Goodman Games

Fan Forums
It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:48 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Strength check query
PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:50 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Howdy all. Long time listener, first time caller.

So: I'm reading through People of the Pit, right early on, when the party arrives at the first door cut into the natural rock (I think area 1-4)... The info in the module gives a DC to see if the door can be pushed open (I think DC 14, I don't have it with me). I don't see how, if the PC fails the check, they can't just decide to try again, and basically you end up with a scenario where they'd just keep rolling until the DC is met, which of course would mean that there was no point in having it in the first place.
Now, I'm pretty sure I'm just looking at this the wrong way. Can someone please set me straight on how this works/What is being modelled here?
Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:27 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 pm
Posts: 2282
Location: Left Coast, USA
Don't think of a such a check as "I push once". Think of it as "I'm pushing every-which-way I can to get this thing open". If the roll fails, you just ain't able to push the door open.

Similarly, picking a lock, or any other such 'skill check' would be handled the same way. Just like jumping a ravine... :twisted:

_________________
Gnome Boy (a.k.a. "Jon") • DCC play-tester @ DDC 35, Feb 2011. • Beta DL 2111, 7:00 AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since 1977 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters - Holds the power to play gnomes at will!

Here Be DCC Monsters...

General Yoros, Warrior, Str 13, Agl 8 (10), Stm 17, Per 13, Int 11, Lck 8; Law, HP 39, AC 17, R+2, F+4, W+2, band/shld, warhammer, longsword, longbow, pitchfork

Han Dee, (Weaver) Neutral Thief, Str 10, Agi 13, Stm 11, Per 11, Int 15, Lck 14, AC 13 (Leather), HP 25, Luck Die d6, Backstab 3, Sneak Silently 10, Hide In Shadows 9, Pick Pocket 10, Climb Sheer 10, Pick Lock 9, Find Trap 9, Disable Trap 9, Forge Doc 10, Disguise 3, Read Lang 5, Handle Poison 3, Cast Scroll d14+2, birth augur (Born under the loom) +1 to all skill checks (including thief skills), Banepicks (auto pick lock/disable trap, but lose 1d3 random ability loss, if a 3 then 1 pt is perm)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:50 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Blork. Of course.
It's the "... you just ain't able" that I needed to hear.
Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:06 am 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 2078
Where there is no consequence for failure (apart from failure) I use a "Three Strikes rule". You get three chances; fail the third, and you are unable to do it no matter how hard you try.

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:57 pm 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 2:55 pm
Posts: 91
I haven't fully thought this through, but I personally don't like the idea of strength checks in most situations, especially where it's something like lifting a portcullis or opening a door.

Consider a brawny fighter with 15 str (+1 mod) and a scrawny wizard with 6 str (-1 mod). The fighter strides manfully towards the door to force it open and ... nothing (rolls a 12). The wizard gives a tentative yank with his child-like arms and ... pops it open (rolls a 15).

Huh? If this were an unusual outcome we could come up with alternative explanations. Maybe the fighter loosened it. Maybe the wizard's shortness meant that his shoulder hit just the right place to crack an aging lock.

But if we think through the numbers, we see that it will happen pretty often. On a DC 14 door, the fighter will open it 40% of the time (8 tries out of 20). The wizard 30% (6 tries out of 20). Only a 10% difference between them. Not only that, there are a pretty large number of times when the wizard is the *only* one who can open the door (fighter succeeds 40% of times -- of the remaining 60%, wizard succeeds in 30% of them -- so for any given door there are three possibilities: (1) 40% Fighter opens it [because he's the only one to try], (2) 18% Fighter cannot open it but Wizard can, (3) 42% neither can open). So for nearly 1/5 opportunities the 6 strength guy can muscle through what the 15 strength guy can't!

If we throw in a couple of other party members with average (0 modifier) strength (able to open the door 35% of the time) the situation becomes even weirder.

Any time the party needs a DC14 strength check, the fighter tries first, and it's 40% likely he succeeds. But his buddies, trying in turn, not together, actually have a much better chance of succeeding. The chance that one of them succeeds is over 70% (chance of failure for all three is 29.6% = .65 x .65 x .70). This make little sense in most situations. Say the party is opening a heavy sarcophagus lid. Either you are strong enough to open it or you aren't. It should be incredibly rare that a weak character can open the lid where a strong one can't. If there's only one person in the party that can lift it, it should be the fighter. He's way stronger and can lift heavier things. But using a DC-based strength check we get the opposite result. It's way more likely that one of the weaklings will open it.

I don't know what the answer is here, but it bugs me. Maybe use roll under? Maybe just say that the door requires at least 13 (or whatever) strength to open with raw power, and only give those characters a chance to roll against the DC. Anyone spent as much time thinking about this as I have? I know Judge's discretion can always save the day, but this seems like a situation where the basic mechanic has real problems.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 1:16 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 2078
One solution that I have seen in some GG modules is to allow the Deed Die to add to the Strength check, thus giving warriors and dwarves a real edge.

Otherwise, a minimum Strength coupled with a roll seems like a good idea. It combines the best of both worlds - reducing absurd results while allowing for unknown outcome.

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:54 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Three strikes makes me think of a dad struggling with a lawn-mower in a front yard, getting flustered...
That's neat with the deed die for warriors and dwarves. I like that.

I think I'm most comfortable with: some days you hit ten free-throws in a row, some days you can't string together more than two. Where it becomes one of those instances where the dice informs the player as to their character's behaviour.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:32 pm 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:39 pm
Posts: 73
Location: Transylvania, PA
Technically if you look at a Strength Check as a Skill Check, the warrior or dwarf are probably the only ones who have a hope of wrenching the gate open (unless someone else has a background that supports having a Strength Skill). Page 66 DCC RPG states that if the skill is untrained (i.e. nothing about the character supports the concept of possessing the ability/skill) the PC rolls a d10 for the check. Only those trained in a skill are permitted to touch a d20. So, out of the way with you, Wizard!

In other realms, if a character has at least two minutes free from threats and distractions and there is no penalty for failure, PC's are permitted to "take 20" in place of making a check.

Such characters may instead aid another in their skill check, providing the aide rolls 10 or higher on his check, the effort counts towards a +2 bonus to the actual attempt.

Something to muse.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:09 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 151
I adopted a three-strikes rule after reading about it on the forums (thanks!), but have added the twist that the second and third checks take progressively longer than the first check. E.g. to pick a lock it takes 1 round, 1 turn, then 1 hour; if you can't get it after an hour, you can't get it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:21 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 2078
oncelor wrote:
I adopted a three-strikes rule after reading about it on the forums (thanks!), but have added the twist that the second and third checks take progressively longer than the first check. E.g. to pick a lock it takes 1 round, 1 turn, then 1 hour; if you can't get it after an hour, you can't get it.


I like that. Yoinked!

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:21 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 2078
oncelor wrote:
I adopted a three-strikes rule after reading about it on the forums (thanks!), but have added the twist that the second and third checks take progressively longer than the first check. E.g. to pick a lock it takes 1 round, 1 turn, then 1 hour; if you can't get it after an hour, you can't get it.


I like that. Yoinked!

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:14 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 pm
Posts: 2282
Location: Left Coast, USA
jozxyqk wrote:
I haven't fully thought this through, but I personally don't like the idea of strength checks in most situations, especially where it's something like lifting a portcullis or opening a door....

To what degree would a roll-under mechanic alleviate your concern?

_________________
Gnome Boy (a.k.a. "Jon") • DCC play-tester @ DDC 35, Feb 2011. • Beta DL 2111, 7:00 AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since 1977 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters - Holds the power to play gnomes at will!

Here Be DCC Monsters...

General Yoros, Warrior, Str 13, Agl 8 (10), Stm 17, Per 13, Int 11, Lck 8; Law, HP 39, AC 17, R+2, F+4, W+2, band/shld, warhammer, longsword, longbow, pitchfork

Han Dee, (Weaver) Neutral Thief, Str 10, Agi 13, Stm 11, Per 11, Int 15, Lck 14, AC 13 (Leather), HP 25, Luck Die d6, Backstab 3, Sneak Silently 10, Hide In Shadows 9, Pick Pocket 10, Climb Sheer 10, Pick Lock 9, Find Trap 9, Disable Trap 9, Forge Doc 10, Disguise 3, Read Lang 5, Handle Poison 3, Cast Scroll d14+2, birth augur (Born under the loom) +1 to all skill checks (including thief skills), Banepicks (auto pick lock/disable trap, but lose 1d3 random ability loss, if a 3 then 1 pt is perm)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:59 am 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
oncelor wrote:
I adopted a three-strikes rule after reading about it on the forums (thanks!), but have added the twist that the second and third checks take progressively longer than the first check. E.g. to pick a lock it takes 1 round, 1 turn, then 1 hour; if you can't get it after an hour, you can't get it.


That is neat! Evocative to boot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:51 pm 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:39 pm
Posts: 73
Location: Transylvania, PA
Wait a minute, three strikes and you're out? I thought this was DCC, not baseball. Ironically if you ever have any PC's who attempt to play baseball within the context of a scenario and you apply the time delay between failed attempts, you'll totally annihilate any sensibility you may otherwise conceive using this one. You might as well just ask them to roll d20 and divide by zero. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Fri Aug 01, 2014 5:59 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 151
:D MDoA result of 3 for a home run?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:19 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 pm
Posts: 2282
Location: Left Coast, USA
Zargon wrote:
Wait a minute, three strikes and you're out? I thought this was DCC, not baseball. Ironically if you ever have any PC's who attempt to play baseball within the context of a scenario and you apply the time delay between failed attempts, you'll totally annihilate any sensibility you may otherwise conceive using this one. You might as well just ask them to roll d20 and divide by zero. :wink:


Depends on how you conceive of a roll in your game (and how serious your comment is...). :wink:

For some, the die roll isn't merely one pass of "I try this" (which leads to "I try again" = another roll). It's can you do it or not, period -- in which case extending that to additional attempts, but with time as a trade off seems perfectly reasonable. It costs something to roll again, because otherwise plenty of things would be simply "I keep rolling until I make it" which means the roll in the first place is essentially pointless.

_________________
Gnome Boy (a.k.a. "Jon") • DCC play-tester @ DDC 35, Feb 2011. • Beta DL 2111, 7:00 AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since 1977 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters - Holds the power to play gnomes at will!

Here Be DCC Monsters...

General Yoros, Warrior, Str 13, Agl 8 (10), Stm 17, Per 13, Int 11, Lck 8; Law, HP 39, AC 17, R+2, F+4, W+2, band/shld, warhammer, longsword, longbow, pitchfork

Han Dee, (Weaver) Neutral Thief, Str 10, Agi 13, Stm 11, Per 11, Int 15, Lck 14, AC 13 (Leather), HP 25, Luck Die d6, Backstab 3, Sneak Silently 10, Hide In Shadows 9, Pick Pocket 10, Climb Sheer 10, Pick Lock 9, Find Trap 9, Disable Trap 9, Forge Doc 10, Disguise 3, Read Lang 5, Handle Poison 3, Cast Scroll d14+2, birth augur (Born under the loom) +1 to all skill checks (including thief skills), Banepicks (auto pick lock/disable trap, but lose 1d3 random ability loss, if a 3 then 1 pt is perm)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:16 am 
Offline
Steely-Eyed Heathen-Slayer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 659
Location: Montreal
I like the discussion in this thread.

To me, skill or competence checks (all RPGs considered) are usually way overused by most GMs. Back in the day of AD&D, we rarely asked for checks. Since I've played D&D 3E, rolemaster, Call of Cthulhu and other skill-heavy systems, skill checks became very frequent. I think that's too bad.

To me, it's important to consider when to require a skill check, and especially when not to ask for a skill check.

When the strong warrior wants to open the lid of a sarcophagus, consider whether the lid is openable or not. If so, just let it be opened, stating: "the wizard is unable to open it, but when the warrior puts his weight into it, he's able to get it to move, and then open." Similarly, when the agile character needs to accomplish a manual task that requires dexterity, let him simply succeed.

This is desirable from many angles IMO. Firstly, it allows the PC to shine in area in which he is good. Secondly, everyone wants him to succeed from the time he gets the idea: the players and the GM alike. The reason is simple: it moves the story forward.

I think that use of skill checks for those actions that appear to have an intermediate difficulty level are way overused. I think that GM fiat is a better decision in most cases. In the case of the sarcophagus, one of the following would be my answer:

Option 1: "the strong warrior puts all his strength into pushing the heavy lid and it yields, revealing ..."
Option 2: "the strong warrior puts all his strength into pushing the heavy lid, but it won't budge. You could conceivably put some time, for example an hour or two, into chipping at the stone with your weapons and tools, until you manage to break the lid open or release it from its welded or locked condition."
Option 3: "the strong warrior puts all his strength into pushing the heavy lid, but it won't budge. You have the impression that it is a very sturdy construction, made of fine stone and locked very securely. Even by using your weapons and tools, you don't think you'll be able to get it to open - unless perhaps you're willing to put an entire day's work on it?"

Because really: what kind of sarcophagus will simply NEVER be opened by a group of people with tools? It's mostly a question of how much time it will take. Except perhaps one magically proptected, in which case an answer in that direction should be considered. Alternately, if the PCs don't have tools, e.g. level-0 PCs, perhaps the sarcophagus can simply not be opened, period (unless they come up with a good idea - nothing to do with a skill check). It's like a PC standing in front of a heavy, reinforced raised castle draw bridge. He'll never get through that by pounding into it, no matter how much time he has. Besieging a castle takes days or weeks, with a group of people equipped with a heavy ram handled by a dozen men: the single warrior with his axe will not break it. So there are those things that will simply resist.

Also, in cases 2 or 3 above, maybe the thief will get the idea to try to find a lock (if there is one and it wasn't obvious) and unlock the lid; or maybe they come up with some other idea (e.g. a spell). There are other solutions.

This said, where a skill check is to be used, I'll usually allow a single one and tell the player what it means. For example, in the case of picking a lock, I assume that it takes a couple of minutes to pick the lock. Either the thief is able to pick it, or not. A single roll is allowed. Failure means he won't be able to pick it, no matter how much time he tries. A result way over the DC or tartget number might mean he succeeds more quickly. If I consider that he'll succeed if he spends enough time on it, I might tell him so, but allow a skill check to see if he's able to succeed within a short time period or not.

I'll note that I've used the roll-under mechanic in DCC a lot. THe dice chain is very characteristic of the game, and very fun to use, to adjust the difficulty level. And the roll-under mechanic is more recognizing of the more talented character.

I'll also note that allowing several skill checks, for each character, is pointless in many circumstances, where a single common task is to be accomplished, since at least one PC will get it. For example, say you want to break down a normal door; and there are 10 characters present. What's the point in asking them to roll 3 strength checks each? Of course, one will get it. I prefer to get them used to putting their strong character to the task and simply lettting him succeed. It makes more sense and we don't lose time rolling pointless skill checks.

Likewise, asking a bunch of 10 characters for one or more stealth checks to get through an area unnoticed, is also pointless. At least one will fail. I'll simply let them know from the outset that it's likely that they'll get spotted. And if they insist on trying, I'll tell them that they get spotted.

Where a group wants to try something and I still think a skill check is required, I'll usually ask one check for the entire group. I'll decide on which character gets to roll the check depending on the situation. For example, if a stealth check is required to determine whether a group gets through an area unnoticed, I'll usually ask the worst character for the roll, perhaps providing a small bonus if a skilled character is there to lead.

In any event, I avoid having everyone roll a die. To me, that mechanic is simply letting the dice decide who's going to succeed or fail. It's a loss of time and an illusion within the game: it's clear to everyone that success or failure will occur, but the story remains the same. I'd rather that the story be about the strong character being able to accomplish something that requires strenght, instead of the weakling breaking down the door where the strong warrior failed; or about the agile thief remaining silent instead of tripping on his shoelaces while the warrior in heavy plate mail was stealthy as a cat because of his natural 20. There comes a point where the random d20 roll completely overcasts any small bonuses that the characters have because of natural talent or competence and, as noted above, this does not reflect reality IMO. I prefer to simply tell the story about that very small action and get on with it.

I'll use skill checks when I'm unsure whether the action should be successful or not, e.g.:

- there is a large hole to jump over: anyone can jump a 6-foot gap, but can the character make it over a 15 foot gap?
- there is a bit of knowledge that might give insight on a situation: do the PCs know it or not? I'll pick one PC, one that might logically know about his, and let him roll a die.
- a PC wishes to accomplish something in a short time period where he'd succeed given enough time

But generally, I try to determine success based on whether the PC is good enough at doing it or not and avoid rollling a skill check. They still roll a few times per gaming session!

(pfew, this was long!)

_________________
Maledict Brothbreath, level 4 warrior, STR 16 (+2) AGI 7 (-1) STA 12 PER 9 INT 10 LUCK 15 (+1), AC: 16 Refl: +1 Fort: +2 Will: +1; lawful; Armor of the Lion and Lily's Blade.

Brother Sufferus, level 4 cleric, STR 13 (+1) AGI 15 (+1) STA 11 PER 13 (+1) INT 10 LUCK 9, AC: 11 (13 if wounded, 15 if down to half hit points), Refl: +3 Fort: +2 Will: +3, chaotic, Robe of the Faith, Scourge of the Maimed One, Darts of Pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Tue Aug 05, 2014 7:44 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 151
I agree that 3e had too many skill checks, but I still like the basic mechanism, they can add a real sense of drama. However, I don't really have stories that need to "move forward." If there is a sarcophagus with a heavy lid, and the characters need to open the lid to get the thing to stop the monster, if they can't open the lid, then the story becomes that they failed to open the lid and they didn't stop the monster, or that now they have to find some other way to stop the monster or some other way to open the lid. I've played in campaigns that had stories-that-must-be-accomplished but I don't enjoy that as much as stories that grow organically from the stuff that happens during the game. You write to decide "whether the lid is openable" but as a Judge I kind of enjoy not knowing whether they're going to be able to get the lid open.... it keeps me in suspense of how the story is going to turn out, and I enjoy that much more than knowing how everything should end and then making sure that happens.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:44 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:59 am
Posts: 127
Also you could set a minimun stat requirement to even attempt it. Either let a person who has the requisite stat amount auto complete it or only let those characters make an attempt. That way you keep out the weakling mage but you dont knockdown the buff Fabio mage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Strength check query
PostPosted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:57 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:55 pm
Posts: 151
I guess I should add that I don't believe in skill checks for every little thing. There are plenty of things that I just let the party open, find if they look for it, jump if they try to jump over it, etc. When there is something tricky, I prefer rolling for it over having minimum stat requirements simply because I do enjoy not knowing whether they'll be able to do-the-thing or not.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group