The Gargoyle module!Now i'm sure you all know what this poorly written piece of cow-tripe is all about,so i won't go into great detail about it.I've honestly never played it but,only skimmed through it's pages to be fair.I can say with no shame however that when i read the introduction and took note that the module is centered around two half-orc assassins named "tom & jerry" i felt for an instant that i was accidentally reading Castle Greyhawk by mistake (only this one was'nt funny.)....So i continued reading,the story was terrible,the creatures whom i now refer to as "gaygoyles"we're awful,the story arc was a travesty and the poorly made pre-generated PC's we laughable.I mean who actually has a deep burning desire to spend so much time on a vast campaign playing as a dwarf named "Hothands"of all things?!?!?
I mean the the last line in the entire story was"How did you make it to the top of gargoyle peak in the winds without your wings?"and the gargoyle king answers with" i climbed."My jaw dropped after reading that,i mean this mod should have been career suicide at TSR if you ask me,could be why they let skip williams loose from the staff at TSR only resigning him to editorial jobs.
But i digress (Not very much though.) the module does give some insights about the surrounding areas,but that's about all it really offers.
Now from what i've read,most GH fans do not consider gargoyle as canocial.Am i being too harsh on this one.It does "feel"like greyhawk,but at the same time,it feels...very wrong somehow.
Last edited by AcidArrow on Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
While I don't disagree, it strikes me as highly ironic that someone whose avatar is Mika-Oba from the cover of Rose Estes' The Demon Hand is calling Gargoyles crap... _________________ -Phil<br /><br />You can have my 1st Edition DMG when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
No appreciation for irony, I guess. Pity. _________________ -Phil<br /><br />You can have my 1st Edition DMG when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
I know,i could only skim through it because i started suffering from stigmata of the optical nerves...and for the first person who responded,let's just say that im a little burned out at the moment on irony.
Yes, I freely admit this is one of the poorer modules written for Greyhawk. However, back in the day I did run it for a few of my friends and we had a great time with it. As I recall, I didn't even modify it significantly.
But since then, as an homage to the great time we had (and NOT to the module itself, I can assure you), I have included the gargoyles as an ongoing element of my campaigns.
Funny what you can do with a piece of crap, ain't it?
Oh, and for what it's worth, I didn't like the Estes novels that much, either - at least not as sources of Greyhawk lore. And yet I include various elements from them as well.
Yes, I freely admit this is one of the poorer modules written for Greyhawk. However, back in the day I did run it for a few of my friends and we had a great time with it. As I recall, I didn't even modify it significantly.
But since then, as an homage to the great time we had (and NOT to the module itself, I can assure you), I have included the gargoyles as an ongoing element of my campaigns.
Funny what you can do with a piece of crap, ain't it?
Oh, and for what it's worth, I didn't like the Estes novels that much, either - at least not as sources of Greyhawk lore. And yet I include various elements from them as well.
I knew i could count on bubbagump for just the answer i was looking for.I think a lot of ppl particularly on canonfire tend to forget what it's all about...having fun with it and not being bogged down by the cannon itself.While it's important to have a backstory to a good campaign,it doesent always have to be perfect.I just think that some modules we're crap and some we're great,but to tell you the truth,i'd rather play 100 sessions of gargoyle over 1 session of watching that wierdo DM on the Dragon Strike VHS again ( i still cringe at the memory of it.).
P.S. i'm not much a Rose Estes fan either,but she had some nice artwork accompanying her novels;)
I read the Rose Estes novels, hell, I have them all somewhere...and for the life of me I cannot remember **** about them. I think I read them sometime in middle school, so if they were bad, you would have to ask the 'me' of 'then' who would very likely give you a crude response.
I read the Rose Estes novels, hell, I have them all somewhere...and for the life of me I cannot remember **** about them. I think I read them sometime in middle school, so if they were bad, you would have to ask the 'me' of 'then' who would very likely give you a crude response.
Let's face it prime,you might not be able to judge a book by it's cover,but it can sure as hell sell the book.
I have a copy of Come Endless Darkness that is as awful outside as inside. I respect EGG for everything he has done, but that does not mean I have to like it all.
Of course, in my opinion, the three worst novels in all of the history of DnD are, Tantras, Shadowdale, and Waterdeep. They were like reading the back of a cereal box. I mean, in the Rose Estes GH books you can practically hear her rolling the random encounters...but these books were just plain excrement.
They are the wet dream of any new DnD player, "You mean at the end of the quest I get to be a new god? Cool!"
Of course, I should state that in one of my games a character did in fact become Vecna...but he wasn't very happy about it.
I knew i could count on bubbagump for just the answer i was looking for.I think a lot of ppl particularly on canonfire tend to forget what it's all about...having fun with it ...
That's a shocking change of tone from the original post. I can't imagine that the intent was to remind players that "Gargoyle" can be fun, despite it's draw backs and that everyone should remember that it's a game and it's about having fun and spending time with firends.
I have a copy of Come Endless Darkness that is as awful outside as inside. I respect EGG for everything he has done, but that does not mean I have to like it all.
Of course, in my opinion, the three worst novels in all of the history of DnD are, Tantras, Shadowdale, and Waterdeep. They were like reading the back of a cereal box. I mean, in the Rose Estes GH books you can practically hear her rolling the random encounters...but these books were just plain excrement.
They are the wet dream of any new DnD player, "You mean at the end of the quest I get to be a new god? Cool!"
Of course, I should state that in one of my games a character did in fact become Vecna...but he wasn't very happy about it.
Well to be fair,the forgotten realms novels we're an excuse to switch over to second edition rules,they we're the second series i read out of all the ad&d stuff out of all of the available novels at the time,i enjoyed them,but the one book i think that bothered me the most was " Tales of Ravenloft"which to me read like a bad Goosebumps novel (Yes i know the writer of Goosbumps did a story in the book.)But those stories felt very generic and several of them,i had to laugh while reading.
I knew i could count on bubbagump for just the answer i was looking for.I think a lot of ppl particularly on canonfire tend to forget what it's all about...having fun with it ...
That's a shocking change of tone from the original post. I can't imagine that the intent was to remind players that "Gargoyle" can be fun, despite it's draw backs and that everyone should remember that it's a game and it's about having fun and spending time with firends.
But, hey, maybe cooler heads preside, and people have a change of heart. Glad to see it.
It's all good,i still think gargoyle is way better then the personal mods i wrote back when i was around 13,looking back at those poorly done stories,i could'nt hold a candle,but i had fun doing them regardless,i think my major complaint about gaygoyle is the cartoonish way it was presented.So, to be completly fair,i will eventually play gargoyle,but don't be suprised if i roll my eyes a time or two when doing so
Well, when you need to favorably compare it to modules you wrote when you were 13...that's hardly complimenting it.
I always figured that the best way to establish my opinion was to create a scale of judgment against a stated standard. It's easy to say what you hate, but without a source of comparison to what you like, you are just ranting.
For instance, whenever I say a movie was good or bad, I say, "It was better than Time Cop" or I say, "It was worse than Time Cop."
Damn near everyone has seen Time Cop. So, by saying that it was better or worse, that lets people know where my opinions lay before arguing with me. Just saying, "Star Wars Episode II Attack of the Clones was stupid as hell" makes people think you are simply whining, but by saying, "I think Time Cop was better than Star Wars Episode II Attack of the Clones."
Therefore, when you say, "I think Gargoyle is only slightly better than the modules I wrote when I was 13." You sum up everything without much further need for an explanation.
If anyone cares, I compare music with "better or worse than Tears for Fears" and TV shows with "better or worse than Full House."
Actually the module has some useful gazeteer information in it. I've added a heavily edited version to my own Yeomanry gazeteer excluding things like ice cream parlours and leaving the gargoyles as standard gargoyles that the locals placate with offerings. The module is embarassing but there are some nuggets that can be useful.
That's a shocking change of tone from the original post. I can't imagine that the intent was to remind players that "Gargoyle" can be fun, despite it's draw backs and that everyone should remember that it's a game and it's about having fun and spending time with firends.
But, hey, maybe cooler heads preside, and people have a change of heart. Glad to see it.
Here's a grim little tale set in the World of Greyhawk - you may have always thought of gargoyles as sinister, deadly adversaries, but what do you do when one stalks you, wakes you, and begs you help him recover his stolen wings? This is one of my all-time favorite adventures to entice novices into the game - a wonderful story for levels 1-4.
I've never played it before, but I remember my friend buying it when we were like 11 or 12. I think I might pick it up. I think its funny that you guys all seem to be in agreement that its a comedy module while thie guy who wrote the review seems to be of the opinion that its a "Grim little Tale".
That's a shocking change of tone from the original post. I can't imagine that the intent was to remind players that "Gargoyle" can be fun, despite it's draw backs and that everyone should remember that it's a game and it's about having fun and spending time with firends.
But, hey, maybe cooler heads preside, and people have a change of heart. Glad to see it.
yeah, had the same thoghts, ehehe
Ah,you'll have to all excuse me on that one,see i've been in an emotional rollercoaster lately,due to the fact that 5 of my relatives all got cancer around the same time( some are not expected to live much longer.) and i just recently moved and my girlfriend is suffering severe PMS right about now .Ususally i'm very laid back but right about now,i'm a bit moody and i need to vent.But what i guess i was trying to say was that when i play Greyhawk,i expect at least some seriousness out of it,i hated the module ,but at the same time i'm always willing to listen to the opinions of others and i try to see things in a different point of view and i value those opinions,good or bad.
Here's a grim little tale set in the World of Greyhawk - you may have always thought of gargoyles as sinister, deadly adversaries, but what do you do when one stalks you, wakes you, and begs you help him recover his stolen wings? This is one of my all-time favorite adventures to entice novices into the game - a wonderful story for levels 1-4.
I've never played it before, but I remember my friend buying it when we were like 11 or 12. I think I might pick it up. I think its funny that you guys all seem to be in agreement that its a comedy module while thie guy who wrote the review seems to be of the opinion that its a "Grim little Tale".
That review was probably written by the author.
As to the reviewer thinking that "Gargoyles" is "one of my all-time favorite adventures to entice novices into the game - a wonderful story for levels 1-4.", well perhaps if you are trying to entice 8 year-olds into playing D&D then you might like it. It is just kind of corny. I think the term "Disney D&D" describes "Gargoyles" the best, and I don't mean Disney's cartoon entitled "Gargoyles" either. That cartoon is cool by comparison. The module "Gargoyles" may be worse than Disney's "Hercules".
Yes, I said it.
To be honest, "Gargoyles" is not horribly written, it is just written for the wrong audience/age group, and that is why is just doesn't work. But, like Paul said, there is some background information you can glean from it for general campaign setting usage that is not utterly horribly and that can save you some development time. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
I second the love (hate?) for CHILD'S PLAY. That has to be the WORST module I"ve ever read. WORST. I can think of no redeeming qualities for this module.
I would like to say, for the worst I have ever seen, I would have to refer to a list of some of the RPGA Living Greyhawk mods. There were some real tragedies in there. Dozens of horrific travesties of mods.
I also have to say that LG was also the source of some of the best mods I have ever seen as well. Better, in fact, than many professionally produced stuff. There are about a handful that I would list among the best mods I have ever run, or seen.
But it was a mixed bag. It was inconsistent with finding authors ... when it was good, it was glorious. But, when it was bad, it made you want to forswear gaming for the rest of your life, travel to meet the author's mother and slap her in the face for birthing him. It was that bad. _________________ Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com
Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal
Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com
But, when it was bad, it made you want to forswear gaming for the rest of your life, travel to meet the author's mother and slap her in the face for birthing him.
...the module does give some insights about the surrounding areas,but that's about all it really offers.
Now from what i've read,most GH fans do not consider gargoyle as canocial.Am i being too harsh on this one.It does "feel"like greyhawk,but at the same time,it feels...very wrong somehow.
-I was a tad disappointed when I bought "Gargoyles" way back when. However, it was placed in the WOG setting, so I accepted it, particulalry because of the map stuff.
I've haven't DM'ed it yet, but I intend to use it for 1st level PCs since I'm fairly harsh, and consequently 1st level PCs have a high fatality rate in my campaign.
bubbagump wrote:
Yes, I freely admit this is one of the poorer modules written for Greyhawk. However, back in the day I did run it for a few of my friends and we had a great time with it. As I recall, I didn't even modify it significantly.
But since then, as an homage to the great time we had (and NOT to the module itself, I can assure you), I have included the gargoyles as an ongoing element of my campaigns...
PaulN6 wrote:
Actually the module has some useful gazeteer information in it...
-I'll second the gazeteer info' again.
PaulN6 wrote:
...I've added a heavily edited version to my own Yeomanry gazeteer excluding things like ice cream parlours and leaving the gargoyles as standard gargoyles that the locals placate with offerings. The module is embarassing but there are some nuggets that can be useful.
...and...
bubbagump wrote:
Funny what you can do with a piece of crap, ain't it?
-I thought about it, and decided to keep the "gaygoyles" as is. Perhaps a joke by Zagyg? (When in doubt, I always blame Zagig Yragene... ) I've got time to decide. Anyway, they're resticted to that neck of The Tors.
As for the village, I don't have a problem with it. A few eccentricites here and there are not a problem. If you spend most of your time with the temple and the conventional stores and workshops, it will put the occasional eccentricity in perspective.Anyway, why not an ice cream parlor? Someone had to have invented it (probably a halfling), and The Tors are pretty hot. They must have a magical ice maker (handy in The Tors, anyway), and use magical bowls to keep it from melting. My only problem is the market- who would be able to afford it? The miners must be doing well... Perhaps sugar is cheap, since they're so close to the Sea Princes and the Amedio.
So, maybe PaulN6 will consider having those halfings and their magic ice maker move in and set up shop?
manicmidwife wrote:
WHAT? No mention of WG7 Castle Greyhawk or WG10 Childs Play?
* Casts a few Greater Atonement spells *
-WG7 was de-canonized, and WG10 was never seriously placed in WOG. Yatils equal Perrenland?
Oerthman wrote:
While I don't disagree, it strikes me as highly ironic that someone whose avatar is Mika-Oba from the cover of Rose Estes' The Demon Hand is calling Gargoyles crap...
I haven't given it my full thought, but I think the module is salvagable. I've some notes somewhere. But the cover is lovely and should for the basis for revising it IMO. 7 gargolys for each of the deadly sins. I think it is a matter of getting a marker and crossing out all the junk, then figuring out what is necessary to run the mod, then what you would like to add for appropriate flavor. There is stuff in there that is good. It just needs to be scraped off quite a bit. _________________ Plar of Poofy Pants
... when it was good, it was glorious. But, when it was bad, it made you want to forswear gaming for the rest of your life, travel to meet the author's mother and slap her in the face for birthing him. It was that bad.
What we (the holders of the Greyhawk torch) REALLY need is a review database of LG mods. Which are the diamonds worth tracking down and bringing to light... which are the lumps of dirty coal best left buried deep below WotC's ban on public release... which have useful fanon... which violate the laws of Greysense. Perhaps someone who has played alot of LG could start a thread or two... "Good LG mods I have played/DMed" and "Bad LG mods best avoided"
I've got an excel spreadsheet I've built with over a 1000 Living Greyhawk mods from all regions in it that I'd be glad to offer as a start. It has the mod numbers, titles, levels, locations, authors, and tie-in info (sequels or other mods that are related). I've often thought this would be useful to some folks on here, but couldn't figure out the best way to present it. It would be really great if it had those short blurbs describing the adventures and possibly a star rating for each one, but sheesh, there are only so many hours in the day! :-) If anyone thinks this might be worthwhile or has a good idea on how best to present it, I'm certainly open to input.
Well, if someone were to carefully read through one entire adventure per night and write a review, allowing only nationally approved holidays off, that would take... umm.... 3 years. ;) If we could collect them all!
Obviously, if we could ideally find one person (with a good memory) from each of the LG regions who have played through most of the adventures from their regions, we could knock back a large percentage of them. Presumably, the really good ones (the ones we'd be interested in finding out about) would stick out in their memories.
... if we could ideally find one person (with a good memory) from each of the LG regions who have played through most of the adventures from their regions, we could knock back a large percentage of them.
Actually, Aurdraco is in the process of doing something like this for the Bandit Kingdoms. He's actually doing a Gazetteer for 599CY that includes a summary of the mods outcomes, but that's at least a step in the right direction.
I really wish that the regional Triads had been asked to do somehting like this before the campaign ended, so that we knew what the "official" results were ... at least a compliation of the summaries (as was mentioned above) would give us a good idea. _________________ Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com
Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal
Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com
Kind of a digression, but I just noticed this more recent D&D scenario Skip Williams was involved with, featuring a half-pixie/half-copper dragon swanmay with a mohawk (her mom was the pixie!), and, well, I think it's kind of awesome, in a way, but very much what I'd expect from the co-author of Gargoyle.
Kind of a digression, but I just noticed [url=http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/vv/20040319a] featuring a half-pixie/half-copper dragon swanmay with a mohawk
LOL. Excellent build! And even though she is three feet tall, she somehow manages to wield a longsword and have enough draw to use a composite longbow with the Feat of Rapid Shot. Why did I never get into third edition when I had the chance? _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Well, if someone were to carefully read through one entire adventure per night and write a review, allowing only nationally approved holidays off, that would take... umm.... 3 years. ;) If we could collect them all!
Don't joke. I'm going through all the ones I could find, extracting gazeteer information. It's taken me 10 months to reach half way through Year 4 of the Keoland regional mods (on top of the year that it took me to stitch together existing gazeteer information from other 'official' sources).
Actually, the mods are generally very basic and a review of each would not take long. Having said that, unless people want to have a whip round to pay me to do it full time for a year, I'll have to pass on any extra duties
Mind you, if I ever finish, I will need a volunteer to go through everything I found a redraft & re-edit it all so that I can't be done for copyright infringement.
Kind of a digression, but I just noticed featuring a half-pixie/half-copper dragon swanmay with a mohawk
LOL. Excellent build! And even though she is three feet tall, she somehow manages to wield a longsword and have enough draw to use a composite longbow with the Feat of Rapid Shot. Why did I never get into third edition when I had the chance?
Well, it's a small (i.e. adjusted for her size) longsword and bow so it does make alot of sense. Much more than pixies using daggers as swords btw.
Well, it's a small (i.e. adjusted for her size) longsword and bow so it does make alot of sense. Much more than pixies using daggers as swords btw.
I read it over again and still didn't see anywhere that says either the sword or bow is small or proportionally sized (although the base damage from the sword is d6). But I guess that only proves I don't know how to read a 3E stat block! _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
This is obviously going to be a bit pedantic, but ...
The weapon size issue was cleaned up a little bit in the revised third edition... we all likely know that much, at least. But, it's not that you should be looking for a place where it says that the weapons are smaller than normal - in 3.5, you have to look for where it says that they aren't appropriately sized for the creature. The PHB only assumes weapons for Medium sized creatures because that's what the majority of the player-character races in the PHB are. Monster statistics also assume that a creature is going to naturally carry a weapon that is not cumbersome to use, i.e - one appropriately sized for it. Thus, the reason the weapon damage is listed as 1d6 rather than a 1d8 for a "normal" longsword. the only time that they would include notes about weapon size would be if they were something outside "normal" for that ceature.
Monster Manual 3.5, pg 6 wrote:
The attack bonus given includes modifications for size and Strength (for melee attacks).
What we (the holders of the Greyhawk torch) REALLY need is a review database of LG mods. Which are the diamonds worth tracking down and bringing to light... which are the lumps of dirty coal best left buried deep below WotC's ban on public release...
One starting resource for this would be the Nyrond region's website (definitely one of the better websites for Living Greyhawk). They kept a list of the current scenarios and allowed users to rate them on various aspects and (my favorite as an author) allowed the authors to log in and read the gamer's comments about their scenario.
They kept a list of the current scenarios and allowed users to rate them on various aspects and (my favorite as an author) allowed the authors to log in and read the gamer's comments about their scenario.
.
Found:
GEO6-S02: Child's Play
One can only hope it was better than the first. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
The weapon size issue was cleaned up a little bit in the revised third edition... we all likely know that much, at least.
Nope. Blissfully ignorant was I.
Icarus wrote:
Monster statistics also assume that a creature is going to naturally carry a weapon that is not cumbersome to use, i.e - one appropriately sized for it. Thus, the reason the weapon damage is listed as 1d6 rather than a 1d8 for a "normal" longsword. the only time that they would include notes about weapon size would be if they were something outside "normal" for that ceature.
Ah. So, presumably there is a table somewhere which shows the range of a composite longbow appropriately sized for someone with humanoid proportions, height of 3', and a Str. of 16? _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Well, there is a table by which damage for smaller or larger weapons can be determined, but I don't think it takes range into account. It's not exactly logical for smaller weapons to have the same range as larger ones, I know, but frankly, I don't think another rule is what 3e/3.5e needs!
I've actually never read or played Gargoyles. For the ones that I have read Child's Play bakes, takes and eats the cake by far...
As for Living Greyhawk mod summaries, bloody oath what a great idea! I never played Living Greyhawk but I'm sure there must have been plenty of excellent material that we could use as background material and what not.
On the other hand,(SPOILER/RANT!)........
I did hear at one point that King Belvor IV married Baron Kalinstren's daughter in Living Greyhawk only to see her disinitegrated on their wedding day! Firstly, Huh?I Secondly, What!?! The paladin king entering into a dynastic marriage with the Trithereon worshipping noble family who would have less than no political clout even after the Great Crusade? And who could have gotten near them at what one would safely assume to be the most important state wedding in the western flanaess to pull off a disintegration spell!?!
Anyway, RANT/SPOILER over. I still think there would be some great gems amongst the Living Greyhawk stuff....
Yeah there are some reasonable mods and they are basic so it is simple to edit and refluff them to fit any campaign. I think once the mods get up to national politics anything that affects the status quo is going to be divisive.
SPOILERS:
Countess Belissica, Grand Duke Owen, and King Kimbertos all end up dead at various points of the LG run (although not always permanently). I'm sure many other major npcs met similar fates while others who had already been killed by pcs in ages past, like Sakatha or Aulicus were 'resurrected' for re-use.
Belissica was the one I was most hesitant about as it seemed to result in a period of upheaval in the otherwise stable county of urnst (presumably this was the intention) but I haven't reviewed any of those mods yet to see what it was all about.
Ah. So, presumably there is a table somewhere which shows the range of a composite longbow appropriately sized for someone with humanoid proportions, height of 3', and a Str. of 16?
Well, the line in the Monster Manual basically refers to the fact that if a creature has a lower or higher strength, it has a bonus or penalty to it's attack and damage. So, when it says that it includes the Strength modifier, it's the -3 or +42 that it's referring to.
While I agree wholeheartedly that while it doesn't make as much sense in reality, or for verisimilitude, there's definately a degree of abstractness that I am okay with if it means not having another rule to memorize. _________________ Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com
Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal
Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
.Ususally i'm very laid back but right about now,i'm a bit moody and i need to vent.But what i guess i was trying to say was that when i play Greyhawk,i expect at least some seriousness out of it,i hated the module ,but at the same time i'm always willing to listen to the opinions of others and i try to see things in a different point of view and i value those opinions,good or bad.
It was that bad. 
) I've got time to decide. Anyway, they're resticted to that neck of The Tors.
