 |
|
|
|
Next: Explore_Mode....itīs_possible_to_undo???
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Nov 23, 2007
Posts: 52
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:12 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>games>roguelike>nethack (more info?)
|
|
|
Raisse the Thaumaturge wrote:
> Philip Potter wrote:
>
>> pendell RemoveThis @hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>> refusal to use magical fooproofing,
>> It's not necessarily magical. <rot13>cbylzbecuvat n pebpbqvyr pbecfr
>> tvirf svercebbs ybj obbgf, juvpu ner cerfhznoyl svercebbs orpnhfr gurl
>> ner pebpbqvyr-fxva.</rot13>
>
> Yes, but that still needs magic to bring about.
True; but as an example of a non-magical fooproof item it refutes the
proposition that "all fooproofing is magical".
I would argue that the samurai's rustproof splint mail is not magical too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:28 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
pendell.RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
> I don't really see this as doable. "No magic" should mean "no magic"
> -- nothing except divine assistance. Refusal to use any weapon that is
> not +0, refusal to use magical fooproofing, refusal to use any amulet,
> wand, potion (except oil, fruit juice, or holy/unholy water) or
> magical armor (any armor with special attributes and not +0) tool
> except as needed to perform the Invocation ritual.
Well, you can make it as hard as you want to, of course. But that wasn't my
idea at all. A muggle (in the Harry Potter books) can't perform magic and
maybe doesn't believe in magic. It means they can not intrinsically perform
or understand a spell or handle a wand. It does not mean magic can't
passively provide assistance.
I was not sure about the rings and amulets, since they ONLY provide magical
assistance. (At least supposedly. I doubt they work electronically.) Nor
was I sure about using a magic lamp for illumination.
But a conduct shouldn't be so hard no player can ever keep it. You should be
able to put on an unidentified piece of armor without accidentally breaking
the conduct. Especially since you don't have any reliable way ever to
identify it. That's why I thought wearing enchanted equipment (but not
enchanting it yourself) would be ok.
And potions simply don't have to be magical. They can work alchemically. So
I decided to keep in potions.
> That means digging through the plane of earth with a pickaxe, no trap
> detection to find the portal, no wand of teleport to keep off the air
> elementals and no potions of healing to save your life when they catch
> you ... because you're moving at a maximum of "fast". And you still
> have to find the portal the hard way. No wand of death and no magic
> resistance (except, perhaps, from quest artifact) means Rodney and
> liches will have to be meleed, and their touch-of-death will prove
> fatal. It also means, with no wand of death, you'll probably have to
> melee Pestilence.
I always melee Pestilence and Famine. The last time with The Staff of
Aesculapius, so I could later tame them. But, well, I'm always lvl 30 by
the time I'm on the Astral Plane.
> No thanks.
No one said it would be easy. Anyway, in my version you CAN have magic
resistance, potions of healing and speed boots.
> Fundamentalist Christian here. I seriously tried to play nethack
> without magic at all once upon a time. It just doesn't work. It
> wasn't until I found a way to rationalize it that the game became
> winnable or playable at all. Because, TBH, Nethack without magic just
> isn't all that fun.
I find that most interesting. So because of your beliefs you could not use
magic inside the game? But your character was allowed to pray to a
non-Christian god, though?
Forgive my curiosity.
--
Michiel |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 26, 2006
Posts: 184
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:59 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michiel Helvensteijn <nomail.TakeThisOut@please.com> wrote in
news:4799bcd5$0$8092$dbd45001@news.wanadoo.nl:
> It might be interesting to have a conduct of not using any magic or
> anything magical. This means:
>
> * No reading spellbooks (except the Book of the Dead, once)
> * No reading scrolls (except of mail)
> * No firing wands (except of nothing)
> * No using magic {lamps, markers, [instruments]}
>
> This would be a very challenging conduct. But:
>
> * It does NOT imply 'atheist'. You can still pray and use altars.
> * It does NOT mean you can't use enchanted equipment. You just can't
> enchant it yourself.
> * It does NOT mean you can't sit on a throne. So you can potentially
> use that to identify or get wishes.
> * It does NOT mean you can't use potions. They seem more alchemical
> than magical to me.
> * It does NOT mean you can't use rings or amulets.
>
> What do you think?
>
Even with magical armor allowed, you still run into the problem with
armor class: Ok so you *eventually* find a set of +5 or better armor and
then after *much* offering - and probably risking being crowned, you get
what needs to be fooproofed fooproofed. Then what do you do about Nagas
and Liches? you can't genocide them. seems to me you'd be running in
circles with uncursing/getting armor/fooproofing and finding food and
never actually getting on with the game. But without an actual case of
trying it, I can't be sure on that. I think you would have to *at*
*least* limit it only to "doing" magic. That is wands/tools/casting. By
tools, I mean as in the horns of fire, cold etc. Other Item usage would
be allowed. Scrolls would be the fix if it's still undoable for things
such as genocide which could very well be required, but limited in some
way of course.
--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) ) >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 24, 2005
Posts: 275
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:59 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Jan 25, 11:59 am, chuckcar <ch....DeleteThis@nil.car> wrote:
> Michiel Helvensteijn <nom....DeleteThis@please.com> wrote innews:4799bcd5$0$8092$dbd45001@news.wanadoo.nl:
>
>
>
> > It might be interesting to have a conduct of not using any magic or
> > anything magical. This means:
>
> > * No reading spellbooks (except the Book of the Dead, once)
> > * No reading scrolls (except of mail)
> > * No firing wands (except of nothing)
> > * No using magic {lamps, markers, [instruments]}
>
> > This would be a very challenging conduct. But:
>
> > * It does NOT imply 'atheist'. You can still pray and use altars.
> > * It does NOT mean you can't use enchanted equipment. You just can't
> > enchant it yourself.
> > * It does NOT mean you can't sit on a throne. So you can potentially
> > use that to identify or get wishes.
> > * It does NOT mean you can't use potions. They seem more alchemical
> > than magical to me.
> > * It does NOT mean you can't use rings or amulets.
>
> > What do you think?
>
> Even with magical armor allowed, you still run into the problem with
> armor class: Ok so you *eventually* find a set of +5 or better armor and
> then after *much* offering - and probably risking being crowned, you get
> what needs to be fooproofed fooproofed. Then what do you do about Nagas
> and Liches? you can't genocide them. seems to me you'd be running in
> circles with uncursing/getting armor/fooproofing and finding food and
> never actually getting on with the game. But without an actual case of
> trying it, I can't be sure on that. I think you would have to *at*
> *least* limit it only to "doing" magic. That is wands/tools/casting. By
> tools, I mean as in the horns of fire, cold etc. Other Item usage would
> be allowed.
You can pretty easily get naked AC 0 then, say, crystal plate, a robe,
dwarven helm/shoes, a shield, and some gloves gets you AC -15 which is
well within the ascendable range. Throw in a couple randomly found +1
to +3 items and you're golden; even w/o, you can sacrifice to get the
AC much lower if you really must. You could fairly easily (though
boringly) altar camp up 4 more points of AC and swap the crystal plate
out for gray dragon scales or whatever (just scales no armor).
Naga/L respect Elbereth (from fingers or an athame once you kill a few
of the nastier L; I'd assume also that writing with a magic marker is
allowed since that's a non-magical use of it, but it's not necessary);
that and daggers can take them down pretty safely (though it's a
little annoying slogging to the stairs for teleporting L). I've never
bothered genoing N myself. Or you could just wear a cloak of magic
resistance (or carry a MR-granting quest artifact if you're so able)
or wear the scales. >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 17, 2007
Posts: 17
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:15 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 2008-01-25, pendell.RemoveThis@hotmail.com <pendell.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 25, 10:42 am, Philip Potter <p....RemoveThis@doc.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
>> pend....RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> When crowned, a neutral character is given a +1 Vorpal Blade. One could
>> argue that this is divine assistance rather than magic. Also, a +1 long
>> sword may simply be of superior quality to a +0 long sword. (This is
>> corroborated by the loss of 'enchantment' to edged weapons used to
>> engrave in the floor.)
>
> Agree.
>> >
>> The OP postulated that potions are alchemical rather than magical.
>
> Well, I suppose you could do that, but if we're talking about the
> Potterverse potions are magical there. If we can handwave potions
> into not being magical, could we not also handwave wands into being
> technology? I could make a name change to create "death ray gun",
> "sleep ray gun", "energy rifle", etc. Amulets could be devices,
> (amulet of reflection becomes 'personal shield' a la dune), scrolls
> could be one-shot nanobot tools, etc.
>
> I guess my point is that, if we try hard enough, we can handwave just
> about anything "magical" in the game to something "nonmagical" via
> Clarke's law.. So why make an exception for potions? Why do potions
> get the handwave and wands don't?
>
>>
>> Surely you could use the candelabrum as a light source if you wanted?
>> Although the candelabrum is magical, it is not being used in a magical way.
>
> While a human referee would certainly agree with you, how would this
> be done in code? How does the software know whether you're using the
> Candelabra as a light source or as a turning effect? Do we not break
> conduct until a monster gets turned? And if so, how do we distinguish
> the 'magical' turning of the Candelabra from the 'divine' turning of
> the cleric or hte knight?
>
>
The Candelabrum doesn't have a 'turning' effect. It just has an extended
light radius. You're thinking of the cursed Book.
--
Justin Hiltscher >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:21 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
chuckcar wrote:
> Even with magical armor allowed, you still run into the problem with
> armor class: Ok so you *eventually* find a set of +5 or better armor and
> then after *much* offering - and probably risking being crowned, you get
> what needs to be fooproofed fooproofed. Then what do you do about Nagas
> and Liches? you can't genocide them. seems to me you'd be running in
> circles with uncursing/getting armor/fooproofing and finding food and
> never actually getting on with the game. But without an actual case of
> trying it, I can't be sure on that. I think you would have to *at*
> *least* limit it only to "doing" magic. That is wands/tools/casting. By
> tools, I mean as in the horns of fire, cold etc. Other Item usage would
> be allowed. Scrolls would be the fix if it's still undoable for things
> such as genocide which could very well be required, but limited in some
> way of course.
But you don't really need +5 fooproof armor to ascend. You'd get the same
problem with the illiteracy conduct, wouldn't you?
--
Michiel >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Mar 23, 2005
Posts: 552
|
(Msg. 22) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:28 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
nomail RemoveThis @please.com wrote:
>* It does NOT mean you can't use potions. They seem more alchemical than
>magical to me.
Declaring alchemy to not be magic is a kind of hairsplitting that could
be almost calculated to annoy me 
(Fictional alchemy is generally implied to be magical, and historical
alchemy was much focused on decidedly magical principles.)
--
\_\/_/ some girls wander by mistake into the mess that scalpels make
\ / are you the teachers of my heart? we teach old hearts to break
\/ --- Leonard Cohen, "Teachers" >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 23) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:45 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
>> True; but as an example of a non-magical fooproof item it refutes the
>> proposition that "all fooproofing is magical".
>>
>> I would argue that the samurai's rustproof splint mail is not magical
>> too.
>
> *Nods* Your point is taken. So rather than saying "all fooproofing is
> magical" say "Most fooproofing is magical".
>
> What it means, then, is that unless you're fortunate enough to find a
> set of dragon scale mail premade in the dungeon, you're going to be
> limited in your choice of armor to the specific subset of nonmagically
> fooproof types you've mentioned. Or you can resort to temporary
> nonmagical rustproofing. Or just accept the risk of rust and wear the
> better armor anyway.
>
> Sounds to me like, for a "muggle" game, the best armor you could wear
> as far as AC improvement would be crystal plate mail. It also means
> you're going to have a hard time getting magic resistance. Unless you
> find the appropriate armor or cloak by accident (no mean feat), the
> odds are pretty good you'll have to play a class that has magic
> resistance as part of the class artifact.
Don't forget that there are still ways to make wishes. Like thrones and
smoky potions.
I'm still not sure if rubbing a magic lamp should be allowed. It could be
argued that doing it is not an act of magic. But I would also like to avoid
the muggle conduct to become just the 'illiterate + no wands' conduct.
--
Michiel >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 15, 2007
Posts: 21
|
(Msg. 24) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:57 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:28:15 +0100, Martin Read
<mpread DeleteThis @chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> nomail DeleteThis @please.com wrote:
>> * It does NOT mean you can't use potions. They seem more alchemical than
>> magical to me.
>
> Declaring alchemy to not be magic is a kind of hairsplitting that could
> be almost calculated to annoy me
>
> (Fictional alchemy is generally implied to be magical, and historical
> alchemy was much focused on decidedly magical principles.)
Especially if calling it "muggle" conduct since the source for "muggle"
clearly has potions as a magical discipline teached at magical schools...
Well, I'll be fine with "no alchemy but drinking is OK"...
Because obviously drinking a potion can be done by anybody (will zapping a
wand might require some specific hand gesture or similar stuff that can
only be done with some magic implied).
Similarly, wearing an enchated armor is alright because this does not
implies doing magic. Even wearing a cloak of MR could be OK, the magic's
in the cloak, not done by the wearer.
--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym. >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 15, 2007
Posts: 21
|
(Msg. 25) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:11 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:26:56 +0100, <pendell RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> *Nods* Your point is taken. So rather than saying "all fooproofing is
> magical" say "Most fooproofing is magical".
>
> What it means, then, is that unless you're fortunate enough to find a
> set of dragon scale mail premade in the dungeon, you're going to be
> limited in your choice of armor to the specific subset of nonmagically
> fooproof types you've mentioned. Or you can resort to temporary
> nonmagical rustproofing. Or just accept the risk of rust and wear the
> better armor anyway.
Just like in illiterate games ?
> Sounds to me like, for a "muggle" game, the best armor you could wear
> as far as AC improvement would be crystal plate mail. It also means
> you're going to have a hard time getting magic resistance. Unless you
> find the appropriate armor or cloak by accident (no mean feat), the
> odds are pretty good you'll have to play a class that has magic
> resistance as part of the class artifact.
Just like in wishless games ?
There are some illiterate+wishless ascensions.
It's probably not the easiest "two conducts" ascensions, but it's not the
harder either...
And this muggle is *not* wishless in the original version. It something
slightly different from illiterate+wishless.
It can engrave the E word, and get wishes. It cannot use crytal ball to
find the portals. It cannot use wands.
--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym. >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 15, 2007
Posts: 21
|
(Msg. 26) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:19 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:36:42 +0100, Michiel Helvensteijn
<nomail.RemoveThis@please.com> wrote:
> Daniel Kraft wrote:
>
>>>>> * It does NOT mean you can't use rings or amulets.
>>>> What do you think is the difference in using magic between a magic
>>>> lamp
>>>> and rings/amulets? In my opinion, this comes out to rather the same,
>>>> doesn't it?
>>>
>>> Well, a magic lamp has the word 'magic' in it, and that's really the
>>> only
>>> reason.
>>>
>>> But you're right, maybe rings and amulets should be in the list as
>>> well.
>>
>> On the other hand, the other way round one could allow "passive" magic
>> as in rings/amulets, but then I think magic lamps should be allowed,
>> too; and what about magical armour, like speed boots?
>
> Sounds good. But then you still couldn't rub a magic lamp to summon a
> jinni.
> Nor could you use any magic instrument or a magic marker. So it doesn't
> really change THAT much.
>
> But then, if you're allowed to apply a magic lamp, shouldn't you also be
> allowed to apply magic whistles and stuff?
>
> It's gonna be hard to maintain consistency for this conduct.
Well, "passive" magic can well go "unoticed" by the character ("Wow, it
just looks like I'm killing monsters pretty fast today" does not lead a
non-magic-believer to "this pretty ring I found earlier is a +5 ring of
increase damage". Similarly, one can think that the guards are just pissed
off rather than thinking that the ring is conflict).
OTOH, teleporting fido seems pretty strange and the link between blowing
the whistle and teleporting the pet should be easy to do given the
immediacy of the events.
Well, that doesn't really solve the whole problem (what to do with rings
like TC/PC/teleport/polymorph ? Does that mean that the discrimination
should be made ring-wise ?)
Well, maybe one should be able to use no auto-id magical tools... But then
again, a ring of protection does something that is not easilly
quantifiable by the character ("today nobody hits me ! Good ! They must be
tired, or I'm getting good at avoiding blows") but is immediately
identified upon wearing...
--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym. >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 15, 2007
Posts: 21
|
(Msg. 27) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:26 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:39:56 +0100, Michiel Helvensteijn
<nomail RemoveThis @please.com> wrote:
> Yes, that's a good question. My newest thoughts are these: You may not
> actively use any magic. No spells, wands, scrolls or books (with the
> logical exceptions). No rubbing a magic lamp either. But you CAN wear
> magic
> equipment and apply magic lamps and instruments.
A lot of magic instruments work by applying.
This means you can use not only whistle or horns (make enough sense to
allow this), but also write scrolls or use a crystal ball.
These two later use seem pretty "active magic" to me.
OTOH, can you 'a'pply wands ? Again, that seems logical and would give
interesting results...
(and Engraving with wands is also borderline as an active/passive magic.
You're accidentally triggering magic while using a nice stick to write on
the floor... But allowing this will result in a much easier conduct since
it effectivelly allows to use wishes from wands (but not charge them
afterwards, except with the PYEC)).
(other engraving effects are not so interesting, the perma-Elbereth is not
such a big advantage)
--
Hypocoristiquement,
Jym. >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 28) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:35 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
> It might be interesting to have a conduct of not using any magic or
> anything magical. This means:
>
> * No reading spellbooks (except the Book of the Dead, once)
> * No reading scrolls (except of mail)
> * No firing wands (except of nothing)
> * No using magic {lamps, markers, [instruments]}
Oh, you're also not allowed to teleport. So don't eat nymphs!
--
Michiel >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 29) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:40 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Martin Read wrote:
>>* It does NOT mean you can't use potions. They seem more alchemical than
>>magical to me.
>
> Declaring alchemy to not be magic is a kind of hairsplitting that could
> be almost calculated to annoy me
>
> (Fictional alchemy is generally implied to be magical, and historical
> alchemy was much focused on decidedly magical principles.)
Fine then. Chemical. 
--
Michiel >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2007
Posts: 42
|
(Msg. 30) Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:51 pm
Post subject: Re: YANI: Muggle conduct [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
pendell RemoveThis @hotmail.com wrote:
>> Don't forget that there are still ways to make wishes. Like thrones and
>> smoky potions.
>
> Possible solution: wish for 'nothing' to preserve conduct. I think it
> reasonable that a muggle wouldn't believe in a djinn, and therefore
> wouldn't interact with it, and similarly dismiss the throne's voice as
> hallucination.
So the muggle conduct implies the no-wishing conduct then. Sounds good to
me, though my original plan was that wishing was still allowed in those
limited ways.
--
Michiel >> Stay informed about: YANI: Muggle conduct |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | First conduct(s) ascent, Monk - Hi all, Since finishing all of the classes in vanilla Nethack I decided to try a conduct game. This is really more like it - much more challenging and fun, in my opinion. I went with a Monk. My conducts by the end were: You were vegetarian. You neve...
Monk - Failed conduct consequences?? - Ok, so I have a pretty good monk going. However, I (mindlessly) made the mistake of eating a floating eye corpse. For every other character, you wanna get the nice ability as soon as possible, and I ate is almost reflexively. (Is that a word?) 'You..
YAAP: Lazy Samurai, no teleports (not a fun conduct) - So I have been playing a lot recently (well, for me; 20-30 minutes a morning on weekdays with occasional evening stints) and doing conduct games. I recently finished a couple of illiterates (Cav, Val (also polyless polyselfless genoless)) but when I lost...
I see a YANI - When one throws a potion of see invisible at a stalker or any invisible monster, the monster should become visible.
YANI: #empty - While lugging stuff around the dungeon from stash to stash, it struck me that a command #empty would save me a lot of time. #empty What do you want to empty? (a) Empty the Bag of Holding into the chest? (y/n/q) J |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
