|
Post by derv on Mar 10, 2018 13:26:36 GMT -6
In my mind, this place is sort of like my living room and you are all good friends invited to sit on my couch and talk gaming while we eat snacks. I just don't know why anyone would want to crap on that. Fin, I get what you are saying. I just don't know when the neighbors dog came over here to crap in our lawn. That's what's confusing. Maybe I stepped in it and didn't even know it. I come from a family where I'm the youngest of three boys. Maybe I'm aloof to it all. Where is the kerfuffle? On the other hand, I am bothered by these allegations against PD, right or wrong. This isn't me shooting the messenger, either. It just doesn't make sense. He's been a part of these forums for a long time. I've had conversations with the guy through pm a time or two. He's always been kind. I remember when he started Murkhill. I questioned the point of it. But thought it was taking a different approach to the discussion of the original game- more campaign oriented. I'm not a member there, but I will go over from time to time to lurk. It's a lot of familiar faces from here. The reality is it's not like it use to be. Times have changed. The community is fragmented. There was a time when it seemed everyone was brain storming and discussing ideas, putting out free stuff for fun, and sharing it with the community. Now, most of that is old hat to people. Like, "yeah we already talked about that back in 2007 and we've got it all figured out." Honestly, I think things shifted after the publication of the clones. The hobby fragmented slightly with their emergence. Everyone had their favorite and it was discovered that people could make a few bucks too. But, blogs and forums were still a common meeting ground, a familiar face you would check in on to see what's new. Then, google+ and the push to join the crowd happened. It had a selling point of being able to include or exclude people from your circles. It was a great recipe for further fragmenting this small community. Many of the old blogs faded away. Along with that we have been through the scandals of crowd funding- ugh, no more need be said. I've sat through it all and more. Has it made me want to go crawl in a hole? No. I'm not that invested. I just think it's screwed up stuff. It is what it is. The reality is for me this is the only forum I frequent. I'm also a member at Trollbridge and CotI. That's it. And I havn't logged on to the other two in some time. I go by the name derv on all of them. So, I'm pretty easy to find or avoid if someone would want to I guess this is a long way of saying I don't want this place to become an island unto itself. I want diversity of opinion. I don't want everyone constantly worrying about offending each other. Sure, play nice. But, also, we don't have to be so thin skinned either. I'm simply talking about our general interactions and policy here. As far as an industry motivated conspiracy goes, I really have no input. That's above my pay grade.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Mar 10, 2018 20:13:32 GMT -6
I just want to add that I have always felt more welcome here and at Murkhill than I have at other boards. No I don't post much but I enjoy the discussions and come to both when I have any questions on how things were done. As a few of you would know I used to be kind of a hellraiser on other boards up to the point I dropped 'Julian Grimm' for the most part and went to Mr. Darke just to distance myself from my former, shameful in my opinion, behavior. I think here is the only place I still use JG and I am thinking of dropping it here so I can be Darke on most forums I visit.
I do want to echo one sentiment above:
I agree that things have changed and the rise of the clones and the publishing arm of the OSR seems to have been a contribution. Instead of OD&D fans it seems that we became S&W fans, Delving Deeper fans, AS&SH fans and so on. While it all came from OD&D the branches seem to outweigh the tree and the game we love got lost. Instead of OD&D material we have Compatible material made for X clone. With the game at least back in PDF form we need to be pushing OD&D instead of clones and sending people to get the game that started it and introduce them to a solid OD&D community.
Well that's my 2 cents.
* BTW yes I am running an RC game now but Dave legitimized RC as OD&D IMNSHO. ;P
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Mar 10, 2018 20:35:08 GMT -6
Instead of OD&D material we have Compatible material made for X clone. I boggle at this. It's all the same! Yes, sure, Clone X has this way of doing a thing and Clone Y does it another way. Peanuts! There's no reason you can't take material from one clone and use it as-is in another, or in the original. The original point of the clones was to publish new D&D and AD&D material without the legal right to do so, by filing off the serial numbers using this handy OGL that Wizards of the Coast gave away. Just go with that. You don't need someone to purify the "edition" of D&D you're using. Just use whatever. Don't even tell your players which version you're using; just tell them to how to roll up their ability scores and ask them what they do now.
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Mar 11, 2018 6:42:10 GMT -6
So much drama. I miss coming here and playing D&D.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 11, 2018 6:52:45 GMT -6
I guess this is a long way of saying I don't want this place to become an island unto itself. I want diversity of opinion. I don't want everyone constantly worrying about offending each other. Sure, play nice. But, also, we don't have to be so thin skinned either. I'm simply talking about our general interactions and policy here. Well said, and I'm glad to get your feedback. You're also one of the good ones. I agree that diversity is good and I think overall this place has been a fun place to discuss OD&D. Over the years I've had many folks tell me that this board is different from any other in terms of the feel of the place. I don't know if that's right or not because I feel like there are lots of other boards where folks play nice, but I've been pretty happy with the chatter here most of the time. Seems like a couple times a year this place gets heated, and it's sort of sad to realize that it's pretty much the same poster(s) who are causing most of the strife. As far as an industry motivated conspiracy goes, I really have no input. That's above my pay grade. I know nothing about it either, really. Probably above mine as well.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 11, 2018 6:53:35 GMT -6
So much drama. I miss coming here and playing D&D. You still can. We have a couple of active PBP games here, or you can start another one.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 11, 2018 6:55:58 GMT -6
Instead of OD&D material we have Compatible material made for X clone. I boggle at this. It's all the same! Yes, sure, Clone X has this way of doing a thing and Clone Y does it another way. Peanuts! There's no reason you can't take material from one clone and use it as-is in another, or in the original. The original point of the clones was to publish new D&D and AD&D material without the legal right to do so, by filing off the serial numbers using this handy OGL that Wizards of the Coast gave away. Just go with that. You don't need someone to purify the "edition" of D&D you're using. Just use whatever. Don't even tell your players which version you're using; just tell them to how to roll up their ability scores and ask them what they do now. Very true. I'm not sure that I've actually played "pure" BTB OD&D for decades now. I like to insert rules twists and such to almost every new campaign I run. I grab monsters from C&C or the OD&D Monster Manual or from the Rules Cyclopedia all the time. For me, OD&D is as much a style and attitude as it is an actual rules set.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Mar 11, 2018 11:12:26 GMT -6
I'm not being argumentative but I don't completely agree here. We have a couple things going that has changed the landscape and we've been slow to adapt. Legal reprints are now out there, all versions of the old editions are back in print. I have a brand new Rules Cyclopedia on my desk, will be getting the OD&D 'reprints' and printing them off. POD is slowly bringing hardcopies back in play and what we have always wanted is slowly coming back.
Adding in that there has been the law for years (at least in the U.S.) that you can't copyright rules and the number of items out there that does not use any OGL and directly connects to the older games to the original product has changed things. I think that we are moving into what I call the 'Post-OSR' where we have more freedom and the opportunity exists for us to come back to the originals and the need for clones is dwindling. This brings us back to a situation where we can push the original games and bring people to them which is what we wanted. I feel clones are becoming less and less needed now and we can work on at least free supplements, as long as we don't use certain names. (For that matter we can experiment with pay what you want or even a few paid books.)
So my question is why are we not pushing the originals since we are at a point that we can which was where we wanted to be? Have we become so dependant on clones we missed this point? Have we become ego driven where we think my clone is better or that we have taken over the market? Do we think that we are the guardians of something that we created and now see the originals as a threat to what we created which was a means to an end until we can get what we want? Gentlemen, I feel we need to rethink this and come back to what drove us in the beginning; the love for the game and wanting to see it back in print which has been achieved.
It's time to reunify the community under the banner of the original games we loved. See the clones in a different light; maybe as a collection of houserules but not the originals. It's time to write things for OD&D, Classic D&D and AD&D. It's time to defragment the community and return to what drove us in the beginning. Let's write for the sake of expanding the original game, let's tie it back to the originals and let's celebrate what has come. Not make it an afterthought.
Of course, this is my opinion take it for what you will but my need for a clone has now become much less. The change in the paradigm has moved me back to D&D where I always wanted to be. I know I will begin writing with no clone in mind to expand the game I love.
|
|
|
Post by krusader74 on Mar 11, 2018 14:53:22 GMT -6
There are a few major exceptions... NO THERE ARE NOT... This is not a place to debate legal issues... religious history... Except that you have injected both "legal issues" and "religious histories" into your posts here on odd74. As a reminder, you wrote: RE: legal issuesRE: religious historyEtc. Etc.
|
|
|
Post by oakesspalding on Mar 11, 2018 18:35:47 GMT -6
I think most people understood what aldarron meant. Those posts were perfectly appropriate in context, and I assume no one took offense. And aldarron was responding to krusader74 's original response to geoffrey , which clearly referenced politics (and by implication, normative religious questions, etc.) No one thought anyone was talking about banning innocuous and interesting discussions of alignment in ancient religions or how copyright law might apply to retro-clones, etc. We might contrast aldarron 's neutral empirical historical analysis of shamans, his views on the cosmology of Blackmoor or his opinions on what the OGL does or not allow with the recent posts by krusader74 and @rafael , where they just had to get in their petty anti-Trump snarks. Or to take another example, there's all the difference in the world between any of those posts by aldarron and, say, rafael shutting down a thread by putting up a music video advocating a particular position in the "culture wars" and then suggesting that anyone who disagreed with the sentiments expressed might just be ripe for a banning. When, a few days ago, I asked rafael (albeit bluntly) to stop slinging his boring politics around, he responded by fibbing about what I actually said - accusing me of supporting the GREAT CONSPIRACY, when I had pretty clearly said the opposite - and then snarking that I was "the court jester in the harem" of the WORST RPG BOARD TROLL EVER. When aldarron made a perfectly reasonable response to krusader74 on the issue of whether or not this board was the place to debate politics, krusader74 spent spent thirty minutes (or whatever it was) sleuthing around to find quotes and posts designed to make the member look like a hypocrite, even though, in the context of the full thread, anyone can see they do nothing of the kind. It all started with the strawberries...
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Mar 11, 2018 19:56:03 GMT -6
Looks like I have to go find some Rafael posts and put some thumbs-up's on them...
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Mar 12, 2018 7:15:52 GMT -6
So my question is why are we not pushing the originals since we are at a point that we can which was where we wanted to be? [...] It's time to reunify the community under the banner of the original games we loved. We'll never put that genie back in its bottle. We can't force people to play the game we like and not their own. Nor should we try. Fundamentalism only creates further schisms. The best thing to do is accept that different people play different things and to appreciate our differences, not eliminate them.
|
|
|
Post by Piper on Mar 12, 2018 11:07:28 GMT -6
We'll never put that genie back in its bottle. We can't force people to play the game we like and not their own. Nor should we try. Fundamentalism only creates further schisms. The best thing to do is accept that different people play different things and to appreciate our differences, not eliminate them. I agree with my esteemed colleague. That toothpaste is out of the tube, you'll never get it all back in.
|
|
arkansan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 229
|
Post by arkansan on Mar 12, 2018 13:58:16 GMT -6
So my question is why are we not pushing the originals since we are at a point that we can which was where we wanted to be? [...] It's time to reunify the community under the banner of the original games we loved. We'll never put that genie back in its bottle. We can't force people to play the game we like and not their own. Nor should we try. Fundamentalism only creates further schisms. The best thing to do is accept that different people play different things and to appreciate our differences, not eliminate them. Agreed. The cat is out of the bag and we are in a new era. I think though that in a much more important way the legacy of OD&D has been ensured. I agree with Fin that it is as much about a play style as it is about specific rules. When I discovered OD&D I was a product of the 3e era, the major revelation of it wasn't the actual rules in the booklets. It was the freedom that came with them and the expectation that the DM and players had far more agency than any set of guidelines in the books. I think that revelation has been brought to a great many people, and that's awesome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 13:20:33 GMT -6
Unfortunately the OSR in general, and parts of this forum as well, are too focused sometimes on midrashic analysis of finding the "original" D&D and exactly how it was played.
By January of 1973, Greyhawk was already noticeably different from Blackmoor. THAT is the "ur-D&D" -- "decide how you would like it to be, then make it just that way!"
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 13, 2018 13:30:55 GMT -6
Unfortunately the OSR in general, and parts of this forum as well, are too focused sometimes on midrashic analysis of finding the "original" D&D and exactly how it was played. I get what you are saying, but I can't fault most of the posters for this attitude. For those who found the game later on, it's hard to read an decipher how it was played. Heck, if I hadn't played wargames and Chainmail back in the day I'm not sure how I would have interpreted some of the rules, but with that type of background we did was seemed to be a natural evolution and it worked for us. With the exception of accounts from you and Gary and Dave and Greg and a handful of others, the rest of us don't really know how the creators intended it. I can base my thoughts on my own experiences, but many don't have that luxury. From that perspective, newer arrivals can ask old timers and get a feel as to the style of 1970's role playing. Certainly, learning from today's rulebooks won't help. By January of 1973, Greyhawk was already noticeably different from Blackmoor. THAT is the "ur-D&D" -- "decide how you would like it to be, then make it just that way!" And that was a neat conversation that I had with Chirine about the good old days. If I understand correctly, he contends that he has never really played OD&D "by the book" because he did his own thing from almost day 1.
|
|
|
Post by Gene M. on Mar 13, 2018 13:36:29 GMT -6
I agree that sometimes the analysis can be a bit tedious when one is explicitly encouraged to fill in the gaps and make it work how one likes.
Sometimes deep dives into game mechanics can produce interesting results, though, like Wayne/cadriel's Original D&D Setting posts. I found those inspiring.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Mar 13, 2018 14:32:15 GMT -6
I said this back nearly ten years ago (man has it been that long?)
The reason the clones and near clones are going to continue alongside the original is because the use of open content helps folks to realize their vision whatever that may be. What open content provides is clarity, i.e. stuff I can directly refer to and use. With "rules can't be copyrighted" you need the advice of an IP attorney to pull off a project.
Think of it like this. We have the clones but unlike 2008 we get to have copies of the original as well, the best of both worlds.
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Mar 13, 2018 15:04:28 GMT -6
With the exception of accounts from you and Gary and Dave and Greg and a handful of others, the rest of us don't really know how the creators intended it. By January of 1973, Greyhawk was already noticeably different from Blackmoor. THAT is the "ur-D&D" -- "decide how you would like it to be, then make it just that way!" And that was a neat conversation that I had with Chirine about the good old days. If I understand correctly, he contends that he has never really played OD&D "by the book" because he did his own thing from almost day 1. Fin, I think that is exactly what the folks back then intended... that we don't have to know what they intended, rather we have to do what makes D&D "fun" for our table and our friends. In some ways, I think getting too close to what they intended might limit some, in the search of the ONETWUEWAY. Gods know we see it everytime someone asks "How should this work" to the PtB at WotC. For the "official way", when they should just be asking their DM, or (if they're the DM) thinking about what they want out of their game and then make it so. It's definitely cool to know/see how people like Mike play, that's why I attend those games at cons or when invited... but I definitely have made D&D my own game and will continue to liberally steal/borrow/spindle/fold/mutilate into the game that I enjoy playing. 40 years from now, when all of this stuff we have here is probably long deleted, I have no doubt D&D will be around and people will be playing it as they intend. Michael
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 15:45:54 GMT -6
We can't force people to play the game we like and not their own. Well, not with that attitude we can't, mister. We just need to put bad gamers in camps run by FEMA where they can safely learn to have TRUEFUN. Imagine the tears in their eyes when they finally learn to play D&D the right way. This may seem extreme, but I'm pretty sure it's what Gary would want.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Mar 13, 2018 16:56:46 GMT -6
wow! never thought my flippant observation of people drifting away to do their own thing would get a reaction that would roam this far. My comment really wasn't a criticism for or against clones and the people that design them. I'm in the camp, the more the merrier- design a clone if you're inclined. Really it was more a personal observation that prior to the publication of those first few clones there seemed to be more collaboration and an interest in sharing ideas, through these forums in particular.
|
|
|
Post by Piper on Mar 13, 2018 17:36:29 GMT -6
Thread drift is a quite common phenomenon in group discussions.
As long as it stays civil, who does it hurt?
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 14, 2018 0:03:05 GMT -6
Haven't the "clones" (I'd call them "children") been out there all the time, pretty much from day 1? You say that back then pretty much every table and every DM had their own rules to fill the gaps and I'm sure they wrote many of these down. The difference today is, everyone has the chance to give those house rules a half-decent layout and publish it on the internet.
I know that I've never played any version of D&D by the book and when I was running my first own campaign of AD&D I had a little notebook with at least 10 pages of house rules and annotations. Back then we had no internet, though, so no chance to connect to anyone else beyond the folks in my group and most of them didn't bother with reading the rulebook and just asked me, so basically we played an AD&D clone/child back then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 7:37:08 GMT -6
I'm also a bit surprised why this has become the new focus of the discussion, in this thread, in particular. I think it's not the worst topic to continue with, in the set context, though. As far as I see it, again, this boils down to whether you want to keep things real and inclusive, or whether you are, at the end of it all, fine with promoting imagined elites, and imagined codes of purity: This starts with the age demographic we have on this board; most people here are between 30 and 60. However, everyone younger than about 45-50 cannot reasonably claim to have played the games we like to discuss here in a way that was a mature, or, in any way a sophisticated experience. If you were born in 1967, even if you bought the Great Old Game right after it came out, then it's reasonable to assume that your personal D&D experience looked a lot like this until perhaps at least around 1985, if not longer. - So, whenever I read a discussion about the supposed purity of an approach to gaming, I cannot but doubt how exemplary and "pure" some people's experiences really were until they started caring about them being so. Those discussions about elitism in gaming bug me personally a great deal, because they are usually not at all about gaming, but all about very primitive acts of virtue-signaling, and about very plump attempts to build false points of authority. What bugs me the most, though, is that most discussions of the kind target not the culture of the game that already exists, but focus on the direction of the present-day RPG market, rating it based on those imagined levels of purity, like with the never-ending clones debate. - Which is something that I'm having difficulties to comprehend, frankly, supposing that those discussions are not inherently political, about one content creator pregnant doging about the competition. -- Because when I am playing D&D with my friends, it's not like John Goodman would loom over our gaming table, and spit in our beer mugs every time we look into the old RC instead of into the DCC book. Also, I've never heard people getting home from a game and saying things like: "I am so happy we played this strictly by the book." Or: "This game was so wonderfully pure." Mostly, their comments tend to revolve around whether the game was entertaining to them; why what rules were chosen is never something that comes up as long as the game itself was effective. So, what I would like to see would be a debate more focused on gaming than on the game, if you get my meaning. Less pseudo-intellectual discourse, and more inclusiveness and social consciousness: This very thread evolved a great deal around a guy - "Dave", of Murkhill, whether as TPD, as Morgan, as Irish Warrior, or whatever his last known alias was - who was so hell-bent on fabricating those false authorities, that he might have totally missed out on what he could have gotten from making positive contributions. And that, above anything else, I find profoundly saddening. People should not feel pressure when they're contributing here; nobody is unwelcome here for having different experiences, and nobody should be missing out on the positive exchange we're trying to facilitate here. As somebody else said earlier, we cannot all be friends; nobody reasonably expects that. But we can well come together in a friendly and inclusive atmosphere where nobody has to be ashamed of who or she is. Anyway, woof, that coffee break lasted long. *Drops the mic.*
|
|
tec97
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 157
|
Post by tec97 on Mar 14, 2018 10:42:36 GMT -6
The folks at the other place certainly still seem to have a XXXX-on for this forum... Funny, I've been here for almost 8 years and I've never really noticed any kind of 'social agenda'.
|
|
|
Post by Piper on Mar 14, 2018 15:31:32 GMT -6
Haven't the "clones" (I'd call them "children") ... snip ... I like that! I may have to start using that terminology!
|
|
|
Post by Piper on Mar 14, 2018 15:32:40 GMT -6
Anyway, woof, that coffee break lasted long. *Drops the mic.* You drop it and you'll clean it up!
|
|
|
Post by strangebrew on Mar 14, 2018 16:40:46 GMT -6
Sometimes deep dives into game mechanics can produce interesting results, though, like Wayne/cadriel's Original D&D Setting posts. I found those inspiring. This is one of my favorite things to pop up in the "OSR." I also think it serves as an example of some of the oddness of the community. Either obsessing over rules-as-written and the kind of game they imply (ex- OD&D Setting, Delving Deeper) or obsessing over how it was done "back in the day" (ex- Gronan's subforum). That's not meant to be a value judgement, cause I think both are really interesting, though they don't necessarily inform how I actually run games. I'm no longer interested in clones of the OD&D booklets. What I would be interested in is "supplements" ala Greyhawk, Blackmoor, etc. People putting out their original, creative ideas and variants, without reinventing the wheel every single time to rewrite the rules with a few hidden nuggets of real changes. It would be great if we all did this. And while you're at it, also do amateur print runs of folded, stapled booklets in addition to PDFs. And have it on my desk by the end of the week!
|
|
|
Post by oakesspalding on Mar 14, 2018 20:25:48 GMT -6
Well, here are ten propositions I came up with in-between sips of beer.
1. There is an objective aspect to these sorts of seemingly normative discussions. People say (or would say, if asked) that they want x, y and z from a fantasy adventure game. It's an objective and empirical question as to whether a particular game or system best gives them x, y or z.
2. Most contemporary D&D players (outside of these boards, of course, and a few other places) do not make a, so to speak, existentially pure decision to choose the game or play-style that gives then the most "fun.". They simply play what the dominant company in the market offers them. This should be kept in mind by those who insist upon adding "as long as you're having fun, who am I to judge?" at the end of every other sentence.
3. Most people (the vast majority of them, children, presumably) for whom, say, D&D 5e or Pathfinder was their first fantasy adventure game, won't care much about it or even remember it in 40 years, let alone want to spend time talking about it on whatever the equivalent of the internet is then. That's because it's "just a game" to them in the sense of, say, any old video game. It wasn't that way for us, nor is it now. Why is that?
4. I'm fifty-four years old. But my "personal experience" is that I never played OD&D back in the day (I just missed it). I only discovered it through the OSR, and now it's my system of choice. That's because I was convinced, not due to my personal circumstances but by objective arguments: You want x, y and z? Okay, here's why OD&D best gives you x, y and z.
5. With respect to one of the original players, saying that back in the day, "we just made sh*t up" and if you think anything more than that was ever going on, you're no better than some silly pointy-headed Talmud scholar, is the biggest bunch of horse sh*t I've ever heard.
6. Since we all so love the original game (that's why we're here), it's perfectly natural to want to find out how one or both of the two co-authors of the game and their friends "really" played it. If that isn't obvious or reasonable, nothing is.
7. On the other hand, if one or more of the retro-clones is indisputably superior to OD&D in one or more areas, or just as good, or interestingly different, etc., it's silly to suggest that the time for excessively focusing on retro-clones is over, or whatever. Unless of course we have some kind of quasi-silly-pointed-headed-Talmud-scholar-like fetish.
8. Purity for its own sake has no value. But once one has identified something that is good, valuing purity (in regards to that good) is only logical and reasonable, at least in the right context.
9. Wizards destroyed D&D, though the rot was well under way before Wizards took over. In terms of roleplaying, 2018 is in a sense far inferior to, say, 1978. And yes, I mean "inferior" in an objective way. New players of D&D 5e or Pathfinder aren't having the same quality of experience that we had. And they won't remember or care in forty years. That's an objective claim (whether it tuns out to be true or false).
10. But looked at in another way, 2018 is in a sense far superior to 1978. Instead of, say, 3 available adventure modules, there are 500+ (including those original 3), virtually all of which you can get for free or for a pretty low price in inflation-adjusted terms. And there are 100+ "retro-clones" and other suggestions for how to understand or reinterpret the rules, many of which are free and virtually all of which cost less (in inflation-adjusted terms) than the originals. And, then, there are these boards and blogs, etc.
So, if you're some poor kid shelling out $200 for the interminably boring, predictable and vanilla 5e "core-books" at Barnes & Noble (just because everyone else has them), for the moment, 2018 sort of sucks.
But it could be much better. That kid's life would be much improved if he knew about the OSR. Won't you try to help him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 20:37:19 GMT -6
My, aren't WE full of ourselves, little man.
|
|