What's the point of being good in D&D?

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Gelare
Knight-Baron
Posts: 594
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:13 am

Post by Gelare »

Sir_Neil wrote:Pretending to be something radically different from yourself can be fun?
Heh.

Seriously though, if my party goes out and does some incredibly heroic act, I expect the DM to show us that we've achieved something meaningful - and usually, that is indeed how it goes. If you accomplish some grand quest for Good and nothing at all changes, and you find this to be unsatisfying, well...no kidding. Get a better DM, or talk to your current one. Plot is largely his province anyway, not the rulebooks, so make him fix it.
Top
ubernoob
Duke
Posts: 2444
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 12:30 am

Post by ubernoob »

Maxus wrote:I think it depends on the Evil person in question. Evil people are completely able to make and sustain friendships and actually care about other people. That whole "evil turns upon itself" line doesn't meet the True in 100% of Cases test.
Just agreeing with Maxus here. Good generally has to be more accepting of piddly crap because they can't simply kill anyone that doesn't fit their criteria. Thus, Evil parties that succeed (don't kill each other) are guaranteed to have stronger loyalties.

Literature approach here. As for RPGs, people don't PK simply because that's disruptive to the game regardless of alignment.
Top
FatR
Duke
Posts: 1221
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:36 am

Post by FatR »

Talisman wrote:Arguing that they're the same, except one side is more predictable reduces "good" and "evil" to "red" and "blue"...which isn't an RPG I'm terribly interested in. It works fine for board games and video games, though.
I feel like this too. If I want to run an amoral setting, where, in the end, only might makes right, I'll run Exalted (I do run an Exalted game, in fact). I use DnD for a pretty typical heroic fantasy about Good vs. Evil, so I prefer for Good and Evil to actually mean something. And Evil worthy of its name does not mean "smart" or "badass", as far, as I'm concerned. It means "enormous dick". Those who have chosen Team Evil should remember, that this applies to their peers, underlings and, most importantly, superiors. This is one of the few things that official settings usually get right. Even if your evil organization does not consist of a superpowered leader or an inner circle of such leaders and their de-facto slaves/dupes (like many, if not most, evil organizations in DnD do), it is still full of violent thugs (or brutal, uncompromising fanatics) at lower levels and ambitious backstabbers above.
Last edited by FatR on Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Acting in self interest is predictable. Acting in the interest of whatever real or imagined crap such as say... thinking you're evil, even if you aren't and stabbing you in the face... not so much.

Also, 'evil is harmful' =/= eating babies. Nor is it harmful to everyone... yes, you have a tyranny, but before that your subjects were worse than dead because you're smart and you saw an opportunity for advancement here. I'd trust some disciplined tyrant before trusting some wild go lucky idiot. So there's a new category. Chaos. And it's worse than evil because it's at least as bad and completely fucking random. At worst evil is a known variable. Chaos is fucking I feel like killing you because Giant Frog. Goddamn homicidal elves who are still somehow 'Chaotic Good'. What the Fuckity Fuckstar?

Now you may not like D&D being Red vs Blue but it is and your only options are to change it or deal with it. In the former case that only applies to your personal games obviously.
Last edited by Roy on Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
User avatar
Talisman
Duke
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: The Cliffs of Insanity!

Post by Talisman »

Roy wrote:Acting in self interest is predictable. Acting in the interest of whatever real or imagined crap such as say... thinking you're evil, even if you aren't and stabbing you in the face... not so much.
What??

Let me turn that around for you...

"Acting in the interests of your fellow man is predictable. Acting in the interests of whatever whim suits you at the moment, such as...knifing that guy for the coins in his pocket...not so much."
Also, 'evil is harmful' =/= eating babies.
For the last time, the eating babies thing was intended as a comic exaggeration! Sheesh!
Nor is it harmful to everyone... yes, you have a tyranny, but before that your subjects were worse than dead because you're smart and you saw an opportunity for advancement here.
Again...what?? Tyranny > any other form of government? People in a non-tyranny are worse than dead?

By definition, evil is more harmful to a greater number of people than good. Evil doesn't fucking care about the people, except as cogs in the Big Evil Machine.

Good, by definition, cares about the people. A good monarch may be ineffective, but he's not actively malicious.
I'd trust some disciplined tyrant before trusting some wild go lucky idiot. So there's a new category. Chaos. And it's worse than evil because it's at least as bad and completely fucking random. At worst evil is a known variable. Chaos is fucking I feel like killing you because Giant Frog. Goddamn homicidal elves who are still somehow 'Chaotic Good'. What the Fuckity Fuckstar?
So Law > Chaos. Fine; I won't argue this, but it has nothing to do with good vs. evil.
Now you may not like D&D being Red vs Blue but it is and your only options are to change it or deal with it. In the former case that only applies to your personal games obviously.
I can't really disagree with the statement that D&D's default fluff is Red vs. Blue. Fortunately, I never use it (nor does anyone I game with) because we think it's stupid.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Top
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Completely missing the point. Mixing up Evil and Chaos. Assuming I mean they were worse than dead because of the non tyranny and not say... because dragons kept eating them, and the strength of arms is now protecting them. Evil will keep their tools around and in good working order, so competence is required. Which would you rather have? A useful vengeful fucker, or a useless but 'nice' little twit? Me? I'd kick the Paizil to the curb and get the guy who knows his shit.

Ok, you've chosen 'change it'. Fine. But it still is what it is for everyone else.
Top
User avatar
Talisman
Duke
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: The Cliffs of Insanity!

Post by Talisman »

Roy, I have come to the conclusion that I just plain don't understand you. You claim to be saying Evil > Good, but what I'm actually reading is Law > Chaos, or perhaps Evil > Chaos.

You appear to have fallen into the trap that Good = incompetent.

I will grant you the specific instance of an incompetent, chaotic, good rule being weaker than a competent, orderly, evil ruler. Hoever, remove the "incompetent" angle, as well as law and chaos. Now we have Competent Good vs. Competent Evil.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Top
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Talisman wrote:Roy, I have come to the conclusion that I just plain don't understand you. You claim to be saying Evil > Good, but what I'm actually reading is Law > Chaos, or perhaps Evil > Chaos.

You appear to have fallen into the trap that Good = incompetent.

I will grant you the specific instance of an incompetent, chaotic, good rule being weaker than a competent, orderly, evil ruler. Hoever, remove the "incompetent" angle, as well as law and chaos. Now we have Competent Good vs. Competent Evil.
It's more like that in terms of destructiveness, Chaos > Evil > Good. CG is more dangerous than LE because CG is a loose cannon.

Good ends up being incompetent both because they do not understand the other team whereas Evil understands its own team and the other team and because they cannot or will not do what must be done, which makes any problem worse than it has to be. Even if the Good team is competent, they still don't understand their opposition, and they still can't do what they got to do without being kicked off the team.
Top
User avatar
Talisman
Duke
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: The Cliffs of Insanity!

Post by Talisman »

Roy wrote:Good ends up being incompetent both because they do not understand the other team whereas Evil understands its own team and the other team
This...this is complete garbage.
Good wins precisely because it does understand Evil, whereas Evil cannot truly comprehend Good.
and because they cannot or will not do what must be done, which makes any problem worse than it has to be.
"What must be done" has to be an evil thing, right?
Wrong. That is complete crap. By this logic, youyr LE tyrant gets kicked off the team because his rule is *better* than that of a CG ruler, and thus is "good" by some definition...thus, he is a traitor to the cause of Evil.

Good does what must be done. It's called the heroic sacrifice. It's why Good wins.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Top
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14838
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

Talisman wrote:By this logic, youyr LE tyrant gets kicked off the team because his rule is *better* than that of a CG ruler, and thus is "good" by some definition...thus, he is a traitor to the cause of Evil.
There is no cause of evil. There isn't even a cause of good.

Evil is just self interest, and good is the greater good of all. And those overlap. A lot.
Top
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Woah, woah, woah.

Let's not drag Law and Chaos into this.

I mean, come on. They're just Good and Evil rotated 90 degrees (or that's how they seem to be regarded).

Personally, I can't stand Law vs. Chaos at any price. If I'm playing under someone who uses them, I go with some neutral alignment.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top
FatR
Duke
Posts: 1221
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:36 am

Post by FatR »

Roy wrote:Acting in self interest is predictable. Acting in the interest of whatever real or imagined crap such as say... thinking you're evil, even if you aren't and stabbing you in the face... not so much.
DnD evil =/= acting in self-interest in any actual setting or book definition I care to remember. To qualify for Team Evil and E part of your alignment, you must be consumed either with greed/powerlust (and predictable only in your untrustworthyness) or some idea that is inherently harmful/deranged or taken way too far ("humans/elves/drow/orcs/dragons are superior, bow down to us, insects!", "X is not truly people", "purge evil, or whatever I perceive as such, with fire!", "my end justifies any means!" or even ever-popular "demons smash!" and "you're our food!") in which case you're as unpredictable as any psycho fanatic/sociopath/nutjob. In either case, you must actually hurt other people (for no good reason) to qualify as Evil. That's what Evil in DnD actually is. Again, look at the actual settings, adventures, novels and other stuff that demonstrates us how authors actually see their worlds. They, if anything, are overloaded with villains who are completely damn irrational in their malice and destructive goals or simply fucking nuts. While I won't deny that there is some "red vs blue" stuff going on, it is going on not because the teams are functionally identical, but because authors often don't care/don't have time to describe motivations and deeds of evil creatures beyond "he's on the opposing team, naturally he wishes to kill you", or describe these motivations and deeds rather ham-handedly.
Also, by the way, stabbing people in the face because you just suspect them to be evil, also, surprise, surprise, counts as Evil!
Last edited by FatR on Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:18 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Bigode »

Self-interest == greed. "Nazism == evil" blows up any chance of elves being racially CG. Republicans aren't unpredictable. Said authors are Christian and thus bound to depict unchristianity (since of course there's always some Christ in said works) as stupid. Stabbing people in the face on suspicion of evil's actually what's being done with each and every dungeon clearing ever.

BTW: "enormous dick" - what's bad about it?
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Top
FatR
Duke
Posts: 1221
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:36 am

Post by FatR »

Talisman wrote: Wrong. That is complete crap. By this logic, youyr LE tyrant gets kicked off the team because his rule is *better* than that of a CG ruler, and thus is "good" by some definition...thus, he is a traitor to the cause of Evil.
I agree, that there is no "cause of Evil". I disagree, that rule of a LE tyrant, which actually qualifies for E part of his alignment, can, in general, actually be beneficial, compared to any alterative short of total bloody chaos. Evil tyrant's rule is not "doing what must be done". It is "indulging ruler's own ambitions, manias and prejudices". There can be exceptions, but an overwhelming majority of setting examples I'm aware of follows the second model.
Top
FatR
Duke
Posts: 1221
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:36 am

Post by FatR »

Bigode wrote:"Nazism == evil" blows up any chance of elves being racially CG.
Actual nazist elves (drow and FR extremists) are unambigiously Evil in the settings.
Bigode wrote:Stabbing people in the face on suspicion of evil's actually what's being done with each and every dungeon clearing ever.
Speak for your own games.
Top
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Bigode »

FatR wrote:I disagree, that rule of a LE tyrant, which actually qualifies for E part of his alignment, can, in general, actually be beneficial, compared to any alterative short of total bloody chaos. Evil tyrant's rule is not "doing what must be done". It is "indulging ruler's own ambitions, manias and prejudices". There can be exceptions, but an overwhelming majority of setting examples I'm aware of follows the second model.
Example: evil tyrant gets power to indulge in weird whims they'd not be able to otherwise. OTOH, the only thing keeping them in power's that they actually do things better than everyone else. See also: Mao, Stalin. As for why that supposedly doesn't happen in most settings, see previous post (i.e. the vampire faith - hell, Twilight's starting to make sense now, actually).
FatR wrote:Actual nazist elves (drow and FR extremists) are unambigiously Evil in the settings.
Where's the "1 >>> j00, n00b"?
FatR wrote:Speak for your own games.
Do wars not happen in yours?
Last edited by Bigode on Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Top
User avatar
Talisman
Duke
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: The Cliffs of Insanity!

Post by Talisman »

For some reason I am now reminded of the Evil "Emperor*" Galbatorix in the Eragon torture devices books. He's described as EVIL!!1! and everyone hates him, despite the fact that he doesn't seem to...y'know...do much of anything, least of all anything evil.

Oh wait! He employs nonhumans, taxes his subjects, and has a standing army! Burn him!



*He's the Emperor of a kingdom. Go figure.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Top
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Talisman wrote:For some reason I am now reminded of the Evil "Emperor*" Galbatorix in the Eragon torture devices books. He's described as EVIL!!1! and everyone hates him, despite the fact that he doesn't seem to...y'know...do much of anything, least of all anything evil.

Oh wait! He employs nonhumans, taxes his subjects, and has a standing army! Burn him!



*He's the Emperor of a kingdom. Go figure.
Not only that, he supports slavery, he killed all the Dragon Riders (thereby removing their Light and Leadership from the common people), and he's an Emperor. He is therefore evil. Kings can be Good, Emperors are Evil.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Bigode »

Maxus wrote:Not only that, he supports slavery, he killed all the Dragon Riders (thereby removing their Light and Leadership from the common people), and he's an Emperor. He is therefore evil. Kings can be Good, Emperors are Evil.
Let's remember that empires started existing because kingship was evil. :D
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Top
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Bigode wrote:
Maxus wrote:Not only that, he supports slavery, he killed all the Dragon Riders (thereby removing their Light and Leadership from the common people), and he's an Emperor. He is therefore evil. Kings can be Good, Emperors are Evil.
Let's remember that empires started existing because kingship was evil. :D
Like Emperorship worked out any better.

Let's review the evidence:

Palpatine? Evil.

Zurg? Emperor.

Galbatorix? Emperor.

Caligula? Nero? Emperors.

Shao Kahn? Emperor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:F ... _empresses

PROOF!

If that is not sufficient, consider this compelling argument: Emperor and Evil both start with E.
Last edited by Maxus on Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top
User avatar
Talisman
Duke
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: The Cliffs of Insanity!

Post by Talisman »

Maxus wrote:he killed all the Dragon Riders (thereby removing their Light and Leadership from the common people)
Show me one shred of evidence that indicates the Dragon Riders were Noble and Just and Clean and Caucasian Heroic and thus didn't deserve killing.

Our only current examples are Eragon the Sociopath and Galbatorix the Emperor. Oh, and that reclusive elf-dude Oromis, who is clearly deranged.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Top
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Talisman wrote:
Maxus wrote:he killed all the Dragon Riders (thereby removing their Light and Leadership from the common people)
Show me one shred of evidence that indicates the Dragon Riders were Noble and Just and Clean and Caucasian Heroic and thus didn't deserve killing.

Our only current examples are Eragon the Sociopath and Galbatorix the Emperor. Oh, and that reclusive elf-dude Oromis, who is clearly deranged.
Yeah, seriously. As the Sporkings writer is so fond of pointing out, Eragon is a law unto himself.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Bigode »

Just to make sure we're on the same page, we're talking actual history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor - though you forgot the worse of them (fictional): God-Emperor of Humankind ...
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
Top
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Bigode wrote:Just to make sure we're on the same page, we're talking actual history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor - though you forgot the worse of them (fictional): God-Emperor of Humankind ...
So was I about the emperors not being better than kings. A lot of the Roman Emperors were, to put it lightly, snooker loopy.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top
Elennsar
Duke
Posts: 2273
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:41 am
Location: Terra

Post by Elennsar »

Ah, but the G in God-Emperor stands for Good. So He's not evil.

More seriously, here's a question for the freaks who are determined to find examples (historical or fictional) of good or evil kings or emperors.

1) What is someone who is a king-emperor?

2) How many democratically elected leaders would you like in power for life?

Rulers tend to be fucked up. Next post had better have something equivalantly "duh." in it.
Trust in the Emperor, but always check your ammunition.
Top
Post Reply

Return to “In My Humble Opinion...”