|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 2:07:01 GMT -6
I know some of you guys have experience writing full on retro clones. I'm currently working on one and was hoping someone could shed some light on the matter. Links to some articles would be great if you don't feel like writing here.
Right now I'm more or less just compiling all of the rules I use into one set of books to have at my gaming table. It's really just filled with options more than anything else.
As of now I've just been copying notes into a word document, but it's getting rather long, and hard to navigate. I fear when I move onto the next document, I won't be able to insert my notes quickly or efficiently. My first thought right now is to break it up into multiple shorter documents based on subject, much like the SRD; then I'll recompile and organize them into one book. Has anyone else used this method? How has it worked for you?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Feb 25, 2013 3:45:57 GMT -6
Hi Jakdethe, The first thing to know is that, as an author, you cannot (legally) produce a retro-"clone". Only the fans have the freedom to call your product a "clone" The second thing to know is that you'll have a big job on your hands. It might take you months or even years to "finish" it (these things are never really "finished", are they?). But if you're genuinely enthusiastic and energetic that won't be a problem -- but it will sure help if you can get yourself some help along the way. You might also take a look at the Ghost Town thread (if you haven't already) which laments the tendency for interest in specific "clones" (their word, not mine) to wane after a time. There's lessons to be learned there somewhere, I'm sure -- when you figure out what they are please write to me ;D On a more serious note, it would be neat to see a few enthusiastic OD&Ders put their house rules together as Delving Deeper supplements! Maybe together we can beat the Ghost Town effect, while individually we'll all just fade away eventually? (PM me if you're interested). FWIW -- I had the exact same experience you describe while working on Delving Deeper (which is not a "clone"). I ended up breaking the whole thing up into scores of separate files, and later merging them back into the final documents. You'll probably have (at least) your source text files, your layout files, and your PDFs, with multiple (often quite a few) version of each, and possibly a library of art assets too. If you start exchanging files with proofreaders and other collaborators by email, then you instantly create an additional copy of each file for each email recipient. It can be a major undertaking just to manage all the sources in their various formats. The best advice I can offer is to know exactly what you're trying to do and stay focused on your target. Good luck!
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Feb 25, 2013 4:11:22 GMT -6
I think you seriously need to think, do we really need another retro-clone?
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 4:37:23 GMT -6
I think you seriously need to think, do we really need another retro-clone? It's funny I wrote a blog post about that exact thing. I think the title was literally "Another Retro-Clone, Really?". Well to answer both above posts let me say this: I have no desire to make money, usurp, innovate, or displace what is already there. I know I'm not going to get much interest, I know I'm not going to make money, and I know no one cares. I've accepted this before I started, and I have no delusions of grandeur. What I do know is this: I intend to make a set of rules to play by, and if I release them to the community, it's just more free stuff. With that said, I've been working on this project on and off for about a year, year and a half now. It started as a couple house rules for S&W, but grew into its own thing. Really its kind of a gaming tumor if you will. With some of my players wanting to DM, they wanted to use those same rules because they were familiar, and they liked them. So really I'm making this book so I can hand it to some of my players who want to DM, and they can learn how. I just talked to my fiance about this and she had a wonderful idea for organization if anyone wants to hear it. What I've been doing right now is taking notes from other games (1E, 2E, etc...) and compiling them into one book. Well the biggest problem I was having was making sure everything was in order (ability score rules next to ability scores section, classes under class section). As my document got bigger it became harder and harder to scroll back and forth to the appropriate sections to place my notes in. Her solution is to make a master template file, with all of the Section titles. Then copy the notes under the relevant section titles, since the document is shorter, it's easier to navigate. From there I can copy the notes out of the template, into my main "source" document. Since they have the same order, I just copy as I go along, no need to go back and forth. Anyhow that's what I have for now. I'll check out that Ghost town thread right now. As I said before I know no one will really be interested, this is for personal use. When and if I do release it, I want it to be more like the Crusader Companion, or a supplement. Just a collection of house rules and options compatible with any edition/clone. Right now I'm making a stand alone game, just so I don't need to have several books at the gaming table.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 4:49:07 GMT -6
Hi Jakdethe, The first thing to know is that, as an author, you cannot (legally) produce a retro-"clone". Only the fans have the freedom to call your product a "clone" The second thing to know is that you'll have a big job on your hands. It might take you months or even years to "finish" it (these things are never really "finished", are they?). But if you're genuinely enthusiastic and energetic that won't be a problem -- but it will sure help if you can get yourself some help along the way. You might also take a look at the Ghost Town thread (if you haven't already) which laments the tendency for interest in specific "clones" (their word, not mine) to wane after a time. There's lessons to be learned there somewhere, I'm sure -- when you figure out what they are please write to me ;D On a more serious note, it would be neat to see a few enthusiastic OD&Ders put their house rules together as Delving Deeper supplements! Maybe together we can beat the Ghost Town effect, while individually we'll all just fade away eventually? (PM me if you're interested). FWIW -- I had the exact same experience you describe while working on Delving Deeper (which is not a "clone"). I ended up breaking the whole thing up into scores of separate files, and later merging them back into the final documents. You'll probably have (at least) your source text files, your layout files, and your PDFs, with multiple (often quite a few) version of each, and possibly a library of art assets too. If you start exchanging files with proofreaders and other collaborators by email, then you instantly create an additional copy of each file for each email recipient. It can be a major undertaking just to manage all the sources in their various formats. The best advice I can offer is to know exactly what you're trying to do and stay focused on your target. Good luck! First off thanks for the advice! Second I know exactly what you mean about he Ghost Town effect. I just read the thread and I think the real problem is a lack of released material. That's what I intend to remedy with my game. Take S&W for example: "Lets do a kickstarter for a set of rules we're already selling, and just change the cover art!" I think there's too much of that in our community. Furthermore there's too much rehashing of the same stuff. So we have multiple clones for the same editions. Each of them all discuss encumbrance, how to move, determine initiative etc... Instead of people releasing just what's different about their game, or just their house rules. I love the Crusader's Companion because its exactly that; a collection of optional rules! I'm making a stand alone rule set for myself, just so I can limit the number of books I have at my gaming table; but I do intend to release a set of optional rules by themselves; the things that make my game different. Really what you're suggesting is great, almost perfect in fact. I think we need to see more collaborations if our hobby is to thrive, or at least authors working on original content. There's a lot of overlooked, underdeveloped collections of monsters, spells, treasure, items, etc. found through out the web. I know there's at least two monster books on Dragonsfoot. I'd be more likely to shell out money and discuss a new monster manual every few months, then a SuperRetro & Clones ver 1.3.5.2.5.6 with new cover art! Of course I could be wrong, just my thoughts on the matter.
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Feb 25, 2013 4:52:33 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 5:10:44 GMT -6
Take S&W for example: "Lets do a kickstarter for a set of rules we're already selling, and just change the cover art!" I think there's too much of that in our community. Furthermore there's too much rehashing of the same stuff. Let me say in Matt's defense: the original hardbound release of the rules suffered from poor quality control (not the rules themselves, but the physical book). Mythmere Games and Frog God Games did a Kickstarter so a better HB could be made -- something similar to the textbook binding of the original AD&D books. I'm not necessarily trying to negate any of the points you made in your post, but I thought that was a pretty good reason to revisit the original release and therefore worth a mention.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 5:26:25 GMT -6
To address the defense of Matt really quickly: I understand and agree. It's always nice to get new copies. But what else has been release for S&W? Since the merger with Frog God games we were promised new material, and what meaningful releases have we gotten? What supplements are the community praising, discussing, or even criticizing? Then why bother? If it is for personal use, you need to figure out how to format effectively for you. The conventional wisdom of others, who made a product for everyone, won't be much help. The only reason I'm asking is mostly a "how did you guys do it?". Even if my goals are different, a similar process is occurring; Referencing older rules, taking notes of them, compiling them into a book. I already know how the book is going to be laid out and organized. I was mostly asking how people get from a stack of notes, to a compiled and finished product.
|
|
|
Post by llenlleawg on Feb 25, 2013 5:39:21 GMT -6
I tend to see the various "retro-clones" and emulations as a series of house rules. That is, once you get past the necessary changes made to abide by the OGL and copyright, the differences they have with the original expressions is generally (in the case of OD&D "clones") either (a) an interpretation of some rule or other, like elves gaining levels their two classes, that are less than clear in the original or (b) the expression in a single place of a particular arrangement of the varied books and sources that were used in the early days but not by everyone everywhere. In other words, some make use of the supplements, others recognize that Gygax and co. never played the game as published, etc.
This is what I find interesting. I think it is always nice to have some other options/advice about what to do in my games. Part of what makes the OSR interesting is that what once we only learned by happenstance, at conventions, or through gaming magazines, now the hobby can share freely and broadly on forums like this one.
That said, there is something to be said about a relatively generic supplement that outlines specific ways you want to express certain aspects of D&D and which could be easily adapted to either the original books or any of the clones/emulators. This saves you the time and effort of putting the whole thing together from top to bottom, and allows you to focus on those specific aspects you want to share beyond your own table and set of fellow gamers.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 5:56:15 GMT -6
That said, there is something to be said about a relatively generic supplement that outlines specific ways you want to express certain aspects of D&D and which could be easily adapted to either the original books or any of the clones/emulators. This saves you the time and effort of putting the whole thing together from top to bottom, and allows you to focus on those specific aspects you want to share beyond your own table and set of fellow gamers. If, and only if, some interest is shown in my rules, I'll be releasing a supplement, just as you're describing. Right now I have a download of "beta" version of my rules right now, but no one has checked it out yet.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Feb 25, 2013 6:20:11 GMT -6
Yes we all have greater or lesser compilations of house-rules with varying degrees of separation from one edition or another. While it may be fun to formalize your efforts and publish it, I've thought of it many times, it seems to be more helpful to the community to simply create options as we've already mentioned to existing bodies of work. Perhaps even supporting more than one in the process. Few of our currently well-known "clones" depart that much from either the original or from those that emulate it. Do the work once, tweak it a few times, and give the community more options than they could shake a clone at.
Simon, I'd propose that a Delving Deeper community driven supplement compiled, checked against the SRD/OGL, would be best produced by you and/or others as an "official" Immersive Ink supplement.
Currently, I'm working on the reference sheets/DM screen, minus any artwork, also an additonal class/race or two, and some mass battle or "original wargame" options. ...oh yeah, I forgot some of the non-thief "Greyhawk" combat options I've been exploring. If I ever get back to working only one full-time job instead of two, you'll soon start seeing more than hints about it. :-)
|
|
|
Post by ravenheart87 on Feb 25, 2013 6:22:34 GMT -6
I would do the following: 1, Drink until I forget that I want to write a retroclone. 2, Write down all the cool stuff that would have made it different as a Supplement.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Feb 25, 2013 6:31:10 GMT -6
I would do the following: 1, Drink until I forget that I want to write a retroclone. 2, Write down all the cool stuff that would have made it different as a Supplement. I confess, that's pretty much what I've been doing with my spare time. :-) The only phrase I'd add is "Write down all the cool stuff that would have made it different for somebody else's Supplement. :-D
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Feb 25, 2013 7:49:21 GMT -6
I know that for my tastes, I gave up on keeping up with the plethora of clones. I download the freebies to take a look, like Blueholme,.or DD, but it has become a curiosity. I admire anyone who takes the time to do up a game their way for profit or fun, but as a consumer, or just end user, I no longer have any interest in these rebundlings of i dividual interpretations and house rules. Its old style d&d, the focus should not be on rules anyway,.right?
I would much rather see compilations of house rules/variations like RC Pinnel did, or Carcosa, or The Majestic Wilderlands, that are largely compatible with whatever game you use. Books that show me how an author plays D&D that may be different..how their campaigns work. Having 10 game systems that I have to dig through to find the 1% difference totally turns me off
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 7:54:22 GMT -6
I guess I really shouldn't have put Retro-Clone in the title. Of course when I put house-rules I just got a "don't even bother" response.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Feb 25, 2013 7:58:19 GMT -6
I guess I really shouldn't have put Retro-Clone in the title. Of course when I put house-rules I just got a "don't even bother" response. LOL, that's probably sad but true. Nothing sparks the OSR interest than the "Retro-X" nomenclature! Thanks for posting anyway! I look forward to seeing some of your offerings someday, somewhere. Cheers.
|
|
idrahil
Level 6 Magician
The Lighter The Rules, The Better The Game!
Posts: 398
|
Post by idrahil on Feb 25, 2013 8:16:26 GMT -6
If, and only if, some interest is shown in my rules, I'll be releasing a supplement, just as you're describing. Right now I have a download of "beta" version of my rules right now, but no one has checked it out yet. Hey there, I'm guessing you posted it somewhere but I don't browse this whole forum enough (Usually just General & Delving Deeper ). Mind giving me a link to your rules?
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Feb 25, 2013 8:20:40 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 10:16:42 GMT -6
The only reason I'm asking is mostly a "how did you guys do it?". Even if my goals are different, a similar process is occurring; Referencing older rules, taking notes of them, compiling them into a book. I already know how the book is going to be laid out and organized. I was mostly asking how people get from a stack of notes, to a compiled and finished product. Well, here is my approach but TBH it wasn't very original. I did my campaign booklet the same style as Supplement I: Greyhawk. That is, I presented my new material in the same order and using the same headings as TLBBs. I would follow the heading with (New Rule) or (Additional Rule) etc. I hope that helps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 10:18:17 GMT -6
To address the defense of Matt really quickly: I understand and agree. No sweat. I didn't think you meant any harm and it didn't sound as if you were upset about it. I just didn't want anyone else to get the wrong impression about S&W:C.
|
|
bexley
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 104
|
Post by bexley on Feb 25, 2013 10:23:23 GMT -6
To address the defense of Matt really quickly: I understand and agree. It's always nice to get new copies. But what else has been release for S&W? Since the merger with Frog God games we were promised new material, and what meaningful releases have we gotten? What supplements are the community praising, discussing, or even criticizing? Then why bother? If it is for personal use, you need to figure out how to format effectively for you. The conventional wisdom of others, who made a product for everyone, won't be much help. The only reason I'm asking is mostly a "how did you guys do it?". Even if my goals are different, a similar process is occurring; Referencing older rules, taking notes of them, compiling them into a book. I already know how the book is going to be laid out and organized. I was mostly asking how people get from a stack of notes, to a compiled and finished product. I'm a bit perplexed on what you're looking for. If you already have layout/organisation done then it's just a matter of transcribing your notes into that format.
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Feb 25, 2013 11:28:44 GMT -6
It's hard to say what organizational style would work best for you. For me, I can't write other than to plow through from start to finish, straight through, editing as I go.
~Scott "-enkainen" Casper
|
|
|
Post by xmanowarx on Feb 25, 2013 12:40:46 GMT -6
i zoomed through the document and read a few blog posts (i'm at work) - but have you looked at LABYRINTH LORD and its ADVANCED OPTIONS book? that seems to be what you've made/or are going for. it's b/x d&d and ad&d made compatible as an add on (with most of the ad&d rules cleared out). it doesn't have ascending AC, but you can easily add that in by (i think) subtracting 19 from all the given AC's in the book. monsters would then just add their HD as a bonus to hit. no sense doing the work if its been done for you. if you haven't, check it out (the pdf's are free): www.goblinoidgames.com
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 13:12:29 GMT -6
I would much rather see compilations of house rules/variations like RC Pinnel did, or Carcosa, or The Majestic Wilderlands, that are largely compatible with whatever game you use. Books that show me how an author plays D&D that may be different..how their campaigns work. Having 10 game systems that I have to dig through to find the 1% difference totally turns me off To everyone saying this: I intend to do exactly this. I've already stated it a couple times in this thread, but to reiterate. When, and if, I release a more complete version of "Arcane Adventures" I'll be releasing a stand alone rule set complete with a player's guide, monster book(s), and referee guide. I will also be releasing a "Companion" like product like Carcosa, and the MW, just the differences and house rules. If, and only if, some interest is shown in my rules, I'll be releasing a supplement, just as you're describing. Right now I have a download of "beta" version of my rules right now, but no one has checked it out yet. Hey there, I'm guessing you posted it somewhere but I don't browse this whole forum enough (Usually just General & Delving Deeper ). Mind giving me a link to your rules? arcaneretro.blogspot.com has a link in the top right hand side for a download. Right now it's a just a "Set of Standalone House Rules for Swords & Wizardry". But it's completely playable, and has a lot of, what I feel, are cool rules. The blog discusses what makes my game special, and what different rules I have. Thank you very much! I look forward to any criticisms and feedback. I'm a bit perplexed on what you're looking for. If you already have layout/organisation done then it's just a matter of transcribing your notes into that format. Essentially I'm asking how you guys transcribed your notes into the format. For me it's such a large document that doing that involves scrolling back and forth, and gets really hectic. Also just any processes you guys use, or tips and tricks. i zoomed through the document and read a few blog posts (i'm at work) - but have you looked at LABYRINTH LORD and its ADVANCED OPTIONS book? that seems to be what you've made/or are going for. it's b/x d&d and ad&d made compatible as an add on (with most of the ad&d rules cleared out). it doesn't have ascending AC, but you can easily add that in by (i think) subtracting 19 from all the given AC's in the book. monsters would then just add their HD as a bonus to hit. no sense doing the work if its been done for you. if you haven't, check it out (the pdf's are free): www.goblinoidgames.comThanks for checking it out! I have read through LL, and the AEC. It's a wonderful product, and I think it was great that they are offering that long ago promised bridge, but I feel I'd just end up house ruling it too much as well. Right now (and you'll see when if you get a chance to read more) I have a few really big additions that no other game has. When I make the "Companion" they'll be the main source of it; I have a feat-like system called techniques that no other game (not even 3E) has, I've added a percentile skill system, the three-fold saving throws that still function like the original saves; and a few minor rules that I feel streamline game play, like combined initiative/surprise checks for example. Id appreciate the sentiment of not having to do all this work; but as I've said a lot of it is a personal want; I kind of have an OCD about all of this. Of course one added benefit to all of this will be a uniformity to anything "Arcane Adventures". For example when I finally make my monster books I'll not have any repetitions, but I'll know I have all of the monsters I want. They'll all be in the same format, and ready for my game (no need to modify on the fly. Now this is obviously mostly of personal benefit; but they'll be completely compatible with any and every edition. Since I'll be releasing them for free, anyone who wants a complete, concise set of Monster books is welcome to them, and hopefully someone will enjoy it. Furthermore I intend to do the same thing with a nice spell cyclopedia. I'll be cross-referencing every addition for different variations of the same spells. So the spell book will have, say, magic-missile. Under it's description I'll have all of the different versions listed so the DM can either; select the one best suited for his campaign, offer multiple versions making players pay to learn new spells, or offer stronger variants as loot. A final word, I suppose, is that sure the stand alone rules may be of little use to everyone else, but the planned "Companion", and all of my supplementary material will be useful to anyone. The main benefit being you'll have one set, or series of books, that won't have repeated material, but there will be a lot of it. The best example I can use is monster books. You could use the 1E Monster Manual, some 3E Books, maybe a Retroclone, and then some Pathfinder Bestiaries, and you'll have a lot of monsters to play with. However, they'll all have different formats and styles, you'll have to kind of modify on the fly, and a good 50%+ of those books will just be repeated monsters. You'll have a book there for only a few of its unique offerings, while half of it is just more goblins, orcs, and dragons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 13:29:59 GMT -6
When, and if, I release a more complete version of "Arcane Adventures" I'll be releasing a stand alone rule set complete with a player's guide, monster book(s), and referee guide. In such a case I would advise taking a good long look at the Moldvay/Cook B/X sets, or Mentzer's BECMI. I'm an OD&D guy, but I've always liked the presentation of these two sets.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 13:34:39 GMT -6
When, and if, I release a more complete version of "Arcane Adventures" I'll be releasing a stand alone rule set complete with a player's guide, monster book(s), and referee guide. In such a case I would advise taking a good long look at the Moldvay/Cook B/X sets, or Mentzer's BECMI. I'm an OD&D guy, but I've always liked the presentation of these two sets. Yeah personally I think B/X was the best presentation of the rules today. An excellent blend of introduction and rules reference. The proof is in it's two Retroclones, and their wide spread use and love from the community. For right now I'm using 1E AD&D to define contents of the three separate books, then I'm going to go back and reorganize them like B/X. I might even attempt to make the aesthetics similar (personally I think BFRPG has the cleanest look of any RPG I've seen, and it's based off B/X).
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Feb 25, 2013 13:36:44 GMT -6
I have a bit different opinion than most here. If I am going to use new game options with the same old rules I already know, I'd still like to have those same old rules reprinted in the same volume as the new stuff, as a single complete rulebook. It's just handier that way, as I'm at the point where having multiple books at the table and looking up things in each is quite the pain.
Plus, I like to see the author's intended baseline rules, rather than say it's compatible with "all" old school games. Considering they all have some small differences, that will never be 100% true, anyhow. I can modify things for my own use with whatever rulebook, sure. But it's nice to see it all in one book, complete, as intended.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 13:37:43 GMT -6
I agree, BFRPG is an impressive product in every way. Chris has made a lot of very good material available and has really involved the community in keeping BFRPG supported.
|
|
|
Post by jakdethe on Feb 25, 2013 13:54:55 GMT -6
I have a bit different opinion than most here. If I am going to use new game options with the same old rules I already know, I'd still like to have those same old rules reprinted in the same volume as the new stuff, as a single complete rulebook. It's just handier that way, as I'm at the point where having multiple books at the table and looking up things in each is quite the pain. Plus, I like to see the author's intended baseline rules, rather than say it's compatible with "all" old school games. Considering they all have some small differences, that will never be 100% true, anyhow. I can modify things for my own use with whatever rulebook, sure. But it's nice to see it all in one book, complete, as intended. Then I'm glad my efforts are not in vain! Edit: I forgot to say I'm glad we share the same view on rulebooks at the table. What most people don't get is that, yeah I don't necessarily want to push another rulebook into the market, but it's the most convenient way to express such a different rule set. I agree, BFRPG is an impressive product in every way. Chris has made a lot of very good material available and has really involved the community in keeping BFRPG supported. I really think BFRPG is an example of should be happening in the OSR. It seems that since he hasn't tried to make a business/profit based model that he's just kind of ignored by most of the community. It's a real shame, but kind of gives insight to our world, and even in a community that's not supposed be profit-driven, a lot of people still draw towards it.
|
|
Koren n'Rhys
Level 6 Magician
Got your mirrorshades?
Posts: 355
|
Post by Koren n'Rhys on Feb 25, 2013 16:03:54 GMT -6
I've been doing something similar for my home campaign. I started it out using S&W:WhiteBox and mashed together a booklet with my house-rules so that they were all in one place for easy reference at the table. Most were just compiled from other games, or blog & forum posts. I don't know what is OGL and what isn't so it would be difficult to share without a lot of rewriting. When we migrated to an RC ruleset, I revamped the booklet to match the system, but again - hard to sort out what's already OGL or who I borrowed it from, so it'll be difficult to get into a sharable form.
I started a master Word doc with the outline I wanted to follow, formatted to match the BHP version of S&W:WB. As I added things in, I could periodically reprint the booklet. Nothing too novel about that approach, I don't think.
Ideally, I can someday wrangle it into a format I can share as a properly OGL supplement, and I love it when others do just that. I see it as part of giving back to the community which I get so much from. My favorite two examples are APlus' older Outland supplement from before he switched to DCC RPG, and Jimm Johnson's Planet Eris supplement.
@cameron - Have you shared yours anyplace? I don't recall ever seeing it.
|
|