| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
 Posted - 08 Aug 2005 : 23:16:34
|
I was reading the Leucrotta entry in the Monsters of Waterdeep chapter in City of Splendors: Waterdeep, page 136, and camo to think on two issues.
First, about identifying a leucrotta ... So, I did take a look at the Knowledge (arcana) skill and its description in the D&D 3.5 System Reference Document:quote:
Knowledge (arcana)
Check: Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).
In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s HD. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information.
Now, I have a question regarding the DC to ONLY identify such a creature ...
I mean, with DC 10 + HD, for example, DC 16 for a leucrotta, you identify the monster and get one piece of useful information. For example, the leucrotta is immune to charm and compulsion effects. But, what if a player (or NPC) only rolls 11. Should not that at least let the player (or NPC) know that it is a leucrotta? What do you think?
Imagine the case of a 1st-level Commoner NPC from Daggerdale who sees a leucrotta. Leucrottas are found in the area, and a Daggerdalesman should know a bit, at least. So, I think that DC 11 should help the NPC identify that creature, but nothing more.
And, the second issue ... about another name for a laucrotta ...
I have never liked the name. Do not know why. But still, if all my players have read the leucrotta entry ... then DCs just does not make much sence. Although they might avoid to take advantage of their knowledge ... they are affected. However, if the player's PCs meet an "skullcat" for the first time, and I give them a very vague description, they will have dificulties identifiyng the creature ... and, do you know what a skullcat is ... yes, a krenshar.
Link to the D&D 3.5 System Reference Document:
http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/skillsInt.html
|
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
Crennen FaerieBane
Master of Realmslore
USA
1378 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2005 : 23:38:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
I was reading the Leucrotta entry in the Monsters of Waterdeep chapter in City of Splendors: Waterdeep, page 136, and camo to think on two issues.
First, about identifying a leucrotta ... So, I did take a look at the Knowledge (arcana) skill and its description in the D&D 3.5 System Reference Document:quote:
Knowledge (arcana)
Check: Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).
In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s HD. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information.
Now, I have a question regarding the DC to ONLY identify such a creature ...
I mean, with DC 10 + HD, for example, DC 16 for a leucrotta, you identify the monster and get one piece of useful information. For example, the leucrotta is immune to charm and compulsion effects. But, what if a player (or NPC) only rolls 11. Should not that at least let the player (or NPC) know that it is a leucrotta? What do you think?
Imagine the case of a 1st-level Commoner NPC from Daggerdale who sees a leucrotta. Leucrottas are found in the area, and a Daggerdalesman should know a bit, at least. So, I think that DC 11 should help the NPC identify that creature, but nothing more.
And, the second issue ... about another name for a laucrotta ...
I have never liked the name. Do not know why. But still, if all my players have read the leucrotta entry ... then DCs just does not make much sence. Although they might avoid to take advantage of their knowledge ... they are affected. However, if the player's PCs meet an "skullcat" for the first time, and I give them a very vague description, they will have dificulties identifiyng the creature ... and, do you know what a skullcat is ... yes, a krenshar.
Link to the D&D 3.5 System Reference Document:
http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/skillsInt.html
I think you make a very valid point. I would make the DC check more of a relative check - like the Weapons of Legacy knowledges. The higher you roll, the more you would know about the creature and its abilities. I mean, if you think about it, if you a roll a 15 and your modifier is +6, you have a 21. That just means you've either done tons of research about those creatures in that geographic area or you just happened to be listening to the right tavern tale at the right time. I have always used a slide scale when my PCs ask for general knowledge and generally only use specific DCs for very specific information.
As for your second point - all creatures, besides those that are super numerous, will have local names that the populace uses. Everyone knows an orc, but not everyone knows what a Quaggoth is, or a Skulk, or a Leucrotta. It's up to how regional you want to make your game. It may be a lot of work, but it would definitely enhance your gaming experience overall.
C-Fb |
Still rockin' the Fey'ri style. |
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 00:00:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
I have never liked the name. Do not know why. But still, if all my players have read the leucrotta entry ... then DCs just does not make much sence. Although they might avoid to take advantage of their knowledge ... they are affected. However, if the player's PCs meet an "skullcat" for the first time, and I give them a very vague description, they will have dificulties identifiyng the creature ... and, do you know what a skullcat is ... yes, a krenshar.
As I've seen pointed out in a couple of sourcebooks... Nothing says you have to tell the characters exactly what it is they're encountering. Unless it's a small group of critters, be vague with the numbers. Use the (pitifully small) description provided to describe them. Embellish it a bit. And, depending on the way the encounter happens, you can really have fun being vague. After all, if they encounter some critters that suddenly leap out of ambush on them, they're not going to be stopping to identify the markings.
As a side note, monster descriptions are one of the most notable failures in 3.x. In 2E, we always got at least a full page to describe a monster. We had more of its description, more of its habits, more about the critter -- which, I feel, enabled a DM to more creatively use it. Now the monster books are mere "Kill me!" catalogs, rather than proper bestiaries of strange critters. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Xysma
Master of Realmslore
USA
1089 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 02:37:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
I have never liked the name. Do not know why. But still, if all my players have read the leucrotta entry ... then DCs just does not make much sence. Although they might avoid to take advantage of their knowledge ... they are affected. However, if the player's PCs meet an "skullcat" for the first time, and I give them a very vague description, they will have dificulties identifiyng the creature ... and, do you know what a skullcat is ... yes, a krenshar.
As I've seen pointed out in a couple of sourcebooks... Nothing says you have to tell the characters exactly what it is they're encountering. Unless it's a small group of critters, be vague with the numbers. Use the (pitifully small) description provided to describe them. Embellish it a bit. And, depending on the way the encounter happens, you can really have fun being vague. After all, if they encounter some critters that suddenly leap out of ambush on them, they're not going to be stopping to identify the markings.
As a side note, monster descriptions are one of the most notable failures in 3.x. In 2E, we always got at least a full page to describe a monster. We had more of its description, more of its habits, more about the critter -- which, I feel, enabled a DM to more creatively use it. Now the monster books are mere "Kill me!" catalogs, rather than proper bestiaries of strange critters.
Have you looked at MM3 yet? I think it does a far better job of describing the monsters than MM & MM2. Plus, I liked the "how to run this in Faerun" paragraph that was tacked on to many entries. |
War to slay, not to fight long and glorious.
Aermhar of the Tangletrees
Year of the Hooded Falcon
Xysma's Gallery
Guide to the Tomes and Tales of the Realms download from Candlekeep
Anthologies and Tales Overviews
Check out my custom action figures, hand-painted miniatures, gaming products, and other stuff on eBay.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 03:19:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xysma
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
As a side note, monster descriptions are one of the most notable failures in 3.x. In 2E, we always got at least a full page to describe a monster. We had more of its description, more of its habits, more about the critter -- which, I feel, enabled a DM to more creatively use it. Now the monster books are mere "Kill me!" catalogs, rather than proper bestiaries of strange critters.
Have you looked at MM3 yet? I think it does a far better job of describing the monsters than MM & MM2. Plus, I liked the "how to run this in Faerun" paragraph that was tacked on to many entries.
I can't say that I've flipped thru that book... However, I doubt it would impress me. As I say, I liked the 2E approach to monsters, when we had a full page (well, minus the illustration and stats) to describe a monster and fully discuss it, rather than just a couple of paragraphs. I think we need more than a blurb about its appearance and how it fights; I want to know its ecology, how it associates with other critters (particularly of its type), and how it lives. I can use a critter a lot more effectively with that information, as opposed to just some numbers and a blurb. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 07:57:45
|
Hi folks!
No, I do not have MM II nor MM III. I do have AD&D MM, and do look at it from time to time. However, sorry, but I do not think that you have answered my questions, at least the 2nd:
1) Do you think that DC 5 + HD sounds fine to just identify a monster?
2) Do you have suggestions for other names, maybe Daggerdale local names, to leucrottas?
-- 1 --
According to the PHB rules, the lowest DC is 10 + HD, and a successful skill checks provides two things:
- Monster is identified
- Player gets one piece of useful information
Well, I assume that you think this is OK to just identify a creature with DC 5 + HD.
-- 2 --
My imagination is at this point very limited to additional names to a leucrotta. I have created names for other monster, for example, the krenshar which i call "skullcat". But, do you have suggestions to other names for leucrottas?
Nevertheless, thanks for your interest and your replies. |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 10:12:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
Hi folks!
No, I do not have MM II nor MM III. I do have AD&D MM, and do look at it from time to time. However, sorry, but I do not think that you have answered my questions, at least the 2nd:
1) Do you think that DC 5 + HD sounds fine to just identify a monster?
2) Do you have suggestions for other names, maybe Daggerdale local names, to leucrottas?
-- 1 --
According to the PHB rules, the lowest DC is 10 + HD, and a successful skill checks provides two things:
- Monster is identified
- Player gets one piece of useful information
Well, I assume that you think this is OK to just identify a creature with DC 5 + HD.
-- 2 --
My imagination is at this point very limited to additional names to a leucrotta. I have created names for other monster, for example, the krenshar which i call "skullcat". But, do you have suggestions to other names for leucrottas?
Nevertheless, thanks for your interest and your replies.
Well met!
I do not think that you should allow PCs to use any skill to identify monsters, unless they are able to clearly see them. For instance, if a n unseen leucrotta is mimicking a human voice (such as a distressed maiden), PCs won't be able to say "Hey, that's a leucrotta trying to fool us into an ambush!". Maybe they will be able to identify it when they can see it clearly, and then only if they spend a round to use that skill (and succeed in the check).
I would not allow a check to identify monsters unless a PC really does some research on monsters (reads several tomes about them, pays sages for lessons, talks to other adventurers, etc.). |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 14:32:41
|
Well met Faramicos!
A monster, such as an leucrotta or a wolf, does not need to be seen to be identified. Imagine the following:quote:
Aedam "the Hunter" sits in the tavern and says the following:
"Yeah, my hunting party saw once a pack of wolfs led my a pretty large wolf, and once, we saw a leucrotta. We were lucky, I assume. The beast just watched us from a long distance, and then it run away. So, yeah, I know the countryside, and the beasts here around. Trust me, I can be your guide ... and that can save your lives."
So, the party has not seen the creatures, they just hear about them ... Now, according to the rules, to identify and know something useful, a PC with Knowledge (nature) should make a skill check towards DC 12 for the wolf and a Knowledge (arcana) skill check towards DC 16 for the leucrotta. Players will immediately know what a wolf is ... and possible also a leucrotta ...
However, we could tell the story in a different way:quote:
"Yeah, my hunting party saw once a pack of waergs led my a pretty large waerg, and once, we saw a leuka. We were lucky, I assume. The beast just watched us from a long distance, and then it run away. So, yeah, I know the countryside, and the beasts here around. Trust me, I can be your guide ... and that can save your lives."
Now, the players will not know what Aedam is talking about ... but, with the help of the appropiate skills, they might.
So ... it seems that I have managed to invent a new name, leuka  However, I think that, to just identify a creature, DC 5 + HD could be enough ...
Comments?
/webmanus |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
Edited by - webmanus on 09 Aug 2005 14:46:15 |
|
|
|
tauster
Senior Scribe
Germany
399 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 14:56:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
[snip]
Maybe they will be able to identify it when they can see it clearly, and then only if they spend a round to use that skill (and succeed in the check).
your suggestion promted a question i had fora while:
what are you doing in the round you "use your skill"?
in on a related topic:
in many d20 adventures (i.e. since 3rd edition) the author comes up with something like "...[name of the npc/monster] then uses his skill of haggling (15) to get a better price..."
well, english is not my mother tongue, but i hate it everytime i have to read such a written monstrosity!  is it so very hard to find proper a euphemism for "using skill XYZ"?!? i mean, even i could do that, and i´m far from being a professional writer... 
ok, rant over! 
quote:
I would not allow a check to identify monsters unless a PC really does some research on monsters (reads several tomes about them, pays sages for lessons, talks to other adventurers, etc.).
i handle things the same way. just having heard stories about monsters dosn´t make you an expert on said being. if the party has a member who has a special interest in monsters, let them spend their excess money on old books, or to pay sages (or even better: retired adventurers). and don´t forget to insert every now end then an encounter where the wannabe-monster-expert can shine! |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 15:11:31
|
Hi folks!
Accoring to the D&D 3.5 System Reference Documentation, a Knowledge (<area>) skill check usually does not take an action, see below: quote:
Action: Usually none. In most cases, making a Knowledge check doesn’t take an action—you simply know the answer or you don’t.
And, about having knowledge about a leucotta or not ... quote:
Untrained: An untrained Knowledge check is simply an Intelligence check. Without actual training, you know only common knowledge (DC 10 or lower).
I have not stated wether a Player Character (PC) has ranks or not in a specific skill ... But, let's imagine that they have. By the way ... it seems that knowledge about wolfs and leucottas is not common knowledge (DC 10+) ... hmmm ... leucotta, not common knowledge ... that's OK, but a wolf ... |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 17:14:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
By the way ... it seems that knowledge about wolfs and leucottas is not common knowledge (DC 10+) ... hmmm ... leucotta, not common knowledge ... that's OK, but a wolf ...
That's how I'd handle it. With some notable exceptions, knowledge of monsters would be related to how common they were. So goblins, orcs, trolls, wolves, critters like that anyone could identify. Throw a leucrotta into the mix... People wouldn't be able to identify it unless they'd studied them, encountered them before, or they were particularly common in the person's region.
Some exceptions exist, though. Everyone's heard of drow, for example, and it's hard to mistake a dragon for something else. Someone might not be able to list drow racial abilities or tell you a dragon's magical capabilites, but they'll at least know those critters on sight. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 17:43:04
|
| If you look on page 64 of Monsters of Faerun, it looks like leucrotta are fairly well known, and reviled, in the Silver Marches, at least around Silverymoon and Everlund. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 17:48:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
If you look on page 64 of Monsters of Faerun, it looks like leucrotta are fairly well known, and reviled, in the Silver Marches, at least around Silverymoon and Everlund.
Okay... Running with that factoid, a ranger from Silverymoon would likely be able to pick out a leucrotta. His friend, Bob the Shadowdale ranger, would have a much harder time, though, because the Dalelands don't have as many of the beasties. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 19:43:31
|
Yes ... although Daggerdale could have some more leucrottas ... see Volo's Guide to the Dalelands, page 75. And yes, a kind of modifier should be applied for the creatures "frequency" (AD&D MM).Example -- Frequency
Frequency DC
----------------
Common -5
Uncommon +0
Rare +5
Very Rare +10
In the AD&D MM, the leucrotta was rare. And, if a leucrotta is rare in a specific region (or sub-region), then a +5 modifier could be applied to the DC, having a DC of 21, if the rule of DC 10 + HD is used and, in additon, the above table.
So, if leucrottas are pretty common in an area, then the DC to identify the creatures would be 11 ... And, the needed skill would be Knowledge (arcana) ... and I doubt that my 1st-level Commoner hunter will have that skill ... Thus, he should not be able to know something about leucrottas ... rules
You see ... I think that a 1st-level Commoner that is a hunter ... not a super skilled one (neither Expert nor Ranger) should be able to identify a leucrotta ... if such creature is common in a given area ... maybe ... |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 19:51:01
|
Actually, I have seen in several adventures, such as the ones published in Dungeon, that multiple knowlage skills might yeild knowlage of something. The most relevant knowlage skill should have a lower DC than something that is only tenouous though.
For example, you may know about magical beasts or monstrous humanoids in a region due to history, nature, etc. If the creature has magical abilites, knowlage, arcana might work, and if the creature has any presense in ruins and underground, knowlage, dungeoneering might work.
Its kind of a pain, due to the fact that its a case by case basis, but you may have to think of what the MAIN knowlage skill that would yeild information is, then think of one or two more that might yeild information and make the DC 5 or 10 higher.
Am I making any sense?
In other words, a leucrotta might actually be better identified with a knowlage, nature check, since it is a bane to the natural order in a given ecosystem (hey, even followers of Malar hate them according to Monsters of Faerun), but since they have some supernatural ablities, someone with knowlage, aracna might figure out about them with a check 5 higher than the knowlage, nature check. |
Edited by - KnightErrantJR on 09 Aug 2005 19:53:12 |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 20:38:28
|
Yes, knowledge about a leucrotta could be gained by two skills, rather than just one. That would make it easier. I think, that I have been "blindfolded" by the entries in the rules 
A leucrotta, from a game mechanism perspective, is a Magical Beast. Then, to get information about a leucrotta, that is, to know the true nature of the leucrotta, Knowledge (arcana) should be used. And the DC could be 16. However, as the leucrotta is also an "animal", Knowledge (nature) should also provide some (limited) information. For example, if the leucrotta is a common beast (animal) in a region, then Knowledge (nature) could be used; the DC could be 10.
Thanks KnightErrantJR! |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
TomCosta
Forgotten Realms Designer
USA
954 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 21:03:25
|
You might also consider giving characters a +2 to their check if they are from the region where the creature is native and another +2 if they have 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (local) in the region. That's a possible +4, which counts for a lot on such a check. Or just let a Knowledge (local) check count as well.
It's quite possible the character has heard of leucrotta, but wouldn't necessarily know how to identify one, particularly if he'd never seen one before. |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 23:01:45
|
Thanks Tom ... +2 circumstance modifiers to skill checks sounds appropiate. I have been focusing on DC, rather than on circumstance bonus, due to the following rule:quote:
Untrained: An untrained Knowledge check is simply an Intelligence check. Without actual training, you know only common knowledge (DC 10 or lower).
So, if leucrottas are common in Daggerdale, Knowledge (nature) skill checks could be rolled towards DC 10. Then, a Daggerdalian farmer (Int 10) with no ranks in Knowledge (nature) would have +2 in his skill check, while a Daggerdalian farmer (Int 10) with one rank in Knowledge (nature) would have +3. And, if in Shadowdale leucrottas are uncommon or rare, with DC 15, then a Shadowdalian farmer without ranks would not be allowed a skill check, while a Shadowdalian farmer (or hunter) with ranks would.
Have I missed something ... |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2005 : 23:03:12
|
| However ... if the Daggerdalian farmer takes a trip to Shadowdale and ... |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 10 Aug 2005 : 08:27:53
|
Another issue, regarding the leucrotta is its Intelligence and the languages it knows. A leucrotta is smarter than my average Daggerdalian farmers! And it speaks Common, Draconic, and Giant.
 Does this meen that a pair of leucrottas could have a discussion about the weather in Common?!?
And, how does it come that this magical beasts speaks those languages?
Maybe, a giant wizard created the leucrottas ... to help him trade with the Chondathans and the Calimshans
Has there been something like "The leucrotta's Ecology" written in a FR product or maybe in a Dragon Magazine issue?
... I really like the smilies ... |
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
Posted - 10 Aug 2005 : 08:51:24
|
 The leucrottas are intelligent creatures! Not, only by what you can read in the stats ...
I found my Elminster's Ecologies (#1111, 1994), and in the booklet The Great Gray Land of Thar, page 11, begins a section about the leucrotta. And, here comes a bit: quote:
I am pleased to say that, by my experience, I have cleared all the scholarly detritus from this issue and have proved conclusively that leucrotta are intelligent, and that they are fully capable of meaningful communication.
|
Link to my homepage: http://user.tninet.se/~bsu242v/ |
|
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
Posted - 10 Aug 2005 : 09:56:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by webmanus
The leucrottas are intelligent creatures! Not, only by what you can read in the stats ...
I found my Elminster's Ecologies (#1111, 1994), and in the booklet The Great Gray Land of Thar, page 11, begins a section about the leucrotta. And, here comes a bit: quote:
I am pleased to say that, by my experience, I have cleared all the scholarly detritus from this issue and have proved conclusively that leucrotta are intelligent, and that they are fully capable of meaningful communication.
What do leucrotta look like? |
If I were a ranger, I would pick NDA for my favorite enemy |
|
|
|
webmanus
Learned Scribe
Sweden
338 Posts |
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Leucrotta
