Generalized Abilities Concerns

Member
User avatar
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:14 am

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby sona » Sun May 31, 2015 8:19 pm

by that merit, everyone could lockpick too, though.

Member
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:35 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kiyaani » Sun May 31, 2015 9:08 pm

I was thinking it might be nice to add something to Melee: Focus. As it stands currently it unlocks many things, but it gives nothing on its own. I don't have any ideas for what it could provide, but I feel bad spending points on abilities that just unlock other abilities with no benefit on their own. At least with the profession abilities mentioned before they unlock the core commands and go up from there.

Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:06 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Acarin » Sun May 31, 2015 9:30 pm

sona wrote:by that merit, everyone could lockpick too, though.


Locking picking has always been limited by the availability of lockpicks and availability of training, but everyone CAN lockpick.

Lore Hermit
User avatar
Posts: 6038
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Utah

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Rias » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:00 am

Thanks for all the feedback. A few points:

- The players are our testers. For better or worse, this his how we roll in CLOK. When something so different and new like this comes out, there's likely going to be a lot of adjusting, tweaking, and changing as we get feedback, so we ask for some patience during the potentially turbulent times following implementation.
- Please try to be calm and courteous in your feedback. Phrases such as "stupid", "ridiculous", "useless", and "what were you/they thinking" tend to trigger a closed, defensive, and dismissive response rather than an open-minded and understanding one more willing to allow for admissions and adjustments. We're all people.
- When you have feedback, please post it on the BBS to let us know. Complaints and suggestions on CHAT are likely to be missed by GMs, as they frequently have the chat channel turned off. It can also get lost in the scroll or missed when a GM is focusing on something else. I continue to be frustrated when I hear third-hand about people who are very upset over an issue that wasn't ever brought to our attention. Discussing it amongst yourselves may be therapeutic, but if we don't know about it, we can't do something about it.

War Riding and warhorses
Warhorses offer a significant bonus to attack rolls by simply riding them. They also defend themselves, occasionally attack on their own, and don't flee or buck their rider when hostiles are around. Lastly, they have higher skills than non-warhorses and thusly their survival rate is higher. These are some significant bonuses in themselves. I felt that Trample and Charge were too powerful to be bundled into the rest of that, hence the War Riding requirement. As to the skill requirement and gains, those are being looked into.

Various crafting commands requiring abilities
Currently considering alternatives. If taken, leaning heavily toward low skills caps and quality caps somewhere below average.

Artisans concerned over crafting restrictions
I figured this was something Artisans would appreciate: that people could no longer just do anything and everything themselves, and instead have to go to someone who chose to spend the points on it - and the ones doing that would more often than not be the dedicated crafters, i.e. Artisans.

Point cap
Not set in stone. There will always be a cap, but it may be adjusted.

Thanks to the staff
Glad you're liking things despite the current bumps in the road. We're confident we'll end up in a place where most people will be happy and there'll be an overall net gain in player satisfaction (we realize any change will leave someone unhappy).

No brawling specialization?
I'll add one.

Ability resets for testing
There'll be some accomodations soon. I wanted to see what people would pick when the decision actually mattered.

If I can YouTube a tutorial, it shouldn't require an ability.
Doesn't really hold, considering things like dirtkick, disarm, and tumble are restricted to ability points as well. We reserve the right to occasionally throw in limitations for reasons other than realism.

Melee Focus is just a prereq that doesn't do anything
Might add some Boring Bonuses to it.

Sorry if I missed something. Please continue to post feedback.
The lore compels me!

CLOK Patron
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 6:49 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby merin » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:11 am

I'm completely fine with spending the points on crafting things as an artisan. I have zero issues with that. I'm even ok with having to specialize in something, but again, having to spend an ability point to try something is a detriment to the game, especially if it's not something that is restricted for a purpose (lockpicking).

Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:05 am

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Barius » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:13 am

I don't really have anything of substance to say besides that it left a bad taste in my mouth when I started looking into getting some of my merc skills back and realized I didn't even have the skill requirements for some of them. It left me without any motivation to play. Raising the bar and putting a carrot in front of us is not the way to keep us happy. Or at least, it's not the way to keep me happy.

I'm not sure when I'll be back to actually play the game. Probably at some point, but right now, I'm just not very interested.

Member
User avatar
Posts: 508
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:40 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kunren » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:21 am

I had a question about weapon masteries. Did we not have a bit of a damage bonus before? If so did they lose that? Just asking cause I feel like my longsword is doing a bit less damage overall, but I'm probably just paranoid.
Life is like a box of chocolates. The caramel filled ones are the best.

Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:06 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Acarin » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:26 am

I posted this in the brofist forum too but I think it applies generally so reposting it here (yes, almost all my comments are about brawling). Currently 2 ability points need to be used to get two-weapon combat gains. Brawling currently has reliance on two-weapon combat to find openings and I think there are still some skill pre-reqs for brofist abilities for two-weapon combat. This forces brawlers into becoming "Dual wielders" and using up 2 precious ability points when they don't reap the benefits/penalties from two weapon combat. Can brawling be adjusted to only rely on the brawling skill and not two-weapon and pre-reqs be investigated? I think using your entire body (legs/feet/knees, fists/arms, and head) for unarmed combat is a lot different from swinging around two swords and shouldn't be treated the same way. Thanks for any consideration on this.

Lore Hermit
User avatar
Posts: 6038
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:23 pm
Location: Utah

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Rias » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:34 am

Barius wrote:I'm not sure when I'll be back to actually play the game. Probably at some point, but right now, I'm just not very interested.

Sorry to see you go. Hopefully if/when you do come back, there'll have been time enough for considerations to have been made based on the feedback you provided.

Kunren wrote:I had a question about weapon masteries. Did we not have a bit of a damage bonus before? If so did they lose that? Just asking cause I feel like my longsword is doing a bit less damage overall, but I'm probably just paranoid.

If there was a damage bonus, it would still be applied now. The code for weapon masteries was untouched from before, I just added a bonus to hit aimed locations.

Acarin wrote:(Brawlers and two-weapon combat)

This is something I'll discuss with Jirato since he's done a lot of work on brawling stuff, but I do think it's kind of weird to factor two-weapon combat into brawling. I mean, I see where it's coming from, but at the same time it kind of feels wrong.
The lore compels me!

Member
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:35 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kiyaani » Mon Jun 01, 2015 9:28 am

Thanks again for all the hard work and for taking our feedback into consideration (though you always do). I definitely appreciate your taking the time to address so many concerns individually.

Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:06 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Acarin » Mon Jun 01, 2015 10:32 am

Agreed. Ability generalization is pretty amazing and I'm enjoying the customization it allows. I honestly wasn't looking forward to it at first, but it's gone pretty well. I'm looking forward to further tweaks and options, but just wanted to say that I too appreciate all the hard work the GMs have put in and how responsive you've been as well! Almost reminds me of old times!

Member
User avatar
Posts: 442
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:08 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Elystole » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:35 pm

Rias wrote:If I can YouTube a tutorial, it shouldn't require an ability.
Doesn't really hold, considering things like dirtkick, disarm, and tumble are restricted to ability points as well. We reserve the right to occasionally throw in limitations for reasons other than realism.

I just wanted to clarify that I have absolutely no problem with the Profession Focus line of abilities and their requiring a point if you want to be good at those professions. I think a point is fair to represent the dedication and commitment beyond "I got a lesson ('watched the video') so I understand the bare basics." My comment was solely in defense of being able to try different professions up to the point of a skill or quality cap after getting that initial lesson.

For a more CLOK-centric comparison: Anyone can pick up a weapon and use it, lesson or no. They can try different weapons until they find one that suits them, or they could even try using multiple weapons if they want to suck at them all equally. But they won't really be good with that weapon until they start sinking points into Weapon Specialization and some abilities.

Elystole tried a few different weapons, but he's specializing in firearms. He's tried a few different professions, but he's focusing on leatherworking.
You overhear the following rumor:
"I saw one of those Shadgard folk come barging into Grif's and shoot one of the patrons on the spot. Shadgard must be a pretty rough place with such outlaws running rampant."

Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 8:38 am
Location: USA

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Carressa » Mon Jun 01, 2015 1:19 pm

So just wanted to offer my own thoughts to this.. because.. you know I always do :)

First I want to say thank you because whether we love the new system or hate it or somewhere in the middle, the admins are working their butts off to enhance, improve, and develop the game so thank you thank you thank you thank you!

Now my thoughts... I logged in over the weekend and had to rebuy my abilities... and I had to buy 9 abilities to get back the things I did regularly. Granted I'm not an overly high-level character and I was created to be focused, but even I said that it felt a little odd to spend half of my "potential" just on smithing (and one lapidary skill so I could make coin)

I was on the fence... but today I logged in and found that the two levels of smithing that I actually COULD get to were removed from the game, and the one I was working towards (master) was renamed, and the requirements were doubled..

I don't mean to sound negative, but that really DID feel like the "gut punch" that sona mentioned earlier.. I look at artisan skills as progression, for RP reasons.. I was an Apprentice, then I was a Journeyman.. now the bonuses I got from those are gone, along with the extra things I can make, and the ability I was working at is out of reach so far that I'm not even smithing right now, I'm working on faceting because THAT advancement is ages closer. It's a very very frustrating place to be, personally, and I just wanted to share that reaction.

I was told that it was because artisans used up a lot of skills so they wanted to reduce skills. My idea in relation to that (which I shared with Vinz briefly) is to add (I know, more coding) a way to have abilities REPLACE other abilities... so Apprentice Blacksmith would be replaced by Journeyman Blacksmith.. since if you think about it you're never really both, you got a promotion (just need to make sure that the second skill includes all the bonuses of the first one). That way it's still only one artisan "skill slot" used up for blacksmithing, no matter what level you're at, but you still have levels so you're not just a nobody until you're a Master.

Now, on to other thoughts about the new system in general. I do have to say that I love(ed?) how when I got to CLOK I could try anything at all, including smithing, knapping, fletching, etc.. and I didn't have to buy an ability, or potentially waste a month unbuying, I just did it. Granted it sucked, and my quality was awful, but I could try. ESPECIALLY with blacksmithing... with knapping, or fletching, I made horrible arrows and arrowheads, but I MADE them.. I'd be mad if I had to spend points on smithing to try it and found out that I couldn't make a thing other than lumps.

I love the idea of capping either skill, or just quality (I think skills makes more sense, and it kind of includes quality at the same time) without the ability.. so anyone can TRY but only someone who dedicates enough to get the ability can actually be exceptional at it.

Just my 15 cents (I never stop at 2).

Member
User avatar
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:08 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Solaje » Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:53 pm

500 ranks of brawling seems a little high for blade slap. This may just be me, because I am terrible at grinding.

Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:21 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Fayne » Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:15 am

Solaje wrote:500 ranks of brawling seems a little high for blade slap. This may just be me, because I am terrible at grinding.

I kinda agree. I was kinda disappointed that my alt who had it before now has to grind his brawling up to twice the previous prereq in order to relearn something he already knew.

Also, I'm not a fan of the archery abilities except hyperfocus needing to have bow mastery first. Their prereqs are small, but then you need bow mastery, which takes 500 archery points to learn.
A scrawny alley cat stares after the dog with big green eyes.
Speaking to a scrawny alley cat, you ask, "Friend of yours?"
A scrawny alley cat hisses angrily.

Member
User avatar
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:25 am

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Skah » Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:29 am

Fayne wrote:I was kinda disappointed that my alt who had it before now has to grind his brawling up to twice the previous prereq in order to relearn something he already knew. Also, I'm not a fan of the archery abilities except hyperfocus needing to have bow mastery first. Their prereqs are small, but then you need bow mastery, which takes 500 archery points to learn.


So, I'm really, really enjoying generalization. Kudos to the GMs for making such a big change!

I don't think that blade slap should ever have been generalized in the first place. It's a very special (and frankly, unrealistic) skill, and a very powerful one in a lot of situations. Brawlers have really amazing stuff from generalization.

As for the weapons skill requirements, they're not super high. It makes sense for the archery abilities to require one to be decent with a bow, and that is what 500 archery means. You're somewhere between a beginning and moderately skilled archer at that point.

Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:21 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Fayne » Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:40 am

I believe the prereqs for rapidfire used to be 50 or 100 archery, and triple shot or whatever it's called was 250 or something similar. Why were all these abilities doubled on what their prereqs were? I can agree with the ability to shoot three arrows at once, that requires some skill, but to shoot a bow faster with reduced accurancy? An amateur can do that, just don't take the time to aim properly and voila.
A scrawny alley cat stares after the dog with big green eyes.
Speaking to a scrawny alley cat, you ask, "Friend of yours?"
A scrawny alley cat hisses angrily.

Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:06 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Acarin » Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:51 am

High prereqs are what make the game more fun. You have something to look forward to and not everyone can get it quickly. Honestly, I think the higher prereqs for a lot of things are very reasonable. Might even be nice to see some even higher prereqs for really good abilities (1000, 1500, etc). The higher the prereq, the longer you have to go with an empty ability slot but the more it pays off when you finally achieve it. Not everyone should have their ideal ability combination near to starting out.

Member
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:21 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Fayne » Tue Jun 02, 2015 9:15 am

Yeah, it's fun for people who like to grind. I prefer to actually play a roleplaying game though, where I don't have to farm my skills up just to play the way I want to. Everything we do should be to encourage RP, and increasing prereqs on things just encourages the people who prefer to RP to just go sit in a corner and grind all the time. It tells me that since I don't enjoy grinding even slightly, that I'll never be able to have the type of character I want to have. Honestly, I think the best thing that came from generalization is the restriction of certain skills so that an ability is needed to learn them. It encourages RP. And I'll stop there vefore I go off on a tangent that should be started on another topic.
A scrawny alley cat stares after the dog with big green eyes.
Speaking to a scrawny alley cat, you ask, "Friend of yours?"
A scrawny alley cat hisses angrily.

Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:06 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Acarin » Tue Jun 02, 2015 9:54 am

Fayne wrote:Yeah, it's fun for people who like to grind. I prefer to actually play a roleplaying game though, where I don't have to farm my skills up just to play the way I want to. Everything we do should be to encourage RP, and increasing prereqs on things just encourages the people who prefer to RP to just go sit in a corner and grind all the time. It tells me that since I don't enjoy grinding even slightly, that I'll never be able to have the type of character I want to have. Honestly, I think the best thing that came from generalization is the restriction of certain skills so that an ability is needed to learn them. It encourages RP. And I'll stop there vefore I go off on a tangent that should be started on another topic.


So what you're saying is that having powerful abilities is necessary for your rp? I don't think it is. If you want to rp an archer, all you need is a bow and to play one. You don't need to be able to fire a steady rain of flaming arrows of hyperdeath at sonic velocities to get that across. If you want to be the best archer in the lost lands, you need to be able to back that up and that takes a lot of work.

Abilities give a mechanical advantage in combat. It's not your right to possess them and it diminishes the impressive abilities of people who have worked for them when you just expect them to be given from the start. You CAN learn a ton of things now. That doesn't mean they should just be directly given to you for "RP."

I've worked hard towards abilities that require 1000 ranks before and I have to say that it was very satisfying when I managed to learn it. You don't have to grind to get these abilities, but if you never use your combat skills, you shouldn't expect to be the best at them.

Member
User avatar
Posts: 508
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:40 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kunren » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:59 am

It makes me a bit sad how rarely disarm or feint proc on tactics swashbuckling. Is there any way to increase the chances of it happening? More swords/melee or something?
Life is like a box of chocolates. The caramel filled ones are the best.

Member
User avatar
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:14 am

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby sona » Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:51 pm

yeah. I guess the bigger one is that we have, woodcraft,
carpentry, leatherworking, blacksmithing(subsets), herbalism, lapidary. Maybe a few others I missed,
as crafting crafts. Each craft has corresponding gathering crafts: logging, skinning, mining,
foraging. We can pick 2-3 crafts depending. Not all crafts are equal though. Is it the intent that
crafts and gather skills are not created equally? will the inequalities in craft/gather selection be
reflected in profit, or scaling benefit in relation to other crafts? Will Skill plateaus in
specialization be addressed (there's a huge difference between having 0 skill and 200 skill, but not
a huge difference IMO between 1000-2000. Masterworks are intended to be rare, but should not masters
be able to create master crafts through focus, somewhat regularly?

Member
User avatar
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:31 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kent » Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:13 pm

I've given the generalization a month to try out and now have a few concerns to express.


First, I think far too much combat finesse was taken from the Mercenaries guild and made publicly accessible. The one ability left exclusively to Mercs (adrenaline rush) is of dubious value and Kent chose not to take it.

This fails to correspond to the value of a military training in terms of being essentially tutored by those with significantly more combat experience, versus the trial-and-error methods of the self-trained going in repeatedly to Tarureka et al and fighting foes on their own.

In an omission of Tactics Mastery to the Abilities Show list, I requested this be logically added to the one other available to Mercenaries, but even this was instead tossed to the public pool.

Given the vast change in direction and retconning involved in the switch over to Generalization, it is more than fair for me to ask that all guild memberships be wiped clean and all players be entitled to select a new guild (or none) based upon what is now essentially entirely different game rules) . Myself, I would never have joined the Mercenaries under the current ability system. They offer only one unique ability, which I don't want, plus dangerous tasks for which I am rather undercompensated for. As far as role-play, I am either the highest level Mercenary PC or one of the highest who ever walked the fields of Clok, yet my guild regards me with little or no difference than it does a level 5 mercenary, so the role-play aspect of being a member is nada. I would have wanted to remain guildless or to join what is now the Snowpine Lodge, which an alt of mine suggested years ago in a post on this BBS and waited for, and which still didn't exist when Kent was created.

I somehow suspect I am not alone in Guild choice regrets under this new generalization ability.


I had really hoped the GM's also would have been a little more flexible with their Unlearn policy during the rollout. The problem is, some of our selections of abilities were made due to mis-information. I was misinformed on Question as to how many ability selections total I would have (I still don't understand why three of my slots were blocked out during the first ten days of rollout, the only response I could get on Question was 'That's your basic training'. This made me choose to Unlearn melee focus thinking I'd have no more slots available). Other misinformation involves people who select an ability and learn it's rather useless afterwards. Sure, in an ideal situation where you know what each ability exactly does and you select it with that knowledge, I can agree that a 30 day unlearn is good. When you take an ability, such as I took Firearms: Rapid Reload, and you find out by using it it's essentially useless, the current 30-day system is unfairly long. Remember Coup de Mort as the Mercs had it? It was nerfed into uselessness over a year ago. Do I want to go through the current 30 day unlearn system to find out if it's also useless in it's current incarnation? I think not.


I would also like to suggest that a ratings board be set up for Abilities, so players can see other player's ratings 1 - 10 and reviews of the abilities before they 'buy' them much like apps get rated in an App Store.

Additionally, I think it would be much better if Abilities had two prices, one or two points, depending on relative complexity. For example, to learn basic leatherworking, two points; but to add the ability to do rigid leather, only one more point. Under this suggestion, players would have a larger pool of points to spend (eg 30 points, with many abilities needing 2 points). To add further finesse to this, I would like some abilities to cost most players two points whereas certain guilds it only costs them one point (eg, Tracking - Udemi and Snowpine spend 1 point, all others spend 2).
- Kent "Gunney" Gunderman


A dirty woodsman frowns at you and suggests you return after getting cleaned up.

Helpful tips, commands, and hints for new CLOKers: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2367&p=12822#p12822

Member
User avatar
Posts: 508
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:40 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Kunren » Mon Jun 29, 2015 4:55 pm

Just my thoughts on your post Kent.

1. Mercenaries: Yes, we are no longer the undisputed non-supernatural melee combat guys ability wise. This makes sense to me, no reason people couldn't do most anything the mercs could do with hard work. we have other benefits, free(soon to be very cheap) small storage box, and our reputations as the guys you go to when you need something done for money. Other things as well are apparently in the works. Do we need more abilities now? Maybe. I will be sure to suggest any I happen to think of, as hopefully all will, but our lack of unique abilities gives us ALOT of freedom to pick anything we like from generalized abilities. I think that really fits the mercenaries as a guild.

2.One free chance to leave your guild: I don't think this will fly. As much as people will often choose guilds based on their abilities, or at least it will influence their decision, they shouldn't. A change like this which affects the powers of each guild should not have changed the rp that SHOULD be leading people to joining a guild. If the mercenaries does not fit Kent, then leave. Code wise you will likely always be a mercenary, but there's nothing saying you can't tell Irwin to shove it and shack up with whoever else you like. You won't get their spiffy abilities, yes, but you will fit your RP.

3.Ability resets: If I remember right we have almost been confirmed to be getting at least one of these at some point, probably once changes are finalized. as for abilities not being what they sounded like, trying making posts about particular abilities and information you think should be included about this particular ability. The GMs will probably add the information in where it's needed.

4.Ratings board: Pretty sure the GMs already have a tally board as to who has picked what, and how many times each ability has been picked. It's up to them if they wish to release that information or keep it quiet to use in balance doohickeys and all that jazz.
Life is like a box of chocolates. The caramel filled ones are the best.

DEV
User avatar
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:17 pm

Re: Generalized Abilities Concerns

Postby Jirato » Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:25 pm

Ability resets are still coming. Sorry it's taking so long.
[GMCHAT Uyoku]: Octum is when the octumbunny comes around and lays pumpkins everywhere right?
[GMCHAT Rias]: Dimmes says "oh hai :) u need healz? ill get u dont worry thaum lasers pew pew pew lol"
[CHAT - GameMaster Rias would totally nuke Rooks]: Here's how elemancy works: The freeblegreeble and the zippoflasm have to be combined with the correct ration of himbleplimp, then you add the gargenheimer and adjust the froopulon for the pattern you want, apply some tarratarrtarr, yibble the wantaban, and let 'er rip!

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests