Skip to Content

Ideas Needed: ancient mythology themed card game

13 replies [Last post]
Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010

A few years ago, my son and I developed a card game as a school project. Recently, I decided to dust it off and continue playtesting to see if it is worth pursuing publishing. The game is decent, and the kids I've been playing with enjoy it, but it isn't firing on all cylinders. I know real art would help, but I think it needs some changes on the mechanics. Anyway, below is a description of the game. Any and all fresh ideas are appreciated.

Pantheon
54 cards, 4 suits with 12 cards each, 6 suit-less, value-less cards called "Tribute to the Gods"
Each suit represents a pantheon of ancient gods (Roman, Greek, Norse, and Egyptian)
Each suit has cards valued 0 to 10, with two cards valued at 5.

Each round starts with six cards dealt to each player. Each turn starts with the player drawing the top card of the deck or taking the top card from the discard pile. The player then discards one card and play passes clockwise.

At the end of each round, the players lay their cards down and can collect the points from any cards they have from one of the four pantheons. First player to 100 with the highest score wins.

Each suit has four cards with special rules text:
The 0 value cards are detrimental. If you discard a 0 point card you must either lose five points or suffer a negative effect the rest of the round. (Example: Lose 5 points or play the remainder of the round with your hand face up)
The 1 value cards give an additional benefit if they are part of the player's final pantheon. (Example: You may add the value of your lowest card from a different pantheon to your score this round)
The 3 value cards are the "End Round" cards. If you discard a "Tribute to the Gods" card you can then reveal an "End Round" card to immediately end the round. Each "End Round" card also has a special effect on the scoring of the round. (Example: Roman 3 can end the round and if it does, all non-Roman Pantheons receive -3 to their total)
One of the two 5 value cards in each suit gives a beneficial effect when it is discarded. (Example: When you discard this card, draw a card off the top of the deck and give it to one of the players. Repeat this until each player has received one, and only one, card)

We've played a few variations, sometimes with cards that can just end the round right away, and we've moved into discarding the otherwise worthless Tribute cards in order to "activate" the "End Round" cards. Rounds can sometimes end very quickly, sometimes go on for quite a while. Games are averaging five rounds and taking about 1/2 hour. I would like to cut play time to about 20 minutes. The game should be accessible for children 7 or 8+.

Thanks in advance for any and all help.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I would re-think

Jonsan wrote:
*Snip* The game should be accessible for children 7 or 8+. *Snip*

I would strongly advise against targeting a game towards children... It is hard to get children interested in a game - for many reasons. One is obviously Video Games. Having said this, I have tried to market a Collectible Card Game for children and it has been a very difficult task.

Children are attracted by Television and Cartoons. You need to be in that space if you want to get marketing for your game. Therefore there needs to be a story around the characters in your game. If you have characters and a story, then maybe kids will recognize your *Branding*. If they recognize your branding, then they will tell parents they want such and such a game. It's the same when we were young, on television you had Transformers and He-Man. We wanted toys (and games) about them both...

Take Pokemon. It is selling well in CCG form because every kid has watched the Cartoon on Television. They have tournaments, chase card, etc. The have plush stuffed animals and other Pokemon *World* toys. Not to mention Video Games which go a long way to promote the Pokemon brand.

The other problem is that children DO NOT HAVE MONEY. No money means Mom or Dad needs to buy the game. How do they decide? Well a GOOD clue is Pokemon. Parent's also know the brand - why? Because kids ASK FOR IT... I want this Pokemon toy or this Pokemon Video game, etc.

I am now targeting my efforts towards a Mature crowd: one that has money to spend and enjoy play board games.

That is my two cents.

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
Definitely good food for

Definitely good food for thought. I'm not actually marketing the game to children, but the game needs to be playable for that age range. The game is designed to be edutainment-ish. Each card represents a god or significant event from the mythologies represented, and most of them include a little flavor text giving some context from a story about that god. That part of the game has been pretty successful. The kids tend to start asking questions about the gods named on the cards, and that is without any art or the flavor text. We homeschool my son, so it started as a end of the year project for history. My goal is to make a game that appeals to families wanting an educational game and is also a casual card game with a fun theme.

MarkKreitler
MarkKreitler's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2008
Glad you're going for it!

Jonsan wrote:
Definitely good food for thought.

*snip*

My goal is to make a game that appeals to families wanting an educational game and is also a casual card game with a fun theme.

I agree with Quest that it's hard to get kids interested, but I think you're right to try. My son and daughter enjoy card games like Uno, Qwitch, and Guillotine (with my son, who is 9).

And anyone who home schools *and* integrates games into the mix has my admiration and respect. So, with that in mind, here are a few thoughts on the design:

1st, the central goal is easy to grasp: score the most points. Same goes for the basic rules: draw one, discard one, score one suit at the end of the round. With these, you've established a strong core.

Unfortunately, the "first player to 100 points" means your playing time will scale with the number of players. If you want to keep the game to ~20 minutes in all cases, you may need to adopt a goal based on the size of the deck. For instance, play until the draw pile is exhausted, and the player with the most points wins.

On a related note, the current mechanic for ending the round seems forced, but that's probably because I'm not understanding the context. Why do you need the round to end arbitrarily? If it's to inject strategy, is that level of strategy something 7 & 8 year olds appreciate. For example, some kids like playing special cards because it makes them feel powerful, even if the effect isn't strategically useful at that point in the game.

I love the idea of "tribute" and hope you can make it worth something or otherwise keep it in the game.

The simplicity of your specials is great, but in some cases, the effects don't create interesting choices. For instance, specials seem to have low value, so I always want to discard them -- except for 0, which I'm punished both for holding and for discarding.

Both Uno and Guillotine separate the "special abilities" from the "points," which makes the game easier to understand. It also makes the game automatically "self correcting" -- if I'm holding a lot of points, I can get a good score; conversely, if I'm holding a lot of specials, I can manipulate the game in my favor.

I don't want this to become a wall of text, so I'll stop here and post a follow-up. To summarize my thoughts so far:

-- Great core rules: clear goal, easy play mechanics
-- Great theme and interesting keywords like "tribute"
-- End-of-round mechanic feels too complex
-- Game time scales with number of players -- need a different end condition?
-- Tying specials to values complicates rules; if you're going to do it, specials should go with higher values to create interesting choices

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
Thanks for the feedback. The

Thanks for the feedback. The way I used Tributes most recently (as a way to end the round) felt frustrating during the last play-test. In reviewing tonight, I am considering having the Tribute cards let a player put one of their cards down on the table face-up and draw a new card. Basically, it would increase hand size by pre-playing one of the Pantheon.

I agree that the end of round mechanic isn't intuitive. That has been the hardest part of the game to integrate into play. I don't want to require the round end when the deck is dry because that would make for long rounds. I am still a little stumped on this part.

The way the special cards create choices is as follows:
The special 5 value cards provide an immediate benefit when discarded, but you lose the 5 value card and the next player could pick it up. All of the 5 value specials involve the discarding player either adding cards to everyone's hands or destroying a card from everyone's hand.

The special 1 value card can create extra points at the end of the round, but how many points is somewhat random. Here are the rules for them:
Egyptian 1 (Sphinx): Add one Egyptian card from the discard pile to your final pantheon
Norse 1 (Loki): Add the value of your lowest non-Norse card to your score this round.
Greek 1 (Iris): Look at the top 4 cards of the deck. You may pick one Greek card among them to put in your pantheon.
Roman 1 (Venus): Take one Roman card from another player's Pantheon. That player takes one non-Roman card from you.
So keeping a 1 point card in hand may reduce your score, but it could also result in significant extra points.

The 0 value cards clog up your hand with a worthless card. Discarding them requires you to either lose 5 points or suffer a penalty during the round. The four penalties are playing the round with your hand face up (Greek), not being able to take the top card from discard on your turn (Egyptian), not being able to discard anything with lower value then the top card of the discard pile (Norse), and letting the other players "go fish" from your hand by naming a value (Roman).

I'm not sure what you mean by separating value from special effect. Would that involve putting the effects on higher value cards or removing the value from the special effect cards?

In playing with my 6 and 12 year-old sons, they are able to understand the special effects and have spent time considering their choices when using them. I am starting to play more with other kids now, so hopefully I can get a sense of how the complexity impacts play. I am also having some adults come to playtest soon. I want to make the game appealing to adults as a casual card game, and appealing to kids with the theme and non-standard mechanics.

Thanks for the input. Please keep it coming.

MarkKreitler
MarkKreitler's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2008
Round two!

Hey Jonsan,

Thanks for the further explanation. It helps a lot.

And I hope I didn't come across as critical of the game. I think it's a great idea with a solid core. I've never come up with a game with such a clean rule set.

On the subject of card choices, I may have misunderstood the rules. Here's what I was thinking, and you can correct me as necessary:

If I gain the end-round benefit from discarding a 1, why would I ever choose to keep it? Even with a random value added to my hand at the end of the round, I'm nearly assured to get something more than '1', so it's always the best strategy to discard it.

Zero is painful. I'd recommend trying a game without it to see what happens. Some kids become demoralized quickly in those circumstances. I do love the penalties, though. Have you tried a variation where discarding zero affects *all* players? Then no one feels put upon. It might be interesting to have "tribute" cards undo the effects of the last "zero."

Five provides an interesting choice. Keep the mid-level card or use it to help yourself, but possibly help others? Great!

On the subject of complexity, if your kids are handling it, then disregard my comments. I think my son would be fine. My daughter might find the rules too hard to track -- but maybe not. You'll know soon enough, either way, as you get other kids involved.

Regarding ending the round, have you tried this: allow a player to "go out" as soon as he holds all cards of one suit? In this model, you could make the "tribute" cards wild. When a player goes out, everyone scores his hand immediately. You could maybe add some abilities to the higher-value cards to remove cards from your hand or add them to someone else's. Then players have to risk the loss of that card with the benefit it provides. The game would end when the deck is dry, and the player with the most points wins.

EDIT: by "go out," I mean, "end the round." In other words, the round continues until one player holds a hand of all one suit, at which time everyone scores his hand and a new round begins.

Oh, and finally, here's what I meant by separating special abilities from values. Keep the numbered cards as-is, but move the special abilities onto new cards with no value. Think "Uno." Not sure it's a good fit for your game -- just tossing it out there.

Hope some of this is of use.

Mark

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
No worries at all, I want

No worries at all, I want critical. I'm in need of some fresh eyes, so your feedback is much appreciated.

The 1 value cards' special effect activates when it is included in the player's pantheon at the end of the round, not when the 1 value card is discarded. So if you keep the 1 value card you are using up one card in your hand on a card worth only 1 point, but you stand a chance of gaining extra points from its effect.

I've only played twice with the 0 valued cards so far. My son and his friend didn't get upset by them, but I know exactly what you mean about demoralizing kids in a game. One of the round ending cards destroys everyone's highest value card and that one has prompted some hollering, so it might need to go. I want to playtest the 0 value cards more before I decide either way.

I had considered the idea of ending the round when a player has cards of all one suit, but I thought it would lead to one player establishing to much of a lead. Using the Tribute cards as wilds that do not increase the score is a great idea though. I will certainly try that next. I can switch up the "end round" cards and give those some other ability to keep variety in the game.

Currently, at the end of a round the scores are totaled and then all cards are shuffled, new six card hands are dealt, and a new round starts. Am I right that you are suggesting not reshuffling the played cards before starting a new round and then just playing until no cards remain in the deck?

Thanks again for the responses, you've really helped me work through my mental block on this one.

MarkKreitler
MarkKreitler's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2008
I get it, now

Jonsan wrote:
The 1 value cards' special effect activates when it is included in the player's pantheon at the end of the round, not when the 1 value card is discarded.
.

Makes perfect sense, now. Can't believe I didn't get it right away...

Jonsan wrote:
I want to playtest the 0 value cards more before I decide either way.

In general, I like the idea of the 0s. I'm sure you'll find a way to keep them in. One other thought I had was to give them a "shoot-the-moon" style mechanic. For instance, you only get the negative effect if you play the *least* zeros in one turn. That way, you can unload them at the risk of someone else being able to unload more and stick you with the negative. There might be some hollering over that, though.

Jonsan wrote:
I had considered the idea of ending the round when a player has cards of all one suit, but I thought it would lead to one player establishing to much of a lead. Using the Tribute cards as wilds that do not increase the score is a great idea though.

I know what you mean about the player who "goes out" getting too big a lead. Even without the wilds, though, I think it might be OK. I was more worried that getting a "flush" might take too long, which is where the wilds come in handy. Another way to help this is to allow players to discard first, then draw at the end of their turn. If they can "go out" with 4 cards, it'll take less time to get the flush.

Jonsan wrote:
I can switch up the "end round" cards and give those some other ability to keep variety in the game.

Sounds like a great idea. The specials so far have good zing.

Jonsan wrote:
Am I right that you are suggesting not reshuffling the played cards before starting a new round and then just playing until no cards remain in the deck?

Yes, but I'm only suggesting that to keep the game time independent of the number of players. It could be that it takes 2 or 3 play-throughs of the deck to hit the 20-minute mark.

Jonsan wrote:
Thanks again for the responses, you've really helped me work through my mental block on this one.

My pleasure. Glad to help. I'm sure you'll get to return the favor soon...

Mark

Robinson
Offline
Joined: 08/27/2012
interesting game idea

Cool ideas, here are a few thoughts I had after reading your description and some of the comments.

In terms of the 0 cards, another option that keeps the penalty but dilutes the pain might be a version of hot potato, whoever plays the last 0 gets the penalty. You could either have a token that the player gets, or to keep it simple, the 0 gets discarded in front of you and doesn't get placed on the discard pile until the next zero is played.

I really like how you've themed the cards, in response to some of Mark's comments about Pokemon etc, what about having "expansion" suits that use different mythologies as their base? Coyote as a Native American example of a trickster or Puck as an English one, plus all the fun asian varieties (kitsune is a possibility for the Japanese). Each game you can include 4 of your X suits and the expandable/collectible nature might make it a little more appealing to publishers as well as parents who want to expose their kids to lots of different cultures and traditions.

The tribute cards as wilds seems reasonable to me, but I do like the strategic element of trying to end the game at a certain point if you think you have an advantage. Perhaps instead of having to trash a tribute to end the game, you have to trash a card with a value greater than 5 to end the round early, otherwise whoever gets the "flush" first ends the round. That gives you the option of ending it early, keeps competition for high value off-suit cards a little higher, but isn't as hard to reach as getting the 6 tribute cards.

In terms of scaling the game to a larger or smaller number of people, I think adjusting your point target would be the simplest way to tweak that. For example, if it is taking you 5 rounds to hit 100 pts with 4 players, the winner is averaging 20pts/round. Using that as a rough guide (more players or other changes might dilute winning scores), dropping the number of points needed to win based on the number of people you could set a 5 player game at 80pts and a 6 player game at 60 and probably keep the total game length close to its current time.

Good luck!

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
Pantheon update/response

Robinson wrote:

...might be a version of hot potato, whoever plays the last 0 gets the penalty. You could either have a token that the player gets, or to keep it simple, the 0 gets discarded in front of you...

This was actually the initial concept for the detrimental cards. I couldn't figure out an elegant way to handle the hot-potato version of the cards in play, but I'd be keen to find a way. Hmmm, maybe once they are down the next person to discard a card from that culture gets the "potato".

Robinson wrote:
I really like how you've themed the cards, in response to some of Mark's comments about Pokemon etc, ...what about having "expansion" suits that use different mythologies as their base?

Absolutely. I may be working with a small game publisher to Kickstart this game if it is good enough. Stretch goals would include expansions using different cultures and mythologies. I was thinking Indian and Eastern, but I really like the Native American idea. I want to be careful not to alienate cultures still around. Using ancient cultures provided some safety, but I think the number of easily understandable ancient cultures is probably limited.

Robinson wrote:
...gives you the option of ending it early, keeps competition for high value off-suit cards a little higher, but isn't as hard to reach as getting the 6 tribute cards.

One of the earlier iterations had four different "End Round" cards which could only be used if you discarded one of two certain valued cards. We played a few games today using the idea of playing through the whole deck rather than scoring after each round and playing for a certain score. I liked that dynamic but both of my sons said they preferred scoring after each round.

Robinson wrote:
...I think adjusting your point target would be the simplest way to tweak that.

Yeah, I see lots of flexibility there. Another way to create a firmer time limit would be to play a certain number of rounds and the highest score wins.

Today, as we played the alternate format, we tried the deck with 3 "Tribute to the Gods" cards and 3 "Sacrifice to the Gods" cards. Both could be used as a point-less wild card, but they each had a discard effect. If you discard a Tribute card you got to instantly add one card from hand to your Pantheon (this would need to be tweaked if we return to the deck reset for each round), and if you discard a Sacrifice card you got to destroy one card from your hand and draw a card. I thought both of these effects were fun and added some interesting but simple choices to the gameplay.

MarkKreitler
MarkKreitler's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2008
Hot potato and other thoughts

Jonsan wrote:
Robinson wrote:

...might be a version of hot potato, whoever plays the last 0 gets the penalty. You could either have a token that the player gets, or to keep it simple, the 0 gets discarded in front of you...

This was actually the initial concept for the detrimental cards. I couldn't figure out an elegant way to handle the hot-potato version of the cards in play, but I'd be keen to find a way. Hmmm, maybe once they are down the next person to discard a card from that culture gets the "potato".

[/quote]

I'm confused again. I thought the intent *was* that whoever played the 0 got the penalty. If that's the case, wouldn't it be easy just to "discard" the 0 in front of you and leave it there until someone else played a 0 in front of him? Then you could flip the old 0 into the discard pile.

Jonsan, your reply to Robinson implies you wanted the "hot potato" penalty to move around after someone played the 0? If that's the case, why not just have it be a *real* hot potato: when the player who has it ends his turn, he gives it to someone else. You would keep the "play the 0 in front of the player" rule, then move the zero around the table until a new 0 was played or someone "cleared" it with a tribute card or similar special.

Seems like this could lead to long stretches of the game played at a disadvantage for someone. Might make the zeros too dominant.

Jonsan wrote:
Robinson wrote:
...gives you the option of ending it early, keeps competition for high value off-suit cards a little higher, but isn't as hard to reach as getting the 6 tribute cards.

One of the earlier iterations had four different "End Round" cards which could only be used if you discarded one of two certain valued cards. We played a few games today using the idea of playing through the whole deck rather than scoring after each round and playing for a certain score. I liked that dynamic but both of my sons said they preferred scoring after each round.

I agree with Robinson's point about strategically ending the round early, but I think discarding a single high-value card might be too easy? Your "End Round" cards solve that nicely, but feel a bit too specific, given that most of your cards serve two purposes. An alternative would be to allow for occasional larger discards, reducing the number of cards required to make a flush. Your "sacrifice" cards, for example, destroy a card. If you allow discard *before* draw, I could do something like this:

Start my turn with 5 cards
1) Discard
2) Sacrifice
Now I hold 3, and only need a 3-card "flush" to end the round.

Alternatively, you could expand the discard rules a bit, something like: at the start of the turn, players may discard any single card or any pair of matching value. That would allow me to do a play like:

Start with 5,
Discard a pair
Sacrifice
Score the remaining pair

Jonsan wrote:
Robinson wrote:
...I think adjusting your point target would be the simplest way to tweak that.

Yeah, I see lots of flexibility there. Another way to create a firmer time limit would be to play a certain number of rounds and the highest score wins.

The "fixed round" solution is a great middle ground between my "once through the deck" and Robinson's "points adjusted for player count" solutions. Once through the deck doesn't give you much control over the length of the game, unless you want to fiddle with the deck size. It's only advantage is it's easy to know when you're done (don't have to keep track of how many rounds played).

Having adjusted point totals is probably the most intuitive for players. Unfortunately, tweaking point totals doesn't control variability very well, because low-scoring games still take longer than high-scoring games. Also, players have to know, or look up, the variable point totals, which is effectively a set of rules instead of a single one.

Jonsan wrote:
Today, as we played the alternate format, we tried the deck with 3 "Tribute to the Gods" cards and 3 "Sacrifice to the Gods" cards. Both could be used as a point-less wild card, but they each had a discard effect. If you discard a Tribute card you got to instantly add one card from hand to your Pantheon (this would need to be tweaked if we return to the deck reset for each round), and if you discard a Sacrifice card you got to destroy one card from your hand and draw a card. I thought both of these effects were fun and added some interesting but simple choices to the gameplay.

Those sound like great additions. Are you planning a "print and play" release?

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
More Pantheon

MarkKreitler wrote:

I'm confused again...Jonsan, your reply to Robinson implies you wanted the "hot potato" penalty to move around after someone played the 0?

The idea went through a few stages. I'm thinking now of having 0 value cards in each suit that have a detrimental effect when discarded, and a 3 or 4 value "hot-potato" card that you can play on another player when you discard it.

MarkKreitler wrote:

I agree with Robinson's point about strategically ending the round early, but I think discarding a single high-value card might be too easy? Your "End Round" cards solve that nicely, but feel a bit too specific, given that most of your cards serve two purposes. An alternative would be to allow for occasional larger discards...

The ability to pre-play cards with Tribute and destroy cards with Sacrifice worked well as a way to get a flush. The discard pairs idea is good and if the rounds are lasting too long during our next playtest I will add that rule in.

MarkKreitler wrote:

Those sound like great additions. Are you planning a "print and play" release?

Thanks, and I don't know yet. If we fund it through KS I think it will depend on how much we raise. DriveThruRPG is starting DriveThruCards in January, so that is one possibility (haven't seen their sample cards yet). If we get more capital we could probably get a small-ish run of 2000 to 3000 made, but I would need to see evidence of sufficient demand to go that route. Short story long, PnP is likely if we use a PoD sales model, but it would also depend on how the art and design turns out. That all depends on the game being consistently fun, of course.

Jonsan
Offline
Joined: 02/09/2010
I need some more ideas, I

I need some more ideas, I think. Here's where the latest:

The 5 value cards and the 1 value cards seem pretty balanced and their effect on gameplay is fun.

We are now scoring after each round and reshuffling the whole deck before the next round. Games are still to 100, but I am timing our games so I can see normal length with various numbers of players.

When discarded, the Sacrifice cards let you discard an additional card. The 3 value cards of each suit also let you get rid of an additional card, but each in a different way (destroy, discard, top of deck, and give to another player).

When discarded, the 0 value cards stay face up in front of the player and have a negative game effect. I also want that player to be able to move them to a new player by meeting a certain condition. I need some more ideas for possible negative effects and ways to move them to the new player. Here's my ideas so far:

Roman - Play with hand face up
Norse - Discard at random on your turn, move by skipping a turn
Greek
Egyptian - Cannot take the top discard on your turn, move by discarding a card with same value as the top card of the discard pile

I'm thinking the 0 value cards might be too complex, but I'd like to playtest them a few times and find out. We tried a version with more cards that could not be discarded, but it just slowed the game down and made it frustrating. Any thoughts on the 0 value cards are much appreciated.

MarkKreitler
MarkKreitler's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2008
More brainstorming

Jonsan wrote:

*snip*

I need some more ideas for possible negative effects and ways to move them to the new player. Here's my ideas so far:

Roman - Play with hand face up
Norse - Discard at random on your turn, move by skipping a turn
Greek
Egyptian - Cannot take the top discard on your turn, move by discarding a card with same value as the top card of the discard pile

I'm thinking the 0 value cards might be too complex, but I'd like to playtest them a few times and find out. We tried a version with more cards that could not be discarded, but it just slowed the game down and made it frustrating. Any thoughts on the 0 value cards are much appreciated.

Ideas for getting rid of 0 cards:
Discarding a card of the same suit
Sacrificing a card of the same suit
Retrieving a card of matching suit from the discard pile
Playing a sacrifice without the usual additional card (you're using it to get rid of the 0, instead)
Any "special ability" used
Any "special ability" of the same suit used

I think you're right about the complexity of the 0 value cards, but, as you've said, only play-testing will tell. Have you considered giving the 0s the same power, but differentiate them by suit? For example:

Cannot take top discard if suit matches the 0.
Cannot use special abilities on cards of the same suit.
Cannot "go out" on the zero's suit.
Must discard in the same suit, otherwise, draw 2 cards.

One random thoughts: suppose you can't go out on the zero's suit. In that case, you could move the zero by playing the flush in its suit. In other words, if you could win in the zero's suit, you would move the zero instead, then draw back up to 5. Dunno...seems arbitrary and overly punitive, but in the spirit of brainstorming, I'm tossing it out there.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut