Jump to content



Photo

The state of our Hobby


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#21 jadrax

jadrax

    Member

  • Members
  • 369 posts

Posted 30 August 2009 - 08:21 AM

There are lots of complicated issues all rolled into one. As the wheel turns, books and televison become less popular, radio and the internet become stronger, companies founded on an old model of dominated distribution are eaten into both by criminal and non-criminal endevours. Tastes change, broaden and widen and the economy of scale return less and less. Print of Demand and PDF awaken like tiger cubs knowing their fleeting days of kings of the media jungle will come. Freely distributed news and opinion by unpaid amatures compeate with profesionals in who is the most effective at bringing goverments down.

In a world where they think you will son be able to capture any image just by forming your thumbs and index fingers into a square, data will increasingly become an avalanch no-one can dam.



#22 Matt in the Hat

Matt in the Hat

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 30 August 2009 - 08:33 AM

As a one time independant video games developer, I can attest to the impact of piracy on your sales - as much as people want to justify downloading and fully enjoying games, movies, tv shows, music, books etc. just because they occasionally actually pay for one doesn't mean that people aren't losing a lot of money to pirates. A friend of mine just released a game that he worked on for some time on Steam (game is called 'Raycatcher' - check it out!) and while he made some money, (he sold about 1000 copies in his first day on Steam, not too bad) it had been illegally downloaded 35000 times over just 1 day. Obviously people were interested in the game, and yeah, maybe a small percentage of them wanted to download it to 'evaluate' it (although that is what the demo is for....) with the intent of eventually buying it, but most just enjoyed the months of hard work without paying a dime. I can tell you, it really sucks having to lay off great employees because your game is being pirated so many times.

Anyways, rant off.

As for the actual topic of the post, I think D&D 4e is eclipsing everything because they have done a major overhaul of the system, really polished a lot of rules and mechanics, made it much more accessible, and combined it with a huge marketing spend. Like the new mechanics or not, I have yet to see another system put forth the same effort.

I think people don't necessarily realize that if you just keep putting out slight variations of the same game, people won't buy it because they already own that game - they bought the (nearly identical) version that came out years ago. Sure you could continue to publish supplemetary materials, but at some point people get to a saturation level where they have more content than they can get through, so they don't need to buy any more of those books either - then you have an ideal consumer, a RPG enthusiast, who has money to spend, but is simply not interested in buying more stuff, even though he loves the system. That is pretty bad business. The only way to really make money is to shake it up once in a while - take some risks, maybe piss of some hardcore purist fans, but win over new customers and sell a whole new set of core books, supplements etc. to those that would like something a bit different from what they were used to.

I think WFRP 3rd edition is looking to do just that - take the same kind of leap that D&D4 did - sure, maybe some people won't like it, but it is a risk that could pay off hugely. I'd rather companies take risks and sometimes get a gem out of it than play it conservative and ultimately fade away.



#23 Emirikol

Emirikol

    ~Ĉiam subskribi antaŭ-nup kun Fimir

  • Members
  • 5,094 posts

Posted 30 August 2009 - 09:26 AM

Varnias Tybalt said:

No, piracy is hardly the issue. There is yes to be presented any substantiated proof that piracy harms any given market. 

Surely you're not that naive.  Piracy is  a HUGE blow to game companies.  If WotC found it needful to be addressed, then imagine what it does to smaller companies.  Piracy CANNOT be justified as anything other than sheer theft.

 

ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/

 

WIZARDS OF THE COAST SUES EIGHT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Contact: Tolena Thorburn
Wizards of the Coast LLC
425-204-8011
tolena.thorburn@Wizards.com.

April 6, 2009 — Wizards of the Coast LLC today filed three lawsuits in US District Court for the Western District of Washington against eight individuals, including named defendants located in the United States, Poland and the Philippines, for copyright infringement of its recently-released Dungeons & Dragons® Player’s Handbook® 2. The lawsuits allege that the defendants illegally distributed the Player’s Handbook 2 via free file-sharing websites and that these illicit uploads resulted in a substantial number of lost sales and lost revenue to Wizards of the Coast.

“Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only Wizards of the Coast’s financial health but also the health of whole gaming community including retailers and players,” said Greg Leeds, President of Wizards of the Coast. “We have brought these suits to stop the illegal activities of these defendants, and to deter future unauthorized and unlawful file-sharing.”

The complaint alleges, among other things, that one or more of the defendants purchased digital copies of Player’s Handbook 2 and then illegally posted the copies onto popular file-sharing sites for free access and download by the general public.

About Wizards

Wizards of the Coast is the leader in entertaining the lifestyle gamer. The company holds an exclusive patent on trading card games (TCGs) and their method of play and produces the premier trading card game, MAGIC: THE GATHERING®, among many other trading card games and family card and board games. Wizards is also a leading publisher of roleplaying games, such as DUNGEONS & DRAGONS®, and publisher of fantasy series fiction with numerous New York Times best-sellers. For more information, visit the Wizards of the Coast website at www.wizards.com.

Wizards of the Coast, Dungeons & Dragons, Player’s Handbook, and Magic: The Gathering are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries. © 2009 Wizards
 

 



#24 Nullius

Nullius

    Member

  • Members
  • 167 posts

Posted 30 August 2009 - 09:21 PM

Perhaps I'm simply ill-informed, but I was pleasantly surprised to see Dark Heresy as number 2 on the list (beating out white wolf, at that!). Even if the sales for DH are low, its still proven to be a great success with old hands and new players. The Black Library is probably kicking themselves for letting that little bit of profit go. As far as piracy goes, if you've pirated an FFG game without the intention of buying it you should be as ashamed as if you stole a candy bar from your local convenience store. What, precisely, is the difference? This seems self-evident to me, but maybe I'm old fashioned.

If we want to keep people like Ross Watson in house and home and working full-time on creating games, then we are going to have to buy products. This goes for all I.P's. The Open Source concepts as applied to I.P's are charming because they ensure us that we are not only correct in stealing, but actually part of a crusade against wealthy fat-cats (read: greedy capitalists, elites, the decadent nobility, the  corrupt church, etc...etc...etc...it's always the same story) . All people love to hear that their disgusting behavior is actually commendable. This is the foundation of entire religions and revolutions! Furthermore, this shares a particular flavour of moral terpitude with generations of similar ideologies going back at least as far as the 17th century. The devaluation of human endevour always begins with the devaluation of property.  (or is that terribly  American of me to say)

Keep up the good work FFG. I wish you great luck with this new WHFR boxed set. May it draw in a new crowd of gamers and thwart piracy with its innovative new design.  Futhermore, people with communist ideas about property should be encouraged to examine communist countries. Truly, they are bastions of the free exchange of ideas and examples for the rest of the world on how to regulate the flow of information.



#25 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:42 AM

Emirikol said:

 

Varnias Tybalt said:

No, piracy is hardly the issue. There is yes to be presented any substantiated proof that piracy harms any given market. 

 

Surely you're not that naive.  Piracy is  a HUGE blow to game companies.  If WotC found it needful to be addressed, then imagine what it does to smaller companies.  Piracy CANNOT be justified as anything other than sheer theft.

 

ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/

 

WIZARDS OF THE COAST SUES EIGHT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Contact: Tolena Thorburn
Wizards of the Coast LLC
425-204-8011
tolena.thorburn@Wizards.com.

April 6, 2009 — Wizards of the Coast LLC today filed three lawsuits in US District Court for the Western District of Washington against eight individuals, including named defendants located in the United States, Poland and the Philippines, for copyright infringement of its recently-released Dungeons & Dragons® Player’s Handbook® 2. The lawsuits allege that the defendants illegally distributed the Player’s Handbook 2 via free file-sharing websites and that these illicit uploads resulted in a substantial number of lost sales and lost revenue to Wizards of the Coast.

“Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only Wizards of the Coast’s financial health but also the health of whole gaming community including retailers and players,” said Greg Leeds, President of Wizards of the Coast. “We have brought these suits to stop the illegal activities of these defendants, and to deter future unauthorized and unlawful file-sharing.”

The complaint alleges, among other things, that one or more of the defendants purchased digital copies of Player’s Handbook 2 and then illegally posted the copies onto popular file-sharing sites for free access and download by the general public.

About Wizards

Wizards of the Coast is the leader in entertaining the lifestyle gamer. The company holds an exclusive patent on trading card games (TCGs) and their method of play and produces the premier trading card game, MAGIC: THE GATHERING®, among many other trading card games and family card and board games. Wizards is also a leading publisher of roleplaying games, such as DUNGEONS & DRAGONS®, and publisher of fantasy series fiction with numerous New York Times best-sellers. For more information, visit the Wizards of the Coast website at www.wizards.com.

Wizards of the Coast, Dungeons & Dragons, Player’s Handbook, and Magic: The Gathering are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries. © 2009 Wizards
 

 

 

 

 

Is that supposed to be proof? All I see is another corporate gaming giant (you are very much naive if you consider Wizards of the Coast to be a "small" company) instigating a witch hunt on a few normal people. And you can't expect anyone to listen to the president of WotC's highly biased opinions about it.

"Huge blow"? I beg to difer. First all companies are responsible to provide evidence that their sales have dropped. So far they have only been able to mention "potential sales lost due to people downloading rather than buying". (which with certain products are utterly ridiculous to claim, like RPG sourcebooks. You'd have to be extremely poor to settle with an inferior pdf file rather than buying the book, and printing the entire thing from home would probably cost you more money in inkcartridges alone than just buying it)

"Potential sales" are nothing other than a hypothesis, and it does not count as proof. Sorry.

As for the music industry, I really couldn't care less that profit hungry record companies that leech off of musical artists suffer setbacks due to piracy. It is the record companies that hold musical evolution back due to the fact that they alone choose which artists that are being exposed the most. Meaning that year after year their consumers will have to be happy with the same kind of crap that "sold best" last year. Music should be available in a variety of flavours, not just what corporate analysts decides make the most money.

After all, musicians earn most profits from live preformances, not record sales. So regardless of what bribed "artists" say to the contrary, their livelyhood is barely even scratched by pirated MP3's. In fact, many artists who wouldn't have risen to prominence, have, due to the fact that someone decided to upload their music for free on the internet. It's basically free commercial for them, so as an artist you'd have to be an idiot if you're against pirated music.

The sooner the record companies die, the better. With todays technology their existence is completely redundant.

But to summarize, Piracy IS NOT "sheer theft", since nothing has been stolen, and no one has been able to prove otherwise. If you're gonna call it "theft" then you have to prove that something has been stolen...



#26 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:50 AM

Steerpike said:

 

But whether it harms them isn't the issue. It's still stealing.  When someone creates something and offers it for sale you can either accept their terms or, if you don't like them, reject them.  If someone wants to offer you something without the chance to preview or review it, you can either take them up on it or say you won't buy without seeing more.  But you don't steal it, in my opinion.  There are many products that I won't buy because I either dislike the terms, think they're over-priced, or whatever numerous reasons I might have.  But I don't steal them after deciding not the buy them. That's my personal view on the piracy issue.

 

 

Like I said before, prove that something has actually been stolen.

If I go and jack your car, then that's theft. If I went and copied your car, you'll still have your car, but I'll have an identical one. Nothing has been stolen so it is inappriopriate to call it "theft", and it is ridiculous that some courts in some countris choose to treat it as theft. Travesty on justice is what it is, when individual pirates have been made to pay worse punishments than people guilty of violent assaults. (yes, this has actually happened in some countries).

Seriously? Should I pay a worse punishment for downloading an MP3-file, than someone who beat the **** out of someone else? Is that justice?



#27 macd21

macd21

    Member

  • Members
  • 915 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 04:56 AM

Varnias Tybalt said:

But to summarize, Piracy IS NOT "sheer theft", since nothing has been stolen, and no one has been able to prove otherwise. If you're gonna call it "theft" then you have to prove that something has been stolen...

Piracy is theft. Another person spent time and money creating what you downloaded for free. Not only was his investment in time and money wasted, but he may be out of a job as a result. Most RPG companies are small enough that even a small loss in sales can make a big difference. Keep sticking your head in the sand all you want, but piracy is selfish and immoral.



#28 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:24 AM

The amount of people who think piracy isnt theft because they copy something... *sigh* I'll just go through the usual conversation on the topic to save time:

It's nice to get stuff for free isnt it? Only it wasnt free to make it, was it? Let's consider music, since that's the punishment you were concerned of. You realise how much for example studio hours cost? I can already hear the typing of the "Oh, but I wasn't going to buy it anyway!" argument.

Why did you download it then? Clearly there was something you wanted..

"Oh I just collect them in my harddrive!" What a waste of energy and recourses then. Good for you!

"Oh I just wanted to evaluate it!" The whole record? and when you've listened to it for several hours did you buy it. Maybe added one song to your playlist, did you pay for the song through web perhaps? If the answer is yes, you are mildly excused.

 

Besides piracy for music is sooooo outdated. Use spotify. I know, I know.. not every record is there, but at least it's legal and paid for you.

http://www.spotify.com/en/

 

Here ends rant. (Piracy. Gets me every time.)



#29 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:48 AM

macd21 said:

 

 

Piracy is theft. Another person spent time and money creating what you downloaded for free. Not only was his investment in time and money wasted, but he may be out of a job as a result. Most RPG companies are small enough that even a small loss in sales can make a big difference. Keep sticking your head in the sand all you want, but piracy is selfish and immoral.

Selfish and immoral? You do know that you're speaking with a nihilist here right? All moral is completely relative, so that doesn't present much in the way of an argument. Sorry.

If you desperatly want to own a monopoly on an experience (a picture, a song, a game, a movie etc. they're all experiences to the viewer/listener) then don't show it to the rest of the world. Because once it's out there, it is absurd to claim "ownership" of it. You can own a record, but you can't own the music on it if other people have heard it. You can own the marble that a statue is made of or the canvas that a picture is painted on, but you can't own the feelings seeing it will evoke.

You could say that copyright laws are immoral in a way. That they are absurd there is no question of...



#30 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:50 AM

ymrar said:

The amount of people who think piracy isnt theft because they copy something... *sigh* I'll just go through the usual conversation on the topic to save time:

It's nice to get stuff for free isnt it? Only it wasnt free to make it, was it? Let's consider music, since that's the punishment you were concerned of. You realise how much for example studio hours cost? I can already hear the typing of the "Oh, but I wasn't going to buy it anyway!" argument.

Why did you download it then? Clearly there was something you wanted..

"Oh I just collect them in my harddrive!" What a waste of energy and recourses then. Good for you!

"Oh I just wanted to evaluate it!" The whole record? and when you've listened to it for several hours did you buy it. Maybe added one song to your playlist, did you pay for the song through web perhaps? If the answer is yes, you are mildly excused.

 

Besides piracy for music is sooooo outdated. Use spotify. I know, I know.. not every record is there, but at least it's legal and paid for you.

http://www.spotify.com/en/

 

Here ends rant. (Piracy. Gets me every time.)

Personally I listen to music that can at time be a bit obscure and unheard of, so spotify is not an option, simply because the songs I want to listen to isn't there.

Second, I pay a handsome amount of cash for tickets to live shows of the artists that I like. That way I know that the ARTIST get the most payment, rather than some greedy, leeching record company that take's the major amount of money for any records I buy...



#31 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 05:58 AM

So you want to experience? and how are all these experiences delivered for you? That's right. Somebody coughed up money. You liked a movie? It had superior filming and effects? Somebody had to make them for you to experience it. So yes, you can put a price on experience. Some experiences come a lot cheaper. You want an experience free? Take a walk in the forest. Enjoy the sunset. Write a book (but for crying aloud, do not share it or try to make a living out of it).



#32 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:03 AM

Varnias Tybalt said:

 

 

Personally I listen to music that can at time be a bit obscure and unheard of, so spotify is not an option, simply because the songs I want to listen to isn't there.

Second, I pay a handsome amount of cash for tickets to live shows of the artists that I like. That way I know that the ARTIST get the most payment, rather than some greedy, leeching record company that take's the major amount of money for any records I buy...

 

 

 

Oh, so you think that the contract that "leeches" the artist in record sales wouldnt do that in the tour sales? That is if we talk about the Big, Bad, Record Companies... I had forgot about that excuse. "I already buy tickets for shows!" That's still less money for the artist from the record, no matter what the deal is with the company.



#33 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:07 AM

ymrar said:

So you want to experience? and how are all these experiences delivered for you? That's right. Somebody coughed up money. You liked a movie? It had superior filming and effects? Somebody had to make them for you to experience it. So yes, you can put a price on experience. Some experiences come a lot cheaper. You want an experience free? Take a walk in the forest. Enjoy the sunset. Write a book (but for crying aloud, do not share it or try to make a living out of it).

Oh I buy movies that I like and know that I'll want to see again. Sure, divx rip's can be useful for evaluating if a movie is good or not (if I don't like the movie I delete it), but they don't hold much against seeing the movie at a cinema or the superior quality of DVD or BluRay. And frankly I like the look of having the real movie covers standing in my bookshelf. In fact, im quite a sucker for anything with "Collectors edition" written on it, in that regard.

It's just that I REFUSE to pay for a movie that I can't know for sure that I'll like. I shouldn't be expected to "gamble" on wether I think my money will be well spent or not. It's absurd to expect me to do that. Therefore I check out the movies on beforehand. Sure they will have awfully reduced quality in regards to sound and picture, but from that I can still make an assesment of wether I like the film or not, and if it's worth paying for to have a permanent copy of it.

But that's not how the movie industry want's me to think. They want me to base my entire opinions of inferior trailers that doesn't really reveal how good the movie is, but only shows a few amped up highlights in order to draw crowd interest. They'd rather want me to gamble with my money, like it was a game of blackjack. There is a chance I might be satisfied with buying the DVD or the tickets for viewing it on the cinema, but not a guarantee. And considering the vast amounts of crap that hollywood has produced the last few years, that chance for satisfaction has decreased a huge amount.



#34 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:11 AM

So you only piracy music then? How's that any different from movies? As I stated earlier tour revenues does not make up for record revenues.



#35 lordsneek

lordsneek

    Member

  • Members
  • 70 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:12 AM

Varnias Tybalt said:

Second, I pay a handsome amount of cash for tickets to live shows of the artists that I like. That way I know that the ARTIST get the most payment, rather than some greedy, leeching record company that take's the major amount of money for any records I buy...

Hey did you ever consider that some people dedicate thier times, money or even thier lives to something creative. Be it music, making video games, movies or even fine art. They work hard so we can enjoy all of those things. I know better then to pirate anything because I work on art sometimes. Now I haven't sold any yet but I just practice for fun. Some people have to sell art or music to make money and keep thier jobs. I don't think any company is a leech. They are just trying to do some thing they enjoy (like make RPGs for example) and make money off of it. Is trying to make money and doing something you love so wrong? I think not. 



#36 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:22 AM

ymrar said:

So you only piracy music then? How's that any different from movies? As I stated earlier tour revenues does not make up for record revenues.

Oh yes they do. At least for the musicians. The only people losing money due to piracy is the record companies. Do you realize what an insignificant amount of money from royalties actually goes to the creators of the music?

Many musicians have realized this, that's why some of them even lets you download ALL of their songs from their websites, and this tactic works wonder due to the fact that they become exposed to many people, packing their live preformances with a paying audience.

Other "artists" who don't do this (meaning, pretty much all pop-musicians today) are just bribed pawns of record companies, and they don't have to feel cheated by me, because I don't listen to their crappy "music" anyway. (neither through bought CD's or downloaded MP3's)



#37 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:34 AM

But you already stated that you listen to obscure and unheard of. You download these songs too? Because many of these "small artist" pay the costs for the records themselves. Some of them have started even their own record companies.

Also, no matter what the royalty is. Royalty not gained, is royalty lost. Yes, not all artist have good contracts. Not all of them have bad either. Just like not all of us have good jobs. Not all of them are bad either.

I have no trouble of people listening to music someone offers free on their site, as I have no trouble with fan made products in RPG.



#38 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:37 AM

lordsneek said:

 

Hey did you ever consider that some people dedicate thier times, money or even thier lives to something creative. Be it music, making video games, movies or even fine art. They work hard so we can enjoy all of those things. I know better then to pirate anything because I work on art sometimes. Now I haven't sold any yet but I just practice for fun. Some people have to sell art or music to make money and keep thier jobs. I don't think any company is a leech. They are just trying to do some thing they enjoy (like make RPGs for example) and make money off of it. Is trying to make money and doing something you love so wrong? I think not. 

Yes, because I AM one of those people who dedicate my life and most of the money I earn on creative projects. The thing is, I have realized that such artistic pursuits is a personal matter. I make my art because I WANT to make art, not because I hope to be able to sell it or the rights of ownership to it, to some greedy, leeching distrubution company.

Now im not a public artist (meaning, VERY FEW of the works I've done has actually been revealed to the rest of the world), I create my art for my own satisfaction, not to impress others. But if I were a public artist, I wouldn't be so stupid or naive to think that I could "own" the experience of my work. As soon as someone else lays their eyes upon something that I've drawn or sculpted, the very idea, concept and experience of that work is as much their's as it is mine. The canvas, the paint, the plaster or the marble I might give shape and form to is nothing more than a tool to convey the thoughts and feelings I had while making the piece in question. I might be able to own, and put a pricetag on plaster, canvas or paint in a particular configuration, but it is impossible to put a pricetag or claim ownership on thoughts and feelings.

It would be like claiming copyright on capitalism or communism itself. Or claiming ownership on Pythagoras theorem. It's just thoughts, they only exist in our heads and they copy eachother all the time just by being spoken of in a social setting. No one seems to mind that, so why should it be any different with other experiences, such as seeing movies, listening to music or appriciating artistic pieces in general? It's absurd.

What's also absurd is that some overly romantic people expect that they can earn their entire livelyhood through art. It's absurd to expect that you, as a singer, should be able to make the same amount of money that Britney Spears or Christina Aguilera does. Art doesn't normally entail income, you've just been extremely lucky that you have actually been able to sell the medium of your art if you have.

So yes, doing "what you love" and making money off of it at the same time, is wrong in this regard. Or at the very least, i'ts wrong to assume that you're going to make money off of it if you want to call yourself an artist...



#39 Varnias Tybalt

Varnias Tybalt

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,036 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:41 AM

ymrar said:

Also, no matter what the royalty is. Royalty not gained, is royalty lost. Yes, not all artist have good contracts. Not all of them have bad either. Just like not all of us have good jobs. Not all of them are bad either.

I think that's a bad analogy. If you're an artist that's being offered a contract by a record company, you should make damn sure that the contract is something favorable to you. But most artists don't, because they're so horny over the idea of getting famous, so they're willing to get completely shafted over the royalties by their record company.

I don't really listen to those at all. Fame-loving attention-whores generally make bad music...



#40 ymrar

ymrar

    Member

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 31 August 2009 - 06:49 AM

So if you want to make a living out of something that you actually like, and people are willing to pay you for it, you're a *****? Wow! Someone's bitter...






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS