Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: An Attempt at Theme Discussion  (Read 12596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« on: September 25, 2012, 03:14:19 am »
0

Something Dominion's always been criticized for, is its lack of theme.
Well, the actual problem with Dominion is not that it has no theme, but that the actual gameplay and theme seem so disjointed.

I mean, there's some medieval thing going on, but if you would have slapped a random license on it (Star Wars/Trek, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Manga!) it would still be a great game, so the theme is pretty much interchangeable.

There are some things about the theme and how they connect with the mechanics that I don't understand. That's what this topic is for.

I know your entire deck represents your kingdom to which you add land (Victory cards), infrastructure (Bridge, Highway), people (Smithy, Witch), settlements (Village, City), buildings/rooms (Laboratory, Throne Room) and coin for your vault.
So far, so good!

What I don't understand is:
1. Why don't you lose the money you spend? To me this seems counter intuitive and I don't know what this represents. I mean, I understand it gameplay wise, but I find it curious that you can spend 3 Copper and get 3 Copper and a Silver back, profit!!! To me, it would have made more sense if the treasure cards were actually treasure providing cards.
So, instead of Copper, Silver and Gold, have a Coppermine, Silvermine and Goldmine. Themewise, this would mean that everytime you play a treasure mine it generates some coin for you which you can immediately spend.

2. What does it mean to draw cards, discard cards and just cycling your deck? Is this you taking a walk through your kingdom and encountering various people and places? But you don't know what you'll come across at what time so you're walking with a blindfold on unless you have a Scout looking ahead?

3. What do +Actions represent? I know it has something to do with population as Villages provide more workers and thus more actions. But how about Festival? Are the carnies temporary workers who travel through your kingdom?

4. How about +Cards? A smithy provides cards, so it may have something to do with workers? Then again, a Council Room provides cards so it may have something to do with rooms and buildings. But a Margrave also gives cards, so I'm pretty confused what drawing cards actually means.

This is enough to start, I think.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 03:16:00 am by Davio »
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1490
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2012, 03:16:38 am »
+1

So, instead of Copper, Silver and Gold, to me it would make more sense to have a Coppermine, Silvermine and Goldmine. Themewise, this would mean that everytime you play a treasure mine it generates some coin for you which you can immediately spend.
AFAIR, Donald said that it once was like that but got changed for other reasons.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2012, 03:17:23 am »
0

So, instead of Copper, Silver and Gold, to me it would make more sense to have a Coppermine, Silvermine and Goldmine. Themewise, this would mean that everytime you play a treasure mine it generates some coin for you which you can immediately spend.
AFAIR, Donald said that it once was like that but got changed for other reasons.
I'm curious as to what those reasons would have been.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #3 on: September 25, 2012, 03:19:18 am »
+1

So, instead of Copper, Silver and Gold, to me it would make more sense to have a Coppermine, Silvermine and Goldmine. Themewise, this would mean that everytime you play a treasure mine it generates some coin for you which you can immediately spend.
AFAIR, Donald said that it once was like that but got changed for other reasons.
I'm curious as to what those reasons would have been.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=115.0
See "Estate, Duchy, Copper, Silver, Gold"

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2012, 03:26:19 am »
0

So, instead of Copper, Silver and Gold, to me it would make more sense to have a Coppermine, Silvermine and Goldmine. Themewise, this would mean that everytime you play a treasure mine it generates some coin for you which you can immediately spend.
AFAIR, Donald said that it once was like that but got changed for other reasons.
I'm curious as to what those reasons would have been.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=115.0
See "Estate, Duchy, Copper, Silver, Gold"
I see, I'm still sad that the ... mine variant didn't win out.  :-[
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

vintermann

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21
  • Respect: +7
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #5 on: September 25, 2012, 04:47:42 am »
0

I mean, there's some medieval thing going on, but if you would have slapped a random license on it (Star Wars/Trek, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Manga!) it would still be a great game, so the theme is pretty much interchangeable.

People tend to speak as if this is a sign of weak theme. I think rather it's a sign of a good game.

The most absurd claim of this sort I've seen is the claim that Mage Knight is weakly themed, because you could paste a business theme onto it if you wanted... It's plainly obvious (to me anyway) that the mechanics in Mage Knight are chosen from a fantasy adventure perspective - sure, you could push experience levels and exploration onto businessmen somehow if you really wanted, but it would be obvious it was an RPG-like game in disguise.

Dominion, by comparison, could fairly have any theme that involves building up something fairly broad and varied. In other words a space empire retheme would be unproblematic, a competing circus companies retheming would be a little narrow and probably feel odd, and the zombie retheming which actually exists is pretty awful.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2012, 05:03:37 am »
0

But Dominion doesn't let me really connect with its theme. I mean, I don't really have the feeling that I'm some kind of medieval king when I'm playing the game and that all the cards are parts of my kingdom. This may be due to my lack of immersion, but still.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game and its mechanics, it's just that the chosen theme is not at all why I like the game. Dominion is a pretty abstract game in this sense, a bit like chess. In chess, you are the deus ex machina for some kind of ancient army and you may feel like every pawn is your very own loyal subject and cry when they are taken, but this often doesn't happen in a game between adults. Chess is a good game, because of the battle of wits and excellent gameplay, not because of its theme - as long as you're not playing Battlechess. ;)

This is a 'problem' a lot of Euros have: The gameplay is so good that it's hard to connect to the theme. When I'm playing Caylus and building in the castle, I'm thinking: I'm scoring points! Not: Look at me helping the king!
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2012, 05:06:54 am »
+1

I really don't like, but also don't mind these discussions. Dominion is a Eurogame and not an Ameritrash game. It has per definition limited theme. If you want more theme, re-theme it for yourself or play another game.

But, what I do mind, is when a theme is sort of inconsistent. Dominion is mostly consistent in theme. But there are a few exceptions like Wandering Minstrel as name for a village. To answer Davio's question 3: +2 Actions means more workers, DXV said that somewhere. So I'm fine with any place which has at least a group of people, so I'm fine with Festival too. But "Wandering Minstrel" is ridiculous.

I tend to associate Drawing Cards with "Progress", but I don't think that's "hard-connected".

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2012, 05:08:40 am »
0

Well, this discussion's intent is not to bitch and whine that Dominion has no theme.

It's rather an attempt to understand how the current mechanics could possibly relate to any kind of theme.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2012, 05:26:40 am »
0

Yeah, I know. And sorry if I sounded rude. But I just wanted to clarify my general opinion.

I think there are some unwritten rules in Dominion related to theme, like what +2 Actions are.
But you won't be able to find a rule for what +1 Action means.
And as soon as you remodel a Gold (Mine) - or even better: an Adventurer - into a Province, you have problems to relate that to any theme.

Octo

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
  • Respect: +38
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2012, 06:25:37 am »
+1

Lack of theme is liberating. It allows the players to focus on gameplay unencumbered by thoughts of it being unrealistic, and it allows game designers to follow exploit the mechanics.

Thunderstone is another game I enjoy that is dripping in theme, but it often tries too hard to stick to it and ends up with clunky rules as a result that seem to have a ton of edge cases that the rules don't cover properly. Sticking to the theme is what's great about the game but also it's most prominent flaw in terms of gameplay as far as I can see. That kind of thing can work and it could just be poor choices, but it can work against you too.

So I don't see the need to map the in-game mechanics into thematic elements really. We would approach the game differently if the game had to make sense in a figurative way.
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4074
  • Respect: +2624
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2012, 07:42:45 am »
+1

Quote
Why don't you lose the money you spend? To me this seems counter intuitive and I don't know what this represents. I mean, I understand it gameplay wise, but I find it curious that you can spend 3 Copper and get 3 Copper and a Silver back, profit!!!

You can consider coins to be be income rather than money. If you invest your income wisely you can have more assets that provide income.

This all makes far more sense than Thunderstone where you can spend your rations and torch to buy a feast, but still keep your rations and torch. Thunderstone was supposed to be Dominion "with a better theme".
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 07:43:47 am by DG »
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2012, 08:07:11 am »
0

Income makes sense, so your treasures are essentially taxes?
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1490
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2012, 08:48:43 am »
0

Income makes sense, so your treasures are essentially taxes?

Yepp, you could see it from the macro-oeconomic perspective, after all your kingdom is not a buisness. So you spend you money, but you invest it in your kingdom. If your subjects [is this word really used?] do not spend their money outside your country (in which case they would be sentenced to death anyway), everything stays in your kingdom, and if you wait long enough, everything will come back to you via taxes.
Logged

enquerencia

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 76
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2012, 09:04:02 am »
0

The last two posts kind of beat me to the punch, but yeah, I see treasure cards as being indicative of your kingdom's economy.  If it was money you "spent," i.e. trashed after playing, then there would be a bank, or some kind of overlord that you had to pay those treasures to.  And that doesn't fit with the playability of the game at all.  And when you look at it like that, it's not even a huge stretch to imagine that you can remodel a gold into a province since what you are doing is sacrificing economy for real estate, which happens all the time in real world economics. 

+Actions are definitely workers, and the harder they work, the more actions they give you (crossroads is kind of off theme here, because i've never seen an intersection do any work), and if you have a strong economy you can have more workers, and the more workers you have the better your economy is able to function.  But +cards is a little tricky to imagine.  I'd say your draw ability is like the productivity of a kingdom.  Being able to put all your economy together at once (having your entire deck in your hand) would be like having a very productive kingdom, even if its economy was weak (village, village, village, smithy, smithy, smithy, look at that! I've got seven coppers!)  As to "wandering around blindfolded," remember, in the game of dominion, YOU are not actually a part of your kingdom.  You're like the collective consciousness of your kingdom, so to speak.  You don't actually play a role.  You're not the king.  There could potentially be a kingdom card called "king" and regardless of what it does, it would still fit within the framework of the theme.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3412
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2012, 09:47:40 am »
+2

Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Brando Commando

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
  • Respect: +112
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2012, 10:07:21 am »
0

I have a lot to say on this and I'm glad you brought it up. I'm at work so I can't get into all of it deeply, but, generally, it occurs to me that you will probably making a trade-off in this discussion between making the system as a whole make sense and making any given card make sense.

That is, if you try to make the whole thing work -- saying actions are workers working, for example, -- then some cards are just not going to fit. And some aren't going to fit no matter what you do...how would a Forge make two "Remodels" into a "province"?

So I favor making the system make sense instead of working too hard to make a single card make sense.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2012, 10:35:27 am »
0

I know your entire deck represents your kingdom to which you add land (Victory cards), infrastructure (Bridge, Highway), people (Smithy, Witch), settlements (Village, City), buildings/rooms (Laboratory, Throne Room) and coin for your vault.

(A smithy is a place, not a person.)
Logged

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1097
  • Respect: +1067
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2012, 10:45:38 am »
0

(A smithy is a place, not a person.)

actually, pretty sure it can be both.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

Brando Commando

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
  • Respect: +112
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #19 on: September 25, 2012, 11:39:49 am »
+2

Okay, Davio, I'm pretty sure this is not what you had in mind...

...but the following represents a kind of quasi-economics thematic take. I'm not sure this really makes the game any better for you, but I enjoyed thinking about it. As I said before, a lot of the cards would be impossible to make work "thematically", so instead I've tried to make the whole system look kind of like an economic perspective on some sort of agricultural/pre-industrial European society. Sexy, huh?

Each turn represents a period of time, and all the cards in your hand represent the current set of options as to what you can spend time/labor on. Because you have imperfect information about your dominion and investments take time to come to fruition, you are only given a limited number of options at a time as to what you can pay attention to.

Victory cards/curses take up space in your hand because they're mandatory expenditures of your time/attention. (This isn't great thematically, but it's the best I can do to explain why green cards would show up in your hand even though they're kind of static things.) They could be said to represent how happy your dominion is. (Since land itself is a kind of investment/capital, saying victory cards represent land is a little confusing and doesn't have a good econ analog.)

Action cards represents some mix of capital and technological capacity. They basically represent economic functions whereby you convert time/labor/money/other capital into something else. Each one in your hand represents an option that has been presented to you in the period of time represented by your turn. You can only play one because it requires your labor to operate it. (You're a micromanager.)

Treasure cards, as you've already said, make the most sense not as literal money, but as the dividends of an investment, the investment being some sort of mine. You can play as many of them as you like in a turn because, unlike actions, they don't really require your labor, just your "okay" to produce money. (Again, weak thematically, but keeps my system coherent.)

The operations that are performed by actions (and sometimes treasures) could be explained in econ terms, too, to an extent:

+coin is, of course, monetary output.

Each action can represent one use of your labor. With +actions from villages, etc., your labor can be more effectively used so that you can exercise multiple economic activities in a single turn. (This even kinda sorta works thematically, insofar as Villages can be seen as self-sustaining and promoting economic activity and multiplying the effects of your labor or something.) Cards that offer +1 action don't take any effort on your part to manage or make productive, so you can have them do their thing then you continue on to do something else.

Buys are the most technical and pretty much have the least real-world connection. You could see 1 buy as "the economic infrastructure necessary to facilitate your investment in a single project". It doesn't really translate intuitively to real life because, in real life, investing in things normally takes up very little effort/existing infrastructure.

+X cards represents the generic spur to further economic activity and general foment of infrastructure, etc. This is abstract but seems to cover this case well enough, especially given how many different cards you can draw from this. I can't think of anything else that works in this system. Thematically, it means that your society is moving forward and economically developing faster, so you have more potential options as to how to spend your time/effort/money/etc. and more money to spend.

"Trashing" in this system would mean you're divesting yourself of something, probably by selling it; you can't do this to coppers and estates early in the game because nobody wants to take responsibility for them, I guess.

Hope this helps...
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 11:50:24 am by Brando Commando »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #20 on: September 25, 2012, 11:57:45 am »
0

FWIW Copper/Silver/Gold was originally going to be named Copper Mine/Silver Mine/Gold Mine, but it was simplified.
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9625
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2012, 12:03:24 pm »
+1

FWIW Copper/Silver/Gold was originally going to be named Copper Mine/Silver Mine/Gold Mine, but it was simplified.

I love how the whole coloring the basic Treasures thing brought up in that thread has since been resolved with the Base Cards.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Taco Lobster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 288
  • Respect: +74
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #22 on: September 25, 2012, 12:06:33 pm »
0

Dominion's poor theme implementation is my favorite complaint about the game (right up there with Copper, Silver, and Gold all being the same color).  At the end of the day, I don't think I'm alone in saying that it kicks so much ass as a game that I can live without a deep theme embedded in the game. 

Part of the reason I'm so aware of the poor theme in Dominion is because Magic does it so damn well.  Particularly in the case of modern magic cards, the art typically contains a visual clue or theme to convey mechanics.  For example, creatures with first strike (the ability to damage before the opponent's creature) are usually portrayed with lances/other long weapons.  Other more abstract concepts are also consistently grounded in fantasy tropes (e.g., discarding attacks are portrayed as attacking the mind of the other player to remove their spells).  However, given that Magic is several magnitudes older, larger, better staffed, and well-funded, I can't fault Dominion for not living up to its standards.

Assuming that Dominion doesn't lend itself to a stronger theme, I wish it would go the other direction and place a greater emphasis on using card names as stronger signals.  As has already been mentioned above, Village is a good example of a card name which sends a strong signal as to function due to its consistent use.  In my ideal Dominion universe, all +2 action cards would follow the same naming convention.  "Trading" or "Trader" would indicate a card that gives you a Silver. And, for the love of all that's holy, Library would not be a card that is really good at drawing a lot of coins.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 12:07:37 pm by Taco Lobster »
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9625
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2012, 12:19:08 pm »
+1

Well, Library makes the odd choice of being thematic to the actual mechanic of the game (drawing cards), as opposed to being thematic to the medieval theme.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: An Attempt at Theme Discussion
« Reply #24 on: September 25, 2012, 01:28:36 pm »
+11

Games have mechanics, flavor, data. Normally I arrive at them in that order; I have a mechanic, I pick flavor based on the mechanic, I pick data based on the flavor. For Dominion, data is first. This gives flavor less of a tie-in; the data was not chosen to match the flavor, and doesn't do anything to capture the flavor.

Originally the game was called Castle Builder and many of the cards related to a castle. There are only so many rooms in a castle, so I branched out into the rest of the kingdom. The second expansion was originally a combination of what ended up being Seaside and Hinterlands, and I called it Abroad, because, we were leaving the castle. We had some Intrigue in the castle but then we were done there. And in the end that did contribute to the final themes for those two expansions.

I worried less about card names in the main set and Intrigue. The main set cards almost all have their original prototype names. I thought Circus should change, and it's Festival; I thought Militia and Bureaucrat should switch, since Militia had started like Bureaucrat but evolved away from it so that now Bureaucrat was more bureaucratic, and there was actually resistance to this change, on the grounds that it would confuse playtesters, but cooler heads prevailed. In Seaside I started renaming cards to get a more thematic set and otherwise have better names; so, Salvager was Kiln, Navigator was Crossroads, Smugglers was Espionage. And I've continued to pay more attention to names since.

At the same time I am not adding text to cards to support theme. The text just has too high a price. Some tiny number of cards do this - Cultist is an example - but only in cases where I already needed to change something to improve the card functionally. Most of the most flavorful cards just have a name that really expresses the functionality that came first.

There is little flavor behind +cards and +coins. Giving +cards flavor just wasn't possible - it would rein in the potential flavor on too many cards. +Coins can vaguely make sense but I don't pay much attention to it. Navigator makes +$2; whatever. +Buy tries harder to make sense but doesn't always either. There an issue is that maybe some card like Margrave needs the +Buy and then it's like, what kind of marketplace attacks you.

+Actions is themed as people doing things for you. Since the main set has Village in that role, I made more cards that were a something Village, and that helps people learn the cards, it does this basic good thing that flavor does for you besides being flavorful. Similarly trading a card for a better one is usually a verb suitable for a Roxy Music song. Victory cards are plots of land except in Intrigue. Attacks are people, with magical people for Curses, plus one animal. One-shots were going to be events but then most of them died.

Overall most card titles post-Intrigue try to in some way say what's going on, and some of the main set and Intrigue ones do too. They help you remember the cards and do provide flavor. You don't feel like you're building a kingdom, but when you play Thief you feel like you're thieving, and so on.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 20 queries.