Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SoylentWhite

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
31
True that I was only counting the optional moves.

In the 'writing playbooks guide' http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=2248.0, it mentions that 'First, your moves have to be ones other playbooks could take'.  Now, since this is for a hack, rather than 'pure' AW, you could just ignore that, but it does seem like good advice to me, especially when there are relatively few playbooks, so Dance of Death is making me give it suspicious looks.  You are clearly trading in versatility for power.  This is the only move of the DD that references signature weapons, so why isn't it 'Choose a weapon as your signature weapon.  When you're using it, it has +1 harm and you have 1-armour (if you're wearing armour, use that instead)'?  That lets other playbooks take it.  If you're concerned over it being too powerful, then I feel the move should be altered, rather than limited in who can take it.  Your choice, of course.

I do really like what you did with 'bow'.  Although counting arrows I feel doesn't add enough to be worth the effort.  How about 'after using a special arrow, roll +Cool.  10+: you're fine. 7-9: one left.  Miss: all gone!' Or something, so you don't have 2 additional number to keep track of.  (Also, it probably needs 'far')

I also like what you've done with Death Lab, but you comment about being able to create items with killing edge did present me with the amusing mental image of literally constructing an alibi or crew.  More seriously, that does increase the use of taking edges like 'alibi' and 'crew' in your initial two, which cannot (presumably) be made in the Death Lab.

Interesting that you feel that a dramatic entrance where he shouldn't be strikes you as something Blade wouldn't do (Ahead of the Game), but fair enough.  They were just quick ideas thrown out for inspiration.
(Something that I would point out is that 'Old Ghosts' is largely equivalent to 'Hunted', save for not being vulnerable to 'not just murder', which I just noticed.  Having an NPC hunt you with the ability to kill any NPC off-screen does not a deadly (to you!) combination make.)


And so we're clear, for all that I seem to be criticising it, I do really like it.

32
All those changes seem like good ones, but the playbook now only has 5 moves, which I feel is a bit too severe (yes, I know, I'm never happy ;) ).

So, some ideas for replacement moves:

Inquisition (cf deep brain scan/in-brain puppet strings)
When you have an NPC restrained and at your mercy, roll +cool.  On a 10+ hold 3, on 7-9 hold 1.  You can spend a hold to ask a question relating to security (what are the watchmen shift rotas, where are the cameras, are there food tasters, etc.).  If they answer, they do so honestly.  If your victim can't or won't answer the question, you automatically inflict 1-harm ap on them. On a miss, they escape their bonds!

Ahead of the game (cf Bonefeel)
At the beginning of the session, roll +Sharp.  On a 10+, hold 1+1.  On 7-9 hold 1.  At any time, either you or the MC can spend your hold to have you already be there, with the proper tools and knowledge, with or without any clear explanation why. If your hold was 1+1, take +1 forward now. On a miss, the MC holds 1, and can spend it to have you already be there, but somehow pinned, caught or trapped.

Found (cf Lost)
When you whisper someone's name into the warp, roll +Twisted.  On a hit, you know precisely where they are right now.  On a 10+, you even know where they'll be for the next few hours.  On a miss, they know where you are, and that you're coming for them.

Everybody eats, even that guy

Old Ghosts (cf This Ends Now from the fan-made 'Loner' prestige class)
During a period of downtime, roll +Hard (?) (It's a bad stat, so probably not, but putting it forwards).  On a 10+, things are just peachy.  Take +1 forwards due to your good mood.  On a 7-9, turns out a previous matter you thought closed isn't quite.  The MC will tell you about one final score that needs settling to put it behind you.  On a miss, something from your past blows up in your face, big time.

Next two are basically copy/pasted from the 'Abacus' playbook, found here: http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=2218.30.  While I do like the 'not just murder' move as it is, these are alternatives, since you said you may remove it.

Served cold - when you take your time to settle a score, roll +cool. On a 10+, choose 2. On a 7-9, choose 1. On a miss, they get to choose 1 on you.
* You catch them where they're alone or vulnerable.
* They don't know you're there until you show yourself.
* It doesn't take you until next session.

Like a Ghost - when you appear from nowhere to inflict violence, roll +cool. On a 10+, you get your shot off before getting spotted and inflict harm as appropriate. On a 7-9, one of them notices you - either hightail it or trade fire.


Obviously choosing all of these would be ridiculous move bloat.  But you can hopefully find a couple there that fit your image of the playbook, to get the count back up to a reasonable number.

33
Regarding number of moves: it is certainly true that I was comparing that to base AW, rather than other DG playbooks.


To expand a little on a point I made, to hopefully make my reasoning clearer:

If there's no barrier between the character and being able to do cool stuff, it isn't cool (the 'if everyone's special, no-one is' rule).

One barrier to place is 'you have to buy this move to do X'.  This is stuff like 'Eye on the Door'.  You pay the price to remove the barrier, and suddenly you can (try to!) make a smooth exit whenever you want.

Another barrier is fetch quests.  This is stuff like the Savvyhead working on tech.  The barrier is 'yes, you can do X, but you need A, B and C.'

My problem with Death lab and swear an oath is that it has *both* barriers, and the rewards aren't so special as to be worth the double-barrier investment, so the character gains nothing from having these cool things so hidden away.

You may disagree, but that's the angle I was coming from.


I'm very much of the mindset of 'if you build it, they will come'.  You say 'I don´t want characters to have stuff they don´t use'.  I feel that if they have the option right there, they will probably use it sooner or later.  Not often, maybe.  But they could well come across a circumstance when they need something special, and then they have the Death lab handy, ready to give them a new fetch quest.
Also, with stuff like 'swear an oath', it makes it a definite choice for that character if they know they can get power through sacrifices, and they choose to turn their back on that temptation.  But the power is always there, just a single victim away.


Incidentally, you say that the Trooper cannot really compete with the Commander, but you have to consider the circumstances - the vast majority of the Commander's power is externalised in his men, while the Trooper's power is inherent in himself (and, admittedly, his gear).  In other words, the commander has drama and situations getting in the way of his power that the trooper doesn't have (the chopper/gunlugger divide, writ large).

But that's rather beside the point.  The point I was trying to make was even if the DD gets all this extra 'free' stuff, they still fall within the standard 'power bracket' of the playbooks, in other words, they wouldn't be overpowered compared to the rest (IMO, anyway).


Remember that new advances stuff is both prescriptive and descriptive.  Many advances (such as 'better weapons for gang', 'larger cult', etc.) can be achieved through *both* xp expenditure and narrative actions.  I see no reason why killing edges should be treated any differently.


Bows can be cool (if a player's just seen 'The Avengers' and thought Hawkeye was cool, for example).  Probably the best justification for using one would be in combination with a Death lab, creating lots of custom arrows (like Hawkeye uses!) for specific circumstances.
But that could just be me.


All the above just my opinion, naturally.

34
Okay, to give context to this, I'm playing in the PbP advertised here (http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=2734.0), using the Dark Galaxy hack.

While I have been giving the MC a steady stream of comments about the playbook I'm using (the Commander), the Death Dancer also caught my eye.  That can (hopefully) be found here:
https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B06M_51wBJSFNzY1MDhmY2EtYzA1Ny00NDU4LThhMDktYmZjOTVmODlhNzg0/edit?pli=1&docId=1XTj_vScoWCoB6Q7I6P5OVSPyVrseInwXDVA7BWfnly4.

Unfortunately, he's not the one who made that playbook, so suggested I hash my thoughts out with the author here (they know to look here).  I can't speak for the author as to how open they'd be about others offering their thoughts, but if he'd accept mine, there's no reason why he wouldn't listen to other people (though you may with to wait for them to confirm/deny that).


Okay, so that's the situation, the suggestions:

There's lots of good, inspiring stuff there, but I do feel it has some flaws.  The big one is, it has 9 moves.  Nine!

Dance of death
It's not just murder, it's an art
Swear an Oath
Ice Cold Charm
Surgical Precision
Eye on the Door
Hypnotise
Deliver death
Death lab

And a character can only get 5 of them max (without then changing character and using other playbook move advances to get more, or something equally silly).

So, I had some suggestions for how you might want to cut the numbers down a bit.

Firstly, 'It's not just murder' and 'Deliver death' are similar enough to combine.  Deliver death can be used against PCs (implicitly), and 'not just murder' can't, but that's the only loss I see in just cutting Deliver death out, and it's one I actually prefer - poisoning PCs shouldn't (IMO) be a one-move thing.  Oh, and you could technically use non-lethal poisons using 'deliver death' (ironically enough), so a small rephrase of 'not just murder' might be needed to avoid losing that.

I feel death lab should either be standard, or a non-move advance, preferably standard.  Mostly because, assuming it works like a savvyhead's workbench, it doesn't get cool stuff in and of itself, but it gives you more avenues to get cool stuff, and makes you always want stuff to build your latest 'toys'.  Wanting stuff is good.

Swear an oath, while arguable, I say should be another standard feature (yes, they're getting a lot of standard features, but other classes get ships and armies, so it's not ridiculously excessive).  With the caveat that the sacrifice should be non-trivial, and the more dangerous the mission, the more specific the sacrifice has to be, and the harder it is/more consequenceful it is to acquire.  One key reason is, it ensures the temptation to make the sacrifice is always there, rather than having the 'barrier' of having to buy the move first.

And that takes it down to 6 moves, which is, I believe, fairly standard.


Other points:
There's no way to gain more killing edges.  I feel an advance could be useful to add a couple more options.

Under 'looks', there are options for signature weapons which don't appear later (such as 'bow').


There are a few other minor things, but we're not talking anything that affects mechanics, so it's not important.

35
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 25, 2012, 05:49:32 PM »
There's a good argument that the squad of guards loyal to the captain is the primary duty of the Security Chief.

That will be made.  Repeatedly. ;)


If you're going to be an illegitimate daughter, you *have* to have your father's actual wife be alive and still on board the ship.  There are no excuses (beyond doing the probably sensible thing and offing her as soon as you get on board). ;)

Edit: I should point out that when I suggested killing the widow of a recently-deceased, well-loved captain during the time you are trying to consolidate power as being a *sensible* idea, that was sarcasm.  Realised it possibly wasn't clear.

36
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 25, 2012, 02:57:26 PM »
What makes sense to me, given that (a) I'm likely to increase the command size to 6-battalion eventually (300-1,500) and (b) for an old guy, I'll be improving fairly rapidly, is that the elite force *was* battalion size.

Something (what?  It's a mystery!) happened, and the former captain took command of the forces and led them to a horrendous defeat where we suffered horrific casualties and I was wounded (and him killed), and while the harm has healed, I'm still getting back up to speed.

That explains (a) how the former captain died. (b) why we trade in military force.  (c) How I can be so old and improve so fast.  (d) how we have capacity for the forces to be arriving.

As this impacts on your ship and character, feel free to veto/amend this, but thought I'd suggest it.

Your security force acting as your bodyguard is basically pointing a massive finger at me saying you either don't trust me to do my job well, or you think I'll betray you.  You can totally do that, but be aware there will be friction between the groups as well as the characters.

The militia is just a militia - it's the crewmen who know which end of a gun goes 'bang'.  They just get drafted in when there are riots, otherwise they do their normal jobs.

A few things to perhaps consider:
1) What happened to your mother (I suggest either still alive, or only relatively recently deceased.)
2) How strong *is* your claim to the ship?  Is it simply you were here first, or are you the oldest?  The one named in his will?
3) Why wouldn't you have been raised on the ship?

37
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 25, 2012, 01:34:33 PM »
Sure.  The disadvantage I was suggesting was more along the lines of 'pricey', where it cost 2-hold from duty to replace lost people/materiel rather than 1, since they're difficult to replace, but I'm happy enough with breakdown.

As for choices, well, I think ideas might change as we bounce ideas off each other.  But my thoughts for now:

Gender: Male  (I picture him as looking similar to Admiral Adama from (new) Battlestar Galactica)
Name: Silon Venris (Oh come on, after deciding they looked like Adama, on seeing the name 'Silon', how could I not?)
Scarred body, tired face (yes, I swapped the adjectives around.  Okay?), judging eyes, worn uniform.

Cool+1, hard-1, sharp+1, status+2, twisted -1

Basically, I'm picturing someone who was once the terror of the battlefield, and now age, arthritis, old wounds and other sundry medical problems have worn them down, so they are held together with medicines, willpower and force of habit.

Noble rank: Lord (unlanded)
Military rank: Commander
Ship role: Chief of security
Duties:
Law Enforcement
Border patrols (of secure areas on the ship)
Investigations (mutineers, traitors, chaos worshippers, etc.)
[Escort-to get]

Gear
Power sword
Las Pistol
Power armour

Command
Now, as you've probably guessed, I've spent quite a lot of time thinking about this, but I have finally decided:
I am chief of security.
The ship is about more than just ferrying my personal army from war to war.
Therefore, a small, elite force makes a lot more sense than a massive army.
But, I have a question: does power armour inhibit stealth, or is the increased bulk and weight offset by inbuilt stealth technology?

So:
Command can transport itself swiftly (Jetpacks!  Pleeeease?) +mobile
Well equipped (+1 harm)
Elite is power armoured (3-armour)
Only elite
High maintenance (Vulnerable: breakdown)

4-harm 3-armour elite 4-platoon (25-60 troops) +mobile +vulnerable:breakdown

[Yes, I have basically all but made assault marines.]
Their name:
Carrion Crows, after the story that crows flock to where there is about to be mass bloodshed.

If you are okay with the +mobile being jetbacks, can I get one as well; or do I need to give something up to do so?

So, there we go.  First draft.

38
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 25, 2012, 08:04:31 AM »
Vulnerable:breakdown implies more 'unreliable' than 'high maintenance' to me, but I'm happy enough to go with it - they're using cutting edge tech, which still has little 'niggles' in it.  Works for me.

Talking of duties, there seem to be two kinds.  Let's call them 'home' and 'away'.  For the purposes of the campaign, 'home' is the ship, while 'away' is 'while the force is warring on the ground'.  For example, law enforcement and border patrols only make sense at home.  Raiding and scouting only make sense when away.

Given that duties come about during downtime, how likely is it that 'away' duties will come up?  And the rules suggest you need to pick 3 and stick to them.  Wouldn't it make more sense to freely choose dependant on circumstances, so you aren't stuck attempting to enforce law on a jungle populated solely with orks.

I'm fine with continuing the discussion on Battle Commander.  I do appreciate my version is fairly minimalist.

Finally, why would you ever choose a bolt pistol over a plasma pistol?  My experience as a gunlugger tells me that AP is *hugely* powerful.  I feel the plasma pistol should have something like 'cooldown' (reload), or 'overheats' (1 harm AP on miss when using it) to make a boltpistol useful.

39
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 24, 2012, 07:23:39 PM »
The key part of your answer that answers the thrust of my question was this:
The difference in size influences the base 'harm as established'.
Which is fair enough.  It just wasn't particularly clear to me just on reading the move.

Okay, the elite tag makes a big difference there.
I'm trying to decide between having a massive army of conscripts that I constantly feed into the meatgrinder, or a small pure-elite group.  Thing with the elite group is I'm having difficulty choosing a second disadvantage: savage and unruly don't fit with a well-disciplined group (no, I don't have Blood Angels), and I don't want obligation.  So: would you consider a disadvantage along the lines of 'High maintenance'?  It means that the hold you get from duty is worth less relatively (as replacing this expensive kit and elite troops is harder than 'normal' stuff).  Although the current exchange rate is fairly vague - what does '1 for 1' actually mean in this context?

Edit: Actually, the more I think of it, the more I disagree with the remote command options for 'Battle Commander'.  Well, one of them.  Currently, it is very possible to completely and definitely achieve the objective with low casualties and still lose the respect of your commander or men.  To my reasoning, the respect of your men should depend on the number of casualties, the respect of your commanders on if you definitely achieve the objective.  Also, as a minor point, 'you don't miss something important' assumes there always is something important to miss, which is stretching probability rather.  I can't help but think making it more directly equivalent to 'sieze by force' might be an idea:
10+: choose 2. 7-9: choose 1
Definitely achieve objectives.
Take few casualties
Inflict enough casualties to shatter enemy morale
Or something like that.  Maybe less direct.  But current results seem . . . odd.

40
Apocalypse World / Re: New Playbook: The Seeker
« on: May 24, 2012, 06:54:30 PM »
I Like it in general

First a small comment:
HX on your turn, should it have a "choose 1, 2 or all 3"?
And what is the HX for the other players after the first 3?

Second:
My game, my rules - I like the concept behind the move, but is it a little overpowered? Currently if you stumble upon a lone gun lugger Large gang vs lone opponent gives -3 harm. Unless he shoots you with grenades there is no way to harm you. Or is this intentional.

Hey, thanks for the feedback.

Yes, technically it should have "choose 1, 2 or all 3", I just took that as assumed.
But you are right, I forgot subsequent Hx.  Let's see:
Tell everyone else Hx+1.  You give everyone a chance.

I also realised subsequently that I forgot gear:
You start off with the clothes on your back and a fistful of oddments equal to 1 barter.  Use it wisely, grasshopper.

You've missed a couple of things the gunlugger can do.
Firstly, autofire weapons (which the gunlugger would have to be trying to not even have one of) cut right through the defences.
Secondly, if the gunlugger ditches their weapons and just goes fist-to-fist, they'd be on equal footing.
Machetes or area melee weapons (like some Battlebabe custom weapons, for example) also can do harm.
So, you claim it's overpowered, but in the situation the seeker should be trying to get into (hand to hand), he's only on equal footing, not even at an advantage, vs hard-centric characters like Gunluggers.

41
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 24, 2012, 02:27:18 PM »
Firstly, you seem (though I could be wrong) to have it in your head that I was asking about whether 'Advisor' and 'Ask your subordinates' stacked with 'read a situation'.  I wasn't.  I was asking if they stacked with *each other*.  Because they are *always* the same circumstance, just from 2 different directions.  (Asker asks, answerer answers honestly, asker gets +1 ongoing, answerer gets xp).

Troop numbers could equal the rest of the populace, but remember, for all that we don't have a planet's population, we do have a closed ecosystem.  We need banks, shops, restaurants, firemen, farmers (in some form), etc. in addition to gunners, engineers, manufactory workers, etc.  Equal numbers would equal a serious strain on the economic ecosystem.  (Sure, handwavium.  But thought I'd point it out.)

Right, not sure if you got my point, so I'll illustrate by way of an example.  Two different commanders, A and B, are fighting an identical size 7 force.  Commander A has a size 9 force.  B has a size 6.  Both are commanding from behind the lines.
Using battle commander, commander A doesn't appear to be at any advantage - they're still just rolling 'status'.  Actually, if casualties are determined percentage wise, so let's say they suffer 10% casualties if 'Losses are small' and 30% if they're not, commander A is actually at a disadvantage, losing roughly 30 times as many men (absolute numbers) as commander B for the same result.
This is why I was asking if losses 'scale' according to the size - if so, having a larger army is an asset if you're fighting on the front lines and a liability when you're commanding from behind, because you need so many more replacements after a battle.

As for what I think about Commander, a few points spring up:
1) It is mechanically consistent, but logically impossible, for a force to be both well trained (+1 harm) and untrained (+unprofessional).  (As distinct from mobile/grounded, where the narratively opposed elements are mechanically opposed as well).  Not a *problem*, but slightly odd.

2) The new arrangement makes the elite squad much less prominent.  The difference between elites and command is twofold: +1 harm, and better upgrades. 
There is an option for the command to get +1 harm (and it is unclear if that affects the elite or not), which in one move makes them better overall than elites can ever be (assuming that each step in army size is equivalent to one step in gang size mechanically).
Also, you can have an absolute maximum, after all upgrades, of 5 positive things.  After spending all bar 1 on all the elite upgrades, you have a 4-harm, 3-armour, 5-company, which isn't actually that impressive.
Personally (and feel free to ignore this), I'd start off the elites with the great equipment (so, 4-harm, 3-armour, 3-squad) and have the upgrades give them otherwise-inaccessible tags that give them a use - to do cool stuff that the main army can't do.
Examples:
Your elites are ghosts, able to enter and exit anywhere. +infiltrators.
Your elites are sharp-eyed master scouts.  If there's an advantage, they'll find it.  +scouting.
Your elites are experts at identifying and taking out enemy leaders, leaving them disorganised before the fight even starts. +assassins.
There's probably some overlap there, but you get the idea.

3) What effect does 'unprofessional' actual have? 

42
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 24, 2012, 08:01:32 AM »
1) Actually, kind of answering my own question, here http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=534.40;wap2 is an (equivalent) answer.

2) Well, in the armies doc, you are aware that 'Elite is one size larger' advance seems useless until all 'command is one size larger' advances have been taken (given that, as written, increased command increases elites as well)?

3) Well, the general gist I was looking at was a large, mobile army of conscripts (other advantages spent improving the elites) who (probably) were able of hitting hard & fast, but couldn't maintain a long offensive (so, they did have breakdown).  But this ran into other questions, like: does having another PC higher up in the command chain count as an 'Obligation'?  Can I actually take 'large army', given the population of the ship we're in?  Do non-'Small losses' scale according to the size of the army?  (In other words, can a large army absorb non-small losses much easier than a small army?)

4+) Okay.

43
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 23, 2012, 02:55:39 PM »
Commander is looking good.

Questions:

1) Do the Heirophant move 'Advisor' and the Ship's Master's 'ask your officers' ability stack?  (I would assume not, but thought I'd ask.)

2) The 'Armies and Military Forces' page seems to have completely different (and rather vague) army construction rules.  Since you said Commander is finished, can you confirm we'd be using the rules on the Commander sheet?  If so, what purpose is the Armies & Military Forces page?

3) The 'Your army is self-sufficient' option seems to be completely irrelevant now.  It only removes 'vulnerable: breakdown'.  You can only get that through the 'heavily dependant on a supply chain' disadvantage.  All army modifiers are now 'add or remove one option', therefore you'd remove 'heavily dependant' rather than adding 'self-sufficient'.  Correct?

4) Are you open to new/altered duties?  Some seem less suitable, given our campaign/character concept.  Example: replacing 'Raiding' with 'Reclaim lost areas (spoils/--/escaped monster!)'.

5) I'm presuming that once the character classes have been tidied up, you'll be tidying up(/translating) at least the moves of the other classes, to give us plenty of options.  Correct?  (*Whipcrack*.) ;)

Edit:
6) The crew numbers on the Ship Master page seem . . . sensible.  For this to be truly 40k influenced, you need to take sensible numbers and multiply them by, well, 40k ;).  The book itself says it's got a world-sized population (so, 6 billion or so?) and too big for anyone to know it all.  200 militia and a few thousand crewmen just doesn't sound nearly enough.  FWIW.
Double edit: oh, wait.  It also says a population of thousands.  What world is that the population of?  Pluto!?

44
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 22, 2012, 01:44:34 PM »
My point was 'mystic deals/stuff available to everyone' is much more consistent with the 40k universe than the SW one.

Thinking about it, a role which obviously springs out would be to be the Commander.  Older and more experienced.  The kind with Opinions.  Opinions which are Right.  And the sooner Captain Babymilk stops crapping his diapers and starts taking the Opinions, the better off the Ship will be. ;)

However, the Commander is missing basic stuff like Hx and advancement (an opportunity to increase duty is basically a requirement), which would need to be done first.

45
Apocalypse World / Re: Anyone up for a PbP game?
« on: May 22, 2012, 11:03:16 AM »
If I were in (and while I am leaning - aw, screw it, I'm in.  Why not, right?) I'm considering between Death Dancer and Commander, currently leaning towards Commander (presumably of the on-ship security force if we have a Ship's Master).

[Re: twisted, yeah, I just forgot to factor in zero corruption into my calcs.  My bad.]

As for colour, depends what colour hats you want us to be wearing.  40k is light black hats vs dark black hats, Star Wars is white hats vs black hats (IMO, anyway).  Also, in SW, no-one aside from force users have to worry about corruption, while in 40k, everyone does.    40k would seem to be more consistent with everything else in the playbooks, but I'm convincable either way.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5