areyouacultist - End Game Wrap-Up

Link:12991 Sat Jan 23 00:21:27 2010

So, feedback?

I think the game could've done, honestly, with one more cultist and/or the serial killer or monster. I didn't put them in because I was concerned that with so few players and having at least three deaths a night (Cultists, Serial Killer/Monster, and a Vigilante) that the game would go too quick (i.e. lynching plus three deaths brings game to eleven players on Day 2, lynching plus two or three deaths, brings it down to seven on Day 3).

However, that didn't stop the game from being fast, just fast in the opposite direction. An additional cultist may have drawn it out and made it more difficult for the villagers to win (i.e. they lose the Bodyguard, then the Vigilante). Hell, not having a cultist die and the Bodyguard getting lucky on the first night would've made things a lot easier.

[info]theweaselking wrote, "...Not knowing the roles and numbers in advance, with reveals happening only on death, would make for a better game. As in, we don't know *which* roles are in or how many." and that might be true. I think posting which roles are in the game but not the numbers might be interesting, with the moderator continuing the game as long as necessary. Even restricting the knowledge of how many of a particular special there are would weaken the All-Special-Reveal strategy (because if two people come out as Seer, and both are Seer, and you lynch one, then the other, well, you've just screwed up your Seers).

There have been complaints about whether it's a logic game or a RPG and what is more fun. I don't think there's anything that can really be done about that although I'm open to suggestions.

What do people think?
Time:2009-10-19 21:21:59 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#114111

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#3 #5 #7 #11 #12 #17 #21 #38
Children:#2 #9
#1
The problem is, it's *both* a logic game and an RPG, and [info]gorillashaman and I both went immediately off the logic game *deep end* and kind of made it much harder for anyone to play RPG.

Seriously, I suspect "roles revealed only on death, no indication of which or how many until the game is done" would be a great benefit.


Time:2009-10-19 21:30:25 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#115135

Parent:#1
Siblings:#9
Children:#16
#2
*nod* I might do that the next time I play. That way people will just have to go off of voting trends and might encourage role-play/arguing.


Time:2009-10-19 21:33:46 GMT
Author:[info]stride
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#115391

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #5 #7 #11 #12 #17 #21 #38
Children:#4
#3
It's been a long time since we've done a blind game; why not give it a shot? I can run something if the usual GM's want to play. At this point I'm slated to be killed first as a Werewolf/Cultist anyways. :)

I posted this in the other thread, but since this is the official post-mortum, I think that there needed to be a solid reason for the villagers to not haphazardly kill people or to even have doubt. Even if it was with the introduction of the lovers, or someone who changes sides, or a Ralph [info]Nader-like character, having that wonderful fuzzy gray area to play with makes this game much more psychological than black-and-white.

And COC is all about the psychological horror.


Time:2009-10-19 21:43:49 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#116159

Parent:#3
Siblings:(none)
Children:#6
#4
I could very easily turn off the e-mail notifications and I'd be good and not check the password if you wanted to run things. It seems like Joe runs Millers Hollow once every few years or so.

*nod* I think I might put in a Possessed or Lovers the next time.


Time:2009-10-19 21:56:30 GMT
Author:[info]celothae
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#116415

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #7 #11 #12 #17 #21 #38
Children:#28
#5
I can see an amazing power to having to old your breath for each evening round to see if there are more cultists. I think a blind game sounds pretty good.

All in all, I think the game went well, though I really think that the number of murdering specials in this game was a bit on the high side. I would have like to have seen more of the non-murdering specials.


Time:2009-10-19 21:58:47 GMT
Author:[info]stride
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#116671

Parent:#4
Siblings:(none)
Children:#25
#6
I'm more than happy to put something together if you wanted to play and enough folks were interested in experimenting. In theory, I'll have a lot of free time soon. :)




Time:2009-10-19 22:01:52 GMT
Author:[info]flowen
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#117183

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #11 #12 #17 #21 #38
Children:#8
#7
Well, you know where I stand. I'm strongly in favor of a Blind game as non-blinds seem to end up being "do whatever the specials say" and I don't roll that way. Being a villager shouldn't mean you're a willing sacrifice. I'd like to play a person who wants to live, thank you.


Time:2009-10-19 22:57:39 GMT
Author:[info]chaos_dancer
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#117439

Parent:#7
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #8
I strongly echo this. I am not intersted in the number crunching aspects that some people got into, and feel that this drags down attempts to RP the game.

I think a full blind game, where ya didn't know how many of each character type there was, and where ya didn't know what someone was after they died, would help encourage that.





Time:2009-10-19 23:05:46 GMT
Author:[info]reyl
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#117951

Parent:#1
Siblings:#2
Children:#10
#9
You two were a bunch of bloody greyfaces. But I couldn't say so or people would think I was a cultist for sure!

Now that I can see the night posts, and people actually writing flavorful comments, I see what the game *could* be.

I'd like to play again, but with more role-playing and less logic lawyering. If people are more concerned about being a character, they will think about who and why they are lynching. I just think it's cooler that way.

The object should be killing the cultists with the *least* amount of collateral damage possible. Not, hey lets kill everyone until almost everyone is dead. I think the villagers should have the option to lynch no-one. I suppose they do, if they [info]abstain. But I think if there are a majority of [info]abstainers, maybe they stop the lynching? Or would that change the dynamic/numbers too much?


Time:2009-10-19 23:24:09 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#118207

Parent:#9
Siblings:(none)
Children:#27
#10
If the villagers lynch nobody (because there's a tie, even a 0-all tie), the cultists get two. Part of the point is that the villagers *have* to lynch someone, somehow, every round. Remove that and you lose the most compelling part of the game: The idea that, by *not* adminstering frontier justice without any evidence beyond people's votes, *you lose*.

But in general, I agree. I fucked it up and I won't do that again.

I'm still against a *completely* blind game, because at that point everything really is almost entirely random - you can't *tell* if you're making progress or not, you can only hope you notice the cultists voting in a bloc early enough to see the trend and with time left to reverse it. But being blind *until the deed is done and the result is irrevocable?* That's a great way to add useful information and context to the game.


Time:2009-10-19 23:32:26 GMT
Author:[info]zhymmy
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#118463

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #7 #12 #17 #21 #38
Children:#13
#11
I think I agree with the majority thus far, here. I was playing, under the assumption that it was a role playing strategy game. Much like some of what I saw in the night posts, now that I can see them. I saw some of it the first day, but then almost all I read was out of character deductive reasoning. And that's great to DO, but it doesn't need to be ALL that happens. Maybe a good addition would be a daily/nightly side post for OOC, all comments under the main day post should be made IC, and then in the OOC post whoever wants to can play logic man all they want. If you're like me, and you want to take the RP side, you don't even look at the comments on that post. Then the logic-wielders have to convince the others, in character, of why they should vote for Bob or Trudy to be lynched.

I had another thought that maybe all characters could have a title in addition to their role...like, not just Villagers, but Villager/Fisherman, Villager/Pharmacist, Villager/Shopkeep, etc. You know, in order to encourage role play - like, "I walked into [info]Reyl's General Store today, and caught him covering up some strange looking candles." Or maybe more interaction, say my character (btw, I LOVED the "robes robes robes!" maniacal bit) is on the robes kick, and a group of villagers search someone's house, and that person tries to keep them out and such. They couldn't give anything away but there could be some suspicion about why they can't open that closet or whatever and that's what gets the others to lynch them. But that might cause more problems and require a "day" to span several to allow for interaction.

I did want to ask - is there a rules basis for this game from somewhere else, or is it a personal creation? I'd like to adapt it to a tabletop if I may.


Time:2009-10-19 23:32:29 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#118719

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #7 #11 #17 #21 #38
Children:#14 #15 #18 #20 #29
#12
In fact, here's my suggestions:

* Merge the Sorceror and the traitor. The Sorceror spies every round looking for the PI, and if they're "sacrificed", they become a cultist instead and lose their spying ability. This guarantees that even if the PI is killed, the sorceror still has stuff to do - and opens a ton of interesting gameflow options, *and* prevents situations like the need of the cultists to technically kill the Sorceror to win.

* Eliminate the vigilante and the doctor's poison pill. If the villagers want to kill a cultist, they'd damn well better hang 'em high, or hope to get lucky with the Lovers or the Thrill-Killer. Alternately, drop the doctor's poison pill and make the vigilante a one-time-per-game thing.

* Don't tell people what roles are in the game, or how many of each role.

* Eliminate the suicide rule.

* Eliminate the rule that Lovers can't vote for each other, even if you keep the one that they can't let they vote *stand* at end of day when voting for each other.

* Still reveal roles on death. This added information really is very important to avoid spending a week on literally random lynchings before you have enough to maybe see a pattern in the votes.

* Fewer Specials in comparison to total players.


Time:2009-10-19 23:35:25 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#118975

Parent:#11
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #13
I did want to ask - is there a rules basis for this game from somewhere else, or is it a personal creation? I'd like to adapt it to a tabletop if I may.

It's a long-standing party game, a staple of theatre students and hallowe'en parties and bored geeks *for decades*.

The Cthulhu-themed one is a variant of this:
http://www.toyvault.com/cthulhugame/main.htm
with a lot of the extra add-on rules that people invented to make it playable by livejournal.


Time:2009-10-19 23:38:03 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#119743

Parent:#12
Siblings:#15 #18 #20 #29
Children:#30
#14
Also:
Night should be longer. Seriously, if I'm away from my computer for an hour in the middle of a workday, I don't get to have anything happen at night? When Day ends, all the Night people need to update themselves on the summaries, make decisions that are based on *even further* information in some cases, and then get everything done?

I understand the need to have Days be the majority of the time, but it might be worthwhile tossing up the "what do you do tonight?" posts early, or making Night last 3-4 hours to give scheduling-impaired people a better shot at it.


Time:2009-10-20 00:19:49 GMT
Author:[info]chaos_dancer
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#120255

Parent:#12
Siblings:#14 #18 #20 #29
Children:#31
#15
I would say that the Doctor's poison pill is fine, as it's a once per game thing. The Vigilante, getting a kill each night, probably is a bit over teh top though. I would say there should be some limiting factor on how often or how much they can kill. Similarily with teh Serial Killer (though that should have less restrictions, cause it's harder for them to achieve victory).


Time:2009-10-20 00:21:19 GMT
Author:[info]chaos_dancer
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#120511

Parent:#2
Siblings:(none)
Children:#26
#16
Putting in the MiB would also be a good way to encourage people to keep quiet about their role :)


Time:2009-10-20 04:51:31 GMT
Author:[info]flowen
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#120767

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #7 #11 #12 #21 #38
Children:#35
#17
Really there should only be two all the time kills each day: the lynching and the cultists. Have some other one-off kills, but nothing else that happens regularly.


Time:2009-10-20 06:27:35 GMT
Author:[info]gorillashaman
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#121023

Parent:#12
Siblings:#14 #15 #20 #29
Children:#19
#18
Some of these are good, some I'm not convinced on.

We got VERY lucky in lynching a cultist on day 1. That almost never happens. I think that if we had not done that, or if we had had 3 cultists instead of 2, then MANY of the problems we saw in this game would vanish.


Time:2009-10-20 13:55:17 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#121279

Parent:#18
Siblings:(none)
Children:#24
#19
If some you like and some you don't, which ones are which?


Time:2009-10-20 14:30:29 GMT
Author:[info]faymar
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#121535

Parent:#12
Siblings:#14 #15 #18 #29
Children:#22
#20
Off the cuff thoughts:

I like the sorceror as it stands really.

I am intrigued by the idea of not knowing detail but at the same time I *enjoy* the logic game. So a totally blind game doesn't appeal as much. But not knowing the numbers - even if I just don't know how many cultists - is intriguing.

As a relatively new player, I would like to say that knowing which roles are in the game is very helpful. There is a very long list of possible roles and it's a lot to take in. If every time I think someone is acting oddly, I have to go through that full list again to try to understand the implications, it starts to feel like hard work. So I'd like to see at the very least a cut-down list of possible roles.

The suicide rule is vital to force interaction in my opinion (and I don't believe that people will agree to not play in order to force a win. In fact, even in this game, [info]gorillashaman was targeted as his logic "might be flawed". If someone tried to force the suicide-gameplay, they would almost certainly fail.








Time:2009-10-20 14:31:47 GMT
Author:[info]sylvan
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#121791

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #7 #11 #12 #17 #38
Children:#36
#21
I like the idea of now knowing what's in the game before play more than a full blind game. If a blind game is done, I would really want the notary in play.

I get that the logic was cool and predicted a win scenario, but it did take out a lot of the fun. Would it have been more fun if GS and WK had presented it as a character? Would it have been more fun if I had read through it with the mindset of a crazy thrill killer more than my own? I don't know.

Maybe to promote role-play everyone can also be assigned a function of the village, i.e. inn keeper, florist, head of the tourism commission, farmer, fisherman, mechanic, cable installer, waitperson, teacher, professor, recluse author, baker, crystal shop owner, pizza delivery boy, comic book shop owner, gas station attendant, dog catcher, bartender, seamstress, ranger, fire marshal, mail deliverer, town gossip, etc.


Time:2009-10-20 14:43:40 GMT
Author:[info]theweaselking
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#122047

Parent:#20
Siblings:(none)
Children:#23
#22
I'm not worried about the suicide rule being *abused*, I'm worried about it giving out information and being, well, boring.


Time:2009-10-20 14:55:05 GMT
Author:[info]faymar
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#122303

Parent:#22
Siblings:(none)
Children:#34
#23
OK but not posting is, in my opinion, boringer. If there's no suicide rule, it can become a lot more tempting to sit quiet and wait and see, rather than weigh in. Especially at the start when so little is known.


Time:2009-10-20 16:08:19 GMT
Author:[info]gorillashaman
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#122559

Parent:#19
Siblings:(none)
Children:#32 #33
#24
* Merge the Sorceror and the traitor.
= could be fun, but probably not necessary.

* Eliminate the vigilante and the doctor's poison pill.
= Doctor poison is useful. Vigilante should NOT be used though; it gives villages 2 kills per day. The serial killer or werehamster are better if you just want random carnage.

* Don't tell people what roles are in the game, or how many of each role.
= Disagree. This is one of the few pieces of solid information the villagers get. I think suggesting this is the result of seeing it play out the way it did in this game. I've played four or five of these now, and this is the first solid villager win by logic I've seen. And once in a while, yeah, I'd like to see that kind of win.

* Eliminate the suicide rule.
= Agree.

* Eliminate the rule that Lovers can't vote for each other, even if you keep the one that they can't let they vote *stand* at end of day when voting for each other.
= Why? Disagree.

* Still reveal roles on death. This added information really is very important to avoid spending a week on literally random lynchings before you have enough to maybe see a pattern in the votes.
= Agree (no change)

* Fewer Specials in comparison to total players.
= Disagree. The problem here was really not enough cultists. Also, adding MORE specials makes things more random and chaotic. If you run a LARP, do you give half your players the same bio? No, you give them all different goals and agendas, because it makes it more fun to play.


Time:2009-10-20 16:49:13 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#122815

Parent:#6
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #25
Yeah, I think I'll run the next one. 8)


Time:2009-10-20 16:50:52 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#123071

Parent:#16
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #26
Indeed, since they're the special hunter-killer.


Time:2009-10-20 16:52:08 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#123327

Parent:#10
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #27
*nod* The more I think about it the more I like the idea of the blind roles/blind #s game.


Time:2009-10-20 16:53:42 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#123583

Parent:#5
Siblings:(none)
Children:#37
#28
Well, there was only one murdering special, which was the Vigilante who was particularly...enthusiastic. I think having him be on the side of the village (as opposed to the Serial Killer) changed the dynamic because he could use the threat of his nightly murder in particularly "positive" fashion.


Time:2009-10-20 17:14:16 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#123839

Parent:#12
Siblings:#14 #15 #18 #20
Children:(none)
 #29
* Merge the Sorceror and the traitor. The Sorceror spies every round looking for the PI, and if they're "sacrificed", they become a cultist instead and lose their spying ability. This guarantees that even if the PI is killed, the sorceror still has stuff to do - and opens a ton of interesting gameflow options, *and* prevents situations like the need of the cultists to technically kill the Sorceror to win.

That was kind of what the poll was about but the more I thought about it the less I wanted to change the rules mid-[info]stride (not that it would've mattered anyway since the sorcerer was lynched and that night the last cultist was killed).

I think whenever I include the Sorcerer in the future I will also include the variations where if he spies on the Cultists, he can join them, and if the Cultists all die he picks up the job.

* Eliminate the vigilante and the doctor's poison pill. If the villagers want to kill a cultist, they'd damn well better hang 'em high, or hope to get lucky with the Lovers or the Thrill-Killer. Alternately, drop the doctor's poison pill and make the vigilante a one-time-per-game thing.

I like them because I think in some ways they are a good foil for the cultists (also, I think that in a more blind game the Vigilante may be less likely to use their ability). However, I think I will be including the Vigilante only in games where we have more people.

* Don't tell people what roles are in the game, or how many of each role.

I'm liking this a lot.

* Eliminate the suicide rule.

Honestly, I'm mixed. First of all, the game is about participation and if people don't participate after signing up the moderator needs a way to remove them from the game. Does that "penalize" the players? Sure, but what are you going to do? I do understand that it removes the option of a "staying silent" strategy but I think the best way to do that would be to vote simply to cast a vote; in an in-person game that's what you'd be doing anyway.

* Eliminate the rule that Lovers can't vote for each other, even if you keep the one that they can't let they vote *stand* at end of day when voting for each other.

I'll include that as a variant and mix that in.

* Still reveal roles on death. This added information really is very important to avoid spending a week on literally random lynchings before you have enough to maybe see a pattern in the votes.

I agree. I don't like the idea of 100% blind games.

* Fewer Specials in comparison to total players.

*nod* This was my first time moderating a game like this and I wasn't sure on what mix I should have. Maybe do without the Bodyguard or Vigilante and include one more cultist. Last game of [info]millershollow we had twenty-seven-ish people and I think there were four wolves, a serial killer, a hunter, a doctor, a seer, a ghost, and something else.


Time:2009-10-20 17:15:09 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#124095

Parent:#14
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #30
*nod* I could see extending "night until 2PM. That'd give me enough time to do all the write-ups and everything.


Time:2009-10-20 17:20:50 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#124351

Parent:#15
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #31
I think in a big game it wouldn't be that much of a big deal. I think the Vigilante's killing factor is also very personal; this time we had a very enthusiastic Vigilante and the way things started off made it very much in [info]theweaselking's favor to be vicious but in a larger game and a more hesitant Vigilante, you may see fewer Vigilante kills.

The Serial Killer needs to have no limits because their objective is to be last person standing. Saying they only get five kills would be rather...pointless.


Time:2009-10-20 17:26:54 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#124607

Parent:#24
Siblings:#33
Children:(none)
 #32
* Merge the Sorceror and the traitor.
= could be fun, but probably not necessary.

There's already a variant for it. Plus the Sorcerer's incentive, even if they don't get to murder people, is to create chaos and dissent; they only win if the Cultists win.

Vigilante should NOT be used though; it gives villages 2 kills per day. The serial killer or werehamster are better if you just want random carnage.

I disagree but I think the Vigilante should only be used in larger games with higher numbers of Cultists. If you have a twenty-four person game, you're more likely to get a villager if you have three cultists so using that ability makes it more harmful at that point.

This is one of the few pieces of solid information the villagers get. I think suggesting this is the result of seeing it play out the way it did in this game. I've played four or five of these now, and this is the first solid villager win by logic I've seen. And once in a while, yeah, I'd like to see that kind of win.

*nod* True, although this time it simply steam rolled. I think what allowed logic to just roll over this game was the fact that the villagers had two kills every set of rounds (if the Vigilante wanted to) and there were only two cultists.

The problem here was really not enough cultists. Also, adding MORE specials makes things more random and chaotic.

Agreed to both.


Time:2009-10-20 17:27:57 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#124863

Parent:#24
Siblings:#32
Children:(none)
 #33
* Eliminate the suicide rule.
= Agree.

Eh, still not sure about that. I think having a mechanic to get rid of people who sign-up but don't play is important (even if it does "penalize" the players) but there needs to be a way worked out where someone could play silently if they chose.


Time:2009-10-20 17:30:06 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#125119

Parent:#23
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #34
I have to agree with that logic.


Time:2009-10-20 17:37:31 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#125631

Parent:#17
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #35
Eh, I think in larger games multiple kills in a round are ok (and certainly provide for adequate amounts of OMGWTFBBQ). However, I'm not certain I think this previous game was large enough.


Time:2009-10-20 17:40:38 GMT
Author:[info]areyouacultist
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#125887

Parent:#21
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #36
The problem is that some people like the logic and the RP is a side thing. Some people like the RP and logic is secondary. I don't want to force people to do one or the other out of hand.


Time:2009-10-20 18:52:49 GMT
Author:[info]celothae
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#126143

Parent:#28
Siblings:(none)
Children:(none)
 #37
You had one NIGHTLY murdering special.

There was also the doctor and the thrill-killer.


Time:2009-10-20 20:56:41 GMT
Author:[info]flowen
Subject:(none)
Link:12991#126399

Parent:(none)
Siblings:#1 #3 #5 #7 #11 #12 #17 #21
Children:(none)
 #38
You can still use logic even in a partially blind game. Just behind-the-scenes logic. If you know what's in the game, but no one can reveal themselves, and you know what things are when they die, you can use logic.

My biggest gripe is specials revealing themselves and the game becomes "Do whatever the specials say or else!". That's no fun.

Don't give people roles like [info]sylvan suggested, but let them take them up if they want. If you want a logic game, that's fine, just mellow it out. No giant posts with charts of who is alive, what's left, and what's gone.

I kept a spreadsheet up privately that told me everything GS posted in his daily posts, because I was paying attention. We don't need a secratary.


Posting Statistics
posts by[info]areyouacultist:(14)#2 #4 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36
posts by[info]theweaselking:(7)#1 #10 #12 #13 #14 #19 #22
posts by[info]chaos_dancer:(3)#8 #15 #16
posts by[info]flowen:(3)#7 #17 #38
posts by[info]stride:(2)#3 #6
posts by[info]faymar:(2)#20 #23
posts by[info]celothae:(2)#5 #37
posts by[info]gorillashaman:(2)#18 #24
posts by[info]sylvan:(1)#21
posts by[info]zhymmy:(1)#11
posts by[info]reyl:(1)#9
Comment Tree Summary