|
Man, why the gently caress did I make an Eldritch Knight? Valor Bard is the same thing but better in almost every single way. More skills, better class features, non-gimped-all-the-way-to-9 spellcasting, and it even gets the cast-spell-then-make-an-attack-as-a-bonus-action thing 4 levels earlier (and doesn't waste its class's only gimmick doing so). You only lose, what, the Fighting Style choice and an average of 1 less HP per level? This loving game, I swear.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
For the record, the invisibility spell makes you heavily obscured. That means the caster can use the Hide action to become hidden. Just for being invis you already get advantage on attacks and disadvantage on incoming attacks. Stealth on top of that lets you sneak right past things better than a rogue. Since being seen automatically breaks normal stealth, rogues can only sneak past things in pitch blackness that don't have darkvision. Optimal invisibility usage would involve dim light or darkness to give enemies disadvantage (-5) on passive perception. Even better on a familiar, rogue or other scout-capable character that can get the layout of an area, check for traps, open all the locks and generally finish a dungeon on their own. Only attacking or spell casting breaks invis but skill usage does not. The imp familiar (warlocks) gets at-will invis, darkvision, stealth and flight so is basically built for that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
The invisibility condition makes it so you're "impossible to see" unless they have magical means, though, so in the end I think it's fair to say it's up to the DM.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
But not impossible to hear, and still leaves tracks and other signs of position. Those examples are in the Hiding rules where it says what happens with invis things. It is pretty clear what the rules are, this time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted:Man, why the gently caress did I make an Eldritch Knight? Valor Bard is the same thing but better in almost every single way. More skills, better class features, non-gimped-all-the-way-to-9 spellcasting, and it even gets the cast-spell-then-make-an-attack-as-a-bonus-action thing 4 levels earlier (and doesn't waste its class's only gimmick doing so). You only lose, what, the Fighting Style choice and an average of 1 less HP per level? You don't gain the fighter's 4 attacks per action, heavy armor proficiency, second wind, action surge or indomitable, and you're probably more MAD, but you do gain the bard's other features such as Expertise and all the spells. Incidentally, since Expertise doubles your proficiency bonus with two skills and all grab attacks are based off of your Strength (Athletics) skill, a character with three levels of bard or one level of rogue is going to be a better wrestler than a pure fighter or monk with the same stats. A 20th level monk or fighter with 20 Strength will have a check of +11 for both grabbing dudes and hanging on once you did. With one level of rogue or 3 levels of bard that would be +17 instead since you add your proficiency bonus twice. Similarly, double proficiency bonus on something like Stealth or Perception makes you an incredibly good scout if you've already got the stats to back it up, while double proficiency on social skills makes it far easier to do... whatever the hell it is social checks do in this edition. In a game of flatter math, the word "double" should appear approximately no time whatsoever when it comes to your scaling bonuses. Admittedly, it seems as though the monster math likes to double proficiency bonuses on occasion just to bolster a critter's power up to where it should be even if the math doesn't normally check out (most dragons have double proficiency bonus on Perception checks, but a tiny bonus to their Wisdom modifier). The entire ability score/proficiency system is cracked and bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
I was (and continue to be) super disappointed with every fighting style other than Protection. Protection seriously alters the way you play; the rest are just higher numbers. One or two options that give you higher numbers is fine and expected. Five is a little excessive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
I just figured out what the fighter is good for! It is the fundamental unit of effort. You see, if a wizard or a group of spellcasters solves problems using only magic, it is cheesing the system, and the DM must create greater obstacles to put in their way or say no. But if a fighter is swinging a sword nearby, it becomes ~creative problem solving~ and everything is fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
jigokuman posted:I just figured out what the fighter is good for! It is the fundamental unit of effort. we should start measuring things in how many fighters it would take to do it like the spell invisibility is worth however many fighters it would take in that encounter to distract the enemy from seeing you
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:I was (and continue to be) super disappointed with every fighting style other than Protection. Protection seriously alters the way you play; the rest are just higher numbers. One or two options that give you higher numbers is fine and expected. Five is a little excessive. Great Weapon is really good, actually, but I agree with the rest of that assessment. Well, good for multiattackers and people front loading their damage dice, like Paladins. LightWarden posted:You don't gain the fighter's 4 attacks per action, heavy armor proficiency, second wind, action surge or indomitable, and you're probably more MAD, but you do gain the bard's other features such as Expertise and all the spells. Not really any more MAD than a Fighter. Cha/Dex, take Light Armor and Finesse weapons. Second Wind is practically a low tier healing spell that happens to scale. Action Surge can't really compare to full spell casting, and besides Haste exists. If they desire Indomitable that much they could take the Lucky feat and get more uses with a broader application of the reroll's use. Bard is a vastly superior choice to an Eldritch Knight Fighter if you want to actively use spells or cantrips. Now, if you want to be a Fighter who happens to self-buff themselves with nigh unbreakable Constitution checks (or allies) and then go autoattack its pretty good. The Warcaster/Polearm Master shenanigans can be replicated by the Bard, so the Eldritch Knight's gimmick there doesn't really apply. Strength of Many fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
dichloroisocyanuric posted:we should start measuring things in how many fighters it would take to do it I refuse to accept this inferior version of the skeleton metric.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:I refuse to accept this inferior version of the skeleton metric. It's like "fighter" is just an upgrade kit for the base class of Skeleton, since fighters necessarily have skeletons inside them. So yeah, Skeleton is a much better measure, and you can compare regular PC classes by how much damage or utility they add over that base.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:I refuse to accept this inferior version of the skeleton metric. Even as a measuring stick for energy expended, wizards still somehow beat out fighters. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:I refuse to accept this inferior version of the skeleton metric. It's just shorthand for a certain number of skeletons, no big deal. Like meters and kilometers, except... not as far apart.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Is there any indication of what it would cost to hire some thugs as a PC? Just as a skeleton carrying device before I get animate dead of course.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
moths posted:A huge hurdle to balance is that core game mechanics are keyed to one class's niche. This is one of the things that led to such a vociferous chorus of rascal-bound grogs decrying 4e. "THE FIGHTING MAN CAN DAZE OR STUN PEOPLE AND MY GOD-KING-CASTER CAN TOO. WORST EDITION. MMO! MMO!" It is also one of the best things to occur to main-stream RPG's in the last decade, so I completely agree with your assessment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
Daetrin posted:This discussion seems to me like a semantic mismatch. When you're saying "style of play" you mean "mechanisms used to interact with combat," which are standardized, yes, and that's a good thing, yes. Other people are using "style of play" to mean "subjective experience and objective tactical goals and values" which does vary hugely. It does vary, but not as much, because everyone is using the same basic mechanisms. Having characters with genuinely different mechanics makes them feel less similar to each other, whereas if the mechanics are more standardized, they feel more similar than they would with different mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
I can't believe this particular bit of sophistry has gone on so long. Yes, BMX Bandit feels more different from Angel Summoner than Beowulf does. But that's a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Does anyone know of, or themselves have, any tips for writing a campaign? I've never done it before but I'll be DMing (also a first) my groups next campaign and I don't want to run afoul too many pitfalls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
Monster w21 Faces posted:Does anyone know of, or themselves have, any tips for writing a campaign? I've never done it before but I'll be DMing (also a first) my groups next campaign and I don't want to run afoul too many pitfalls. Yes, but obviously not specifically for this game. This is what usually works when I do it: Plan out a shortish adventure, see what comes up that the players are interested in, and build on that. Try to keep your planning a session or two ahead of where the game is at. It's fine to broad-strokes stuff as far out as you like, but if you're trying to plan this specific story you'll just have to redo it when everyone (eg) decides that getting a ship and going up the coast to approach Mt. Evil from the east sounds better than (eg) taking a caravan across the desert to approach Mt. Evil from the west which is what you'd planned. e: The point of this is that the players get to choose what's important this way. Like, whatever they decide to go and do after the first bit becomes the focus, so you should put lots of interesting (and possibly interconnected) stuff in that first session and see what they're gonna enjoy. You still control the details of the world, but they control the game's focus more than they will in a game where (eg) their mentor sends them on missions and a totally preplanned story unfolds even if they're not super interested. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 11:32 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 11:28
|
|
|
Yeah I was going to approach it more like a scenario with freeflowing story telling acting as the sinew. Map out the world, give them overarching objectives, flesh out the towns and then leave all the rest down to my gut at the time. Also, are there any rules with regards to seafaring with patrols and or weather/anomalies I should be aware of or can I make up my own subsystem for that kind of thing?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
If there are weather or ship rules they'll be in the DMG. I wouldn't count on anything detailed though. It might become clear that the correct nautical ruleset for you to be using here is "you spend two weeks on a ship and get where you're going" because that's all anyone's really interested in. I'm not trying to be condescending here, so forgive me if I come across that way - you did say you've never DMed before and this is the kind of thing that comes up more often than you'd think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 11:57
|
|
|
Solid Jake posted:Man, why the gently caress did I make an Eldritch Knight? Valor Bard is the same thing but better in almost every single way. More skills, better class features, non-gimped-all-the-way-to-9 spellcasting, and it even gets the cast-spell-then-make-an-attack-as-a-bonus-action thing 4 levels earlier (and doesn't waste its class's only gimmick doing so). You only lose, what, the Fighting Style choice and an average of 1 less HP per level? I played my first session with a future Valor Bard last night, and I can see already why Jack the Lad said it was one of the more powerful classes in the game. With the Crossbow Expert feat as a variant human at level 1 you're making 2 attacks per round, going up to 3 at level 6. You won't make as many attacks as a fighter at higher levels but with the utility of being a full caster, it's worth it. On the other hand, heavy armor is really nice at low levels at least - our paladin was nearly unhittable even in starter armor, while I took quite a few shots due to being in light armor until level 3. The Eldritch Knight does get better self buff spells as well by virtue of casting off of the wizard list, although it may well be a case of too little too late.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
FromTheShire posted:I played my first session with a future Valor Bard last night, and I can see already why Jack the Lad said it was one of the more powerful classes in the game. With the Crossbow Expert feat as a variant human at level 1 you're making 2 attacks per round, going up to 3 at level 6. You won't make as many attacks as a fighter at higher levels but with the utility of being a full caster, it's worth it. Right, you're -2 attack behind a fighter throughout, but you only fall behind in number of attacks at level 11, which is when you get your first level 6 spell slot; it's a pretty good trade for one more attack! Also, at level 10 (so before falling behind on attacks) you can scoop up Banishing Smite from the Paladin spell list, which is pretty good though it takes a bonus action so you trade it in for the extra attack on the turn(s) you use it. quote:Banishing Smite Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 13:16
|
|
|
seebs posted:It does vary, but not as much, because everyone is using the same basic mechanisms. Having characters with genuinely different mechanics makes them feel less similar to each other, whereas if the mechanics are more standardized, they feel more similar than they would with different mechanics. Why you're getting jumped on for this is that different basic mechanisms provide cosmetic differences. Which is the more important thing about a fireball? That it's a giant ball of fire - or that it forces people to make reflex saves rather than attacking their reflex defence? To me who picks up and rolls the d20 has absolutely nothing to do with playstyle. What makes the difference is that you are throwing the giant ball of fire. The feel is deceptive and about as relevant to the actual range of playstyles as people painting cars red to make them go faster.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Right, you're -2 attack behind a fighter throughout, but you only fall behind in number of attacks at level 11, which is when you get your first level 6 spell slot; it's a pretty good trade for one more attack! The other spell I've seen mentioned to poach at 10 that I just actually looked up is Swift Quiver from the Ranger list, which lets you make 2 attacks as a bonus action with a weapon that uses ammunition from the touched quiver, and also magically replaces the spent ammunition. Then you can actually exceed the base fighter in attacks per round again, that is really strong. So as a bit of summation by level, Crossbow Expert Bard of Valor has 2 attacks to the Fighter's 1 from level 1-5, where the Fighter gets his second attack and you're equal for a level. Then at 6, the Bard gets his second attack, pushing him ahead by 1 again. At 10, the Bard stops using his bonus action for the extra attack from Crossbow Expert and instead casts Swift Quiver, pushing his attacks to 4 per round, 2 ahead of the fighter for a level when he closes to within 1 again, where he stays until 20th level. Now, the Fighter can also pick up Polearm Master to have a bonus action attack from level 1 onward as well, but that only essentially evens them with the Bard until 20. It also limits your options just to maintain attack parity, and then Bard still has full casting and better skills on top of that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
Even though I'm not crazy about 5e for all the reasons stated in this thread, I went to an Encounters session at a local game store last night. It was fun, no one in my group was that annoying, and I smashed a few kobolds with a Maul. I don't care how bad it is in the long run, just gonna level a straight-up Half-Orc Fighter as the Combat Master or whatever the subclass is that gets the Martial die or whatever it's called I lost the DCI registration card they gave me though  Maybe it's at the store or maybe they can just give me the number they gave me and I can send a letter to Wizards or whatever.Edit: It's seriously bullshit that being able to charge and attack in the same round is a feat instead of a baseline ability, though edit 2: wait, you could definately charge in 4e without feats, and wasn't charging also a baseline thing in 3.5? Power Player fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
Yep. You can still move and attack though, that's fun. I seriously don't get why they made the changes they've made. Standard/Move/Minor was super elegant. As to my experience in organised play, there are a lot of combats, not much healing, and we got hosed for trying to actually take down the dragon by attaching a rope and attempting to climb it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
Cassa posted:I seriously don't get why they made the changes they've made. Standard/Move/Minor was super elegant. 5e really is "the revenge edition". There are inklings of 4e design in there, but they're intentionally obfuscated, watered down and/or made to resemble 3e/3.5e mechanics in order to avoid backlash from the real roleplayers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
Paladin Lay Hands problems: Let's say you're healing up a fallen party member. Is there ever a very compelling reason not to just heal them for 1 hit point from your Lay Hands pool, so they stand back up with 1 hp? Put another way, take the level 1 case. Your level 1 fighter buddy just went down to a few lucky kobold attacks or whatever. You are a level 1 paladin with a 5hp Lay Hands pool. Simplifying it down to the two extreme cases, you can either: a) Heal him for 1hp, in which case he stands back up but drops again to the next kobold to hit him. or b) Heal him for 5hp, in which case he stands back up with slightly more health, but still drops again to the next kobold to hit him 50% of the time (assuming 1d4+2 damage on kobold attacks). The difference is that you can do (a) five times a day, and (b) only once. Of course there are other options - you could heal him for 2 hp or 3 hp or 4 hp. But there's really no reason to heal him for 2hp or 3hp - he'll still die in one hit to a kobold, so that's just wasted Lay Hands pool, and even spending 4hp he still dies most of the time. Alternately, you could heal the fighter preemptively when he hits 50% hp or so. This burns your entire LoH pool and heals for about the average kobold melee attack, so you're still using your entire pool to soak a single hit. At least as I see it, this is pretty silly. It's almost never worth it to burn a substantial amount of your Lay Hands pool on someone, because your total Lay Hands pool is so small that it's only ever likely to heal for slightly more than an attack's worth of damage. This remains true even at high levels - your Lay Hands pool only grows by 5hp/level, so it's not like you're ever really going to catch up to player HP or monster damage. (As far as non-casters go, the gap between your Lay Hands pool and player HP is only going to grow wider - even d8 hit dice classes grow their HP pool faster than 5hp/level with just a +1 CON modifier). Am I just misreading this or is this literally best used as a "stand a party member back up with 1hp" feature rather than for actual healing? branar fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
early on i'd say that's probably its best use. Later as you get a bigger Lay on Hands HP pool to draw from (and Cure spells) i'd guess the functionality will shift a bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
treeboy posted:early on i'd say that's probably its best use. Later as you get a bigger Lay on Hands HP pool to draw from (and Cure spells) i'd guess the functionality will shift a bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Actually it seems like its best use is to top of healing so you don't waste spells. Eh I dunno, since you're using Lay Hands instead of attacking or casting a spell, you probably never want to spend your action just topping somebody off. Even at high levels, I think either you want to heal someone from unconsciousness to 1HP (note that if you've got a big LoH pool, this effectively takes nothing away from it - the difference between a 49HP Lay Hands pool and a 48HP Lay Hands pool is trivial) or you want to drop a big bomb of a heal for something like 75-80% of your max Lay Hands pool, leaving you with some remaining buffer for 1HP heals and/or removing conditions. Spending an entire action to heal someone from 58HP to 65HP isn't very effective in combat, and outside of combat they can spend a hit dice, drink a low-level healing potion, benefit from a Prayer of Healing cast if the entire group is low, etc. Anyway, I just feel like the design of Lay Hands this edition leaves a lot to be desired. Using it to heal for 1HP (whether at low or high levels) just feels cheesy, but is often the most effective choice. And at low levels, using it for actual healing is incredibly weak. The paladin in my Hoard of the Dragon Queen campaign hasn't keyed in on the 1HP use yet, but was definitely disappointed when she decided to use Lay on Hands to heal herself and realized that, hey, wait a minute, her entire Lay Hands pool for the day was equivalent to the damage she took from a single kobold swing in the last combat...and they had fought twelve kobolds already and were probably going to fight a bunch more before a long rest.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
FromTheShire posted:The other spell I've seen mentioned to poach at 10 that I just actually looked up is Swift Quiver from the Ranger list, which lets you make 2 attacks as a bonus action with a weapon that uses ammunition from the touched quiver, and also magically replaces the spent ammunition. Then you can actually exceed the base fighter in attacks per round again, that is really strong. Bear in mind that the Fighter isn't limited to Polearm Master to gain a bonus action attack - they can also take Crossbow Expert (in fact, that's the choice with the highest DPR overall for them) and they'll be at +2 to-hit compared to a Bard who does the same. The downside of being a Bard is that you want to take Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter for your all-day DPR, then Resilient and War Caster to make concentration saves when casting, so there's kind of a hybrid feat tax there. You also don't have Arcane Recovery to get casts back so you're stuck with Swift Quiver (which actually is probably better than Banishing Smite) 2/day until level 17 (when it becomes 3/day). The upside, of course, is that you're a full caster. So it's kind of a first world problem to have, but still.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Bear in mind that the Fighter isn't limited to Polearm Master to gain a bonus action attack - they can also take Crossbow Expert (in fact, that's the choice with the highest DPR overall for them) and they'll be at +2 to-hit compared to a Bard who does the same. The fighter could also take two weapon fighting style to get a decent bonus attack without spending a feat. Also, one needs to remember that hand crossbows are 75GP and aren't available as part of the Bard starting packages.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:The fighter could also take two weapon fighting style to get a decent bonus attack without spending a feat. TWF is outscaled by GWF after level 5 (I'll double-check my tables this evening for the breakpoints). You have a 98% chance of rolling enough starting wealth to buy a hand crossbow. Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:TWF is outscaled by GWF after level 5 (I'll double-check my tables this evening for the breakpoints). Right on, I wasn't considering DPR or whatever, just volume of attacks. The point is you have to roll for wealth and spend a significant chunk of that wealth to start with a hand crossbow. VVVVV E: Something tells me that is supposed to read "martial melee weapons." Otherwise, the leather and longbow option option on the preceding line is pointless. But hey, that doesn't mean you're wrong. 
PeterWeller fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Right on, I wasn't considering DPR or whatever, just volume of attacks. Right, but I don't think that's too big of a deal. You can also have your Fighter buddy take the 2 martial weapons option and give you a hand crossbow while keeping a maul for himself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Bear in mind that the Fighter isn't limited to Polearm Master to gain a bonus action attack - they can also take Crossbow Expert (in fact, that's the choice with the highest DPR overall for them) and they'll be at +2 to-hit compared to a Bard who does the same. Very true, Crossbow Expert is probably the better choice for the Fighter as well, I just think it's pretty nuts that the Bard can have a basically equivalent number of attacks, at only 2 less to hit. If you take Sharpshooter, Resilient, and War Caster, does that work out to be more reliable than taking the stat bonuses at one or two of those levels? I guess by 20 you'd be at 18 DEX and CHA and 15 CON if you started at 16/16/14 and put Resilient into CON, so you're not losing much to hit/damage. As far as hand crossbows go, if you're playing in Adventure Society you can start at class maximum gold, which is 200 for the Bard. I was able to get it, leather armor, rapier, a couple daggers, and all the things starting equipment for class/background usually get you with a little extra to spare for cheap useful gear like oil flasks etc. Not applicable to many home games I'm sure but something to keep in mind if you're doing organized play.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Everyone is making GBS threads their pants over Valor Bards, but I think there is something to be said for Lore Bards to lock down the enemy instead of doing Valor's higher weapon DPR. At 6th level, they can swipe Counterspell from the Wizard list, and start countering magic like a boss. Jack of All Trades makes them especially good at it, almost as good as an Abjuration specialist Wizard (and at a lower level). Cutting Words also lets you "counter" non-magical attacks as a reaction. On the fights that matter, the party usually has more actions than the enemies, so making them whiff usually means your whole party gets a round of attacks instead of just the Bard getting one extra crossbow shot in. Stacking feats instead of ability increases looks like a trap to me. A human with Crossbow Expertise and Sharpshooter has given up 3 points in their primary attribute versus a demihuman with a favorable ability bonus, on top of possible racial abilities. And dual-wielding screws up spellcasters pretty hard unless you take even more feats to cast with both hands full (let alone needing material components or focuses).
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
Dang, friend who wanted to DM has changed his mind, so DM time for me then. Speed reading through the Hoard of the dragon queen, looks like a really fun adventure but why the hell are the monsters and magic items and poo poo not in the book? Why do I have to grab them online? Seems really dumb since they even mention it in the book that they aren't there and to go online so it can't really be an oversight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 18:59
|
|