in, Tacticslion's 102-point buy still wouldn't do enough for me. lol j/k

And as far as "dominance" goes . . . . "Spellcrafting" buddy . . . . Y'know, let's just call him by his semi-official moniker: Darth Heathen . . . . Just ask him about how dominant a decent Power Attack damage roll can be on the wrong end of a greataxe. He got overconfident when the party was being charged by a trio of orcs: he counter-charged and whiffed, and ate enough steel in one hit to drop him to precarious negative hp.

Sure, your bonuses get re-donk-ulous with gestalt, but Tactics has it right: your action economy dictates your efficacy. Even if you can dump an average of 24 damage per hit in the first few levels on a consistent basis, that 25 hp boogeyman is *still* more than likely gonna get two HUGE swings against you if you're the only one engaging him.

(Though the best part about this is: my players know a lot of the "conventional wisdom" of TTRPGs, but I have yet to see them really put it into practice in most cases. Wizard/cleric blows every daily resource in a single encounter; focused firepower on one target till target drops to reduce DM/GM opportunities to murderize you is a thing that NEVER happens with this bunch; they take the *same* risks they do in straight-class games . . . . So they're more durable. So they can cast twice as many spells in a day in the Vancian system. So they *could* optimize a metagame-locking skill array across their various characters. I can still scare the crap out of them with a handful of minions and a couple CR-equivalent baddies.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Couldn't you just multi-class.

I myself can stop multi-classing whenever I want.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

OFFICIAL RETRACTION: I got it wrong, people. Spheres of Power does NOT enable infinite true striking energy blasts with the Destruction sphere -- you do have to spend a spell point to get the +20 attack bonus. Sorry about that -- I'm still doing research and learning the system. Still playtest-less. Hope you'll forgive me.

captain yesterday wrote:

Couldn't you just multi-class.

I myself can stop multi-classing whenever I want.

Why multiclass when you can have the best of both? Or more? Our group multiclasses *in* gestalt builds! Oklahoma-brother (Darth Obstinus, henceforth) has a character that dipped into three PrCs before taking Ordained Champion in 3.5!

I'll stop multiclassing when I find a class that does everything I want it to.

And don't talk to me about the vigilante.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

Couldn't you just multi-class.

I myself can stop multi-classing whenever I want.

Multi-classing is an option. I can also Gestalt Multi-class. For me Gestalt opens up more character build options. If I had the choice between just multi-classing a character or Gestalt, I'm going to pick Gestalt. I have been a player and a GM for Gestalt games and as GM I would rather have people Gestalt instead of multi-class. It's easier to mess up and make an ineffective character for your level with multi-classing compared to Gestalting. As a player and GM, I prefer that people play effective characters. Gestalt makes that easier.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Never tried Gestalt personally, doesn't really seem like my thing.

And Syrus, I also have zero interest in the Vigilante class, or Ultimate Intrigue in general.

But that might be an effect of my general contrary nature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Captian hates new classes and books and such things until he's forced to use them, and then he loves them.

He's kind of like my mom in that way with technology.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Not true, I still don't like ACG.

It's okay, but I have yet to use anything from it.

And Occult Adventures I loved right from the beginning. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't get me wrong -- I like modular mechanics in games, and the vigilante is a pretty solid example of that. I just don't want all the social baggage as a mechanical obligation. Nevermind that the class is too railroad-y to begin with. And bland because of an overabundance of options.

The vigilante is to Pathfinder what 4E was to D&D -- gamestall from excessive decision tree options.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Never tried Gestalt personally, doesn't really seem like my thing.

And Syrus, I also have zero interest in the Vigilante class, or Ultimate Intrigue in general.

But that might be an effect of my general contrary nature.

I hereby contradict your contrarian commentary thus:

Counterflame

Formica fears me!

We can be the best contra-frenemies!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I still haven't seen Star Wars: The Force Awakens because everyone tells me "you gotta see it!"

No, no I don't. I learned my lesson when I saw The Phantom Menace.


captain yesterday wrote:

I still haven't seen Star Wars: The Force Awakens because everyone tells me "you gotta see it!"

No, no I don't. I learned my lesson when I saw The Phantom Menace.

Well, while you certainly don't have to, I enjoyed it thoroughly. TOZ was less impressed. It also seems a number of people think it was a rehash of Episode IV. Though I understand the arguments, I find that assessment unfair and cynical - it was about as Episode IV as Episode VI was. Make of all that what you will.

All that said, Phantom Menace and Force Awakens: one of these things is not like the other. Regardless of what you think of PM (I think it suffered from excessive focus on visuals and story-halting set-pieces, combined with wooden acting and mediocre direction, plus several awkward and needlessly punitive and self-defeating lore bits), TFA is a decent film.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Phantom Menace suffered from Jar-Jar Binks, any other problems are unnoticeable in comparison.


Also, that!

That said...

*deep breath*

I think Binks could have been a decent Threepio-alike... but they also had Threepio. And, you know, tried to make Binks a hero in a way that Threepio never could be. There are several interesting g theories about Binks being Plagus, but as that was never shown - nor even hinted at - it remains firmly speculation at best. And what we did get was symptomatic of what I was talking about before - heavy-handed direction that often brought the plot to a screeching halt for no appreciable gain.

That said, there is no Binks-alike in TFA, sooooooo... that's a huge bonus!

EDIT: clarity of both intent and tone, I hope!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The people who made TFA are completely different from those who made the abortion known as Phantom Menace. It is significantly better. It is even a good movie on it's own merit, not just "for a new Star Wars."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I have my reasons, no doubt it's better (and different) than Phantom Menace.

Edit: I just used it as an example of the last Star Wars I saw in the theater. It's also the only movie I've walked out of.

I'll wait until Seth MacFarlane does his version. :-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

TFA would have been a magnificent movie if there was never an ANH. I can understand remaking the original Star Wars movie for the franchise - man, those planning sessions must have been a bloody nightmare. What if people hate it? We've just hosed ourselves of the strongest movie franchise ever!

But the thing is: It could have been a great movie, with just a little more courage and self-esteem. It should have been more self-contained, as it was we didn't get one useful answer about the characters, instead it set precisely everything up for VIII. I came out from it thoroughly underwhelmed.


Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingm aker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker- Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker-Kingm aker-Kingmaker-Kingmaker~!

:D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, after four attempts with Kingmaker, we quit it today, not out of frustration, but out of boredom. It's been underwhelming. Maybe it gets better a few books into it, but by the end of book 2, we're pretty much shelving it for some Savage Worlds.


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Honestly, after four attempts with Kingmaker, we quit it today, not out of frustration, but out of boredom. It's been underwhelming. Maybe it gets better a few books into it, but by the end of book 2, we're pretty much shelving it for some Savage Worlds.

For us, it broke down like this:

- Book One: awesome initial character interaction/getting to know people
- - - The actual book in this one was kind of weak, but we had fun getting the PCs to know each other, and then building relationships with the NPCs. It helped that my character (before I knew he would be unanimously voted into Kingship) was really good at disabling folks, so we took a lot of them alive. Between my debuff, the fighter's brutal savagery, the ranger's efficacy, and the cleric's healy our battles were swift; with the fighter/ranger team Intimidate and my character/the cleric team Diplomacy, there were few things we couldn't social/Diplomance together thereafter. So a lot more recruitment of former villains than normal. - - -

- Book Two: KINGDOMBUILDING! Finally...
- - - Book two was actually kind of grindy/less fun, except for the Kingdom building.

- Book Three: Most epic battle~!
- - - I won't spoil it, but the final battle of the book was incredible - I actually was able to "solo" the battle (with a single healing assist from beyond the battle grounds via the cleric and a linked ability I'd set up previously), and really tick off the final baddy while doing it. My favorite moment was, after it blinded me, stealing the <macguffin> from it, causing it to <spoiler for spoiler>, and then destroying the <macguffin>, just as it finally got back to where I was. Then taunting it some more, and blowing up its <spoiler-place> - all before finally defeating it for good. So fun~!

- Book Four: New (Re-)beginnings! Alternate epic!
- - - I retired my King to function as a background character; a golem-alike with less spells took over as the "me" character for adventuring; they share XP via <magical stuff>, but it allows the King to stay at home (and not have his stupidly large numbers of spells and powers for everything). Lots of different kind of weird fun ensued. We also set up the fighter as queen of the barbarians! It was so awesome! - - -

- Book Five: Where we are now! The Rushlight tournament is really fun, so far! We're finally getting back, just in time for "my" event: the boasting! I'm really looking forward to it! :D

So, you know, we had a lot of fun, but the first two books were kind of a slog, but we had a fun enough group that it didn't end until kids and moving got in the way. :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

For us Kingmaker can't compete with laser guns, pirates, or blasting across the galaxy to mother Russia in an ornery chicken legged hut.

Maybe someday.


Dang it, Sims3

Too many awesome choices.

Blarg! You only allow me five traits!

OPTIONS
Excitable__))
Good Sense of Humor__))
Family Oriented__))
Bookworm\]]
Computer Whiz\__))
Genius - - - /]]
Brave\]]
Good /__))
Charismatic]]
Great Kisser]]

FINAL
Excitable
Good Sense of Humor
Family Oriented
Good
Computer Whiz

(A couple of those were determined by random dice rolls. I chose none of the categories, and chose to focus on positive traits, 'cause there were plenty of negatives that go with that, too.)


Hah! Take that, Immortal difficulty and raging barbarians!


Happy Fourth of July, everyone!

Even if you're not a U.S. citizen, have an awesome day!


INITIATE RANT

"Star Whores": Episode "7" - Disney's Abomination . . . .

The bird-turds abandoned us EU (Expanded Universe) fans. Crap on a multi-billion-dollar silver platter is still crap.

I want Kickstarter, crowdfunding, Browncoat-style Rebellion against Disney's licensing rights. I want THRAWN on the big screen, and Mara Jade, and C'baoth's clone -- not a "villain" whose acting might have been a tiny bit better than Hayden Christiansen's -- and he was deplorable.

I just tracked down a second set of copies of the Thrawn trilogy this weekend. I *will* be working up a screenplay for all three. Too bad I've never made such an attempt before -- may take a lot of time. But I'm going to do it.

I know most of you have seen my expressed thoughts on this before. I'm not trying to belabor my point; neither can I quietly sit by while that . . . that . . . THING . . . they call a movie is mentioned. I believe everyone who has EVER been a fan of the Star Wars franchise would have loved to see the franchise move forward; I just wish they had expressed a modicum of respect for those of us who have contributed to the continual financial well-being of its broader scope.

Star Wars was the first story I ever loved; it's still one of the greatest -- but what Disney did had NOTHING to do with the story I love.

Made me sad and angry to watch that movie.

:(

TERMINATE RANT


I made an (probably unbalanced and terrible) archetype~! :D


NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~!

CURSE YOU*, NETFLIX~!

AAAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHH~!

... Netflix has removed Avatar: The Last Airbender, Avatar: Legend of Korra, and Daniel Tiger.

>:(

:(

*sniff*

Q.Q

* No, not really. Don't curse you. Don't curse anything. Cursing things sucks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I own the first two but have never seen the third.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~!

CURSE YOU*, NETFLIX~!

AAAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHH~!

... Netflix has removed Avatar: The Last Airbender, Avatar: Legend of Korra, and Daniel Tiger.

>:(

:(

*sniff*

Q.Q

* No, not really. Don't curse you. Don't curse anything. Cursing things sucks.

Every time I want to stream something, it has either been

a)On Amazon Prime Streaming but not Netflix
b)On both Amazon Prime and Netflix
c)On neither

I have since cancelled Netflix. I haven't checked if Amazon has Avatar/Korra, though, and I'm too lazy tired and sleep-deprived to check now.

Oh, and, uh, I passed 7,000 posts!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Maneuvermoose wrote:

Oh, and, uh, I passed 7,000 posts!

All without saying a single freaking constructive thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Maneuvermoose wrote:
Maneuvermoose wrote:

Oh, and, uh, I passed 7,000 posts!

All without saying a single freaking constructive thing.

Everything Maneuvermoose has ever said is true!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Maneuvermoose wrote:
Maneuvermoose wrote:

Oh, and, uh, I passed 7,000 posts!

All without saying a single freaking constructive thing.
Everything Maneuvermoose has ever said is true!

Everything Maneuvermoose has ever said is false!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
Maneuvermoose wrote:
Maneuvermoose wrote:

Oh, and, uh, I passed 7,000 posts!

All without saying a single freaking constructive thing.
Everything Maneuvermoose has ever said is true!
Everything Maneuvermoose has ever said is false!

Everything Sarcasm Dragon has ever said is true!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everything Operationdromedary has ever said is morose and generally pointless. *sigh*


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hulu has Daniel Tiger.

The entirety of Gravity Falls also.

By the way, do you know who really loves Gravity Falls?

My dad. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everything Rantraptor has ever said is inflammatory, agitating, and great for starting fights.

ka-KAW!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Everything I've said has been geared towards building the perfect cult. :-)

1,801 to 1,850 of 2,228 << first < prev | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *Tacticslion* to Favorite ALL Your Posts Here!!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.