AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - Evil folks

762 wrote:

KrautBoy wrote:

To dominate lands you can not have everyone rise against you. I think if the Banites would have stepped away from the many battles and "settled down", becomming the lord's of the people of Guldorand and ruled them in all the harshness of their laws (tyranny, not have demons walk about and turn their babies into undead to exaggerate extremely) I think they could have done well for themselves. ((Ravenloft setting has a nice portrayl of bane as the lawgiver)) They were great to have around like that, but the destruction of the keep was absolutely foreseeable.

That's exactly what we DID do, even somewhat lower key than that.

The good guys rose up anyway. As soon as they see a target they can go after, they go after it.

I know for a fact that the Good factions had all intentions of destroying the Banite Fort before it was even built. I remember someone telling me that they was going to Destroy it the moment it was possible.

I see alot of good points for both sides of this discussion.

I'd just like to say you evil guys should try getting more people to join your cause. I have an evil character and all his friends are probably good align characters.. I seriously have never been approached by any evil group since i've been here. ( A year or so?) Ofcourse i could have just completely missed the obvious signs.

jimbono1 wrote:

762 wrote:

KrautBoy wrote:

To dominate lands you can not have everyone rise against you. I think if the Banites would have stepped away from the many battles and "settled down", becomming the lord's of the people of Guldorand and ruled them in all the harshness of their laws (tyranny, not have demons walk about and turn their babies into undead to exaggerate extremely) I think they could have done well for themselves. ((Ravenloft setting has a nice portrayl of bane as the lawgiver)) They were great to have around like that, but the destruction of the keep was absolutely foreseeable.

That's exactly what we DID do, even somewhat lower key than that.

The good guys rose up anyway. As soon as they see a target they can go after, they go after it.

I know for a fact that the Good factions had all intentions of destroying the Banite Fort before it was even built. I remember someone telling me that they was going to Destroy it the moment it was possible.

Leave it in the past eh? Thats a sore subject with a few people.

ButtersTFG wrote:

I see alot of good points for both sides of this discussion.

I'd just like to say you evil guys should try getting more people to join your cause. I have an evil character and all his friends are probably good align characters.. I seriously have never been approached by any evil group since i've been here. ( A year or so?) Ofcourse i could have just completely missed the obvious signs.

Well as a supposed "Good Guy", I feel that I need to point out that the Banites had more players then any other group on the server, so "recruit more" isn't really good advice. They did that.

Since the past keeps repeating itself, it isn't only in the past.

And who is sore over it? I am not. I just wouldn't want to be bothered building a new one every six months or less.

Last edited by RaveN on Wed, Nov 10 2010, 23:59 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Evil doesn't attack good, because when good dies, good complains OOCly, and cries for 20 minutes. But when good attacks evil for being evil and "banned" it's alright, because they're supposed to do that, it's IC. I've been on the wrong side of a ban where I was basically banned for standing there, then having 20 people attack me, then killing them. You can bet I didn't repeat that again; because some people take this fucking game way too seriously, and cry every single time they lose.

But lately, every time I log on my evil character, I get involved in some RP with someone else, then some superhero dumbass comes along and tries to kick me out of wherever it is, because their RP is to be the PvP/RP kicker outer. At this point, I stopped defending myself with PvP mechanics because I found that I personally don't give a fucking shit anymore who wins. It makes no difference. You know, where you transport the body to another zone and 5 minutes later you tell them they can do whatever they want again. It's like gee thanks, I was trying to roleplay. Granted I have been on both sides of this, it's the real reason I stopped picking on 'good' players. (see above). It's just a pointless cycle.

That and the conflict has no bearing on any plot roleplay whatsoever. Because of this, this is why Amia is a social server, not a RP server, no matter what you want to call it. Noone is exempt from this rule. It's not like anyone is going to permadeath because someone came along and PvP'd them for almost zero reason. You can bet that any server where people don't have a real reason to actually PvP other than opposing alignments and timestop is the deciding factor of a PvP battle makes it less than meaningful for anyone. It would be nice if they actually tried to engage in roleplay rather than PvP, and there are some that do, and others who don't, and it ruins the experience. Maybe you care about PvP, and I know I did at some point too, but I stopped a long time ago.

Please don't PvP my character if you don't plan to roleplay with me afterwards. Thanks.

ButtersTFG wrote:

I see alot of good points for both sides of this discussion.

I'd just like to say you evil guys should try getting more people to join your cause. I have an evil character and all his friends are probably good align characters.. I seriously have never been approached by any evil group since i've been here. ( A year or so?) Ofcourse i could have just completely missed the obvious signs.

You lie down with dogs then you wake up with fleas... by that I mean that if all your friends are good guys then people will assume you are too... and if you say you're not they probably won't trust you.

But, seek and ye shall find! I'm not sure what kind of bad guy you've got there but if you can find some other peoples of ill repute they'll more then likely give you a shot.

Last edited by Yurell on Thu, Nov 11 2010, 0:00 AM, edited 2 times in total.

Edit: Unnecessary now!

I guess. I run at a high monitor resolution so it doesn't seem that long. I'll go back and divide it up.

I was editting it in my post at the same time

I misclicked with my copy/paste before I hit submit.

It should be readable now? I think. *Shrug*

I'd just like to note that while I played Audrey, I complained constantly about even having a Banite fortress at some times, because the impenetrable wall of "OOC metagaming yadayadayada" completely discouraged any people to come roleplay inside who may or may not be banned based on an NPC's discretion. So you can bet that I'm not sore about that thing blowing up even though I built half of the thing myself. I missed people knocking on the door in Underport and starting RP sessions. Castle + Bridge + Archers + OOC metagaming = fail. The only thing that kept the faction really going with the isolation was the fact that I had enough time to actually go around the island recruiting people IC.

762 wrote:

Since the past keeps repeating itself, it isn't only in the past.

And who is sore over it? I am not. I just wouldn't want to be bothered building a new one every six months or less.

I understand it must be very discouraging for the banites and I am not trying to say that I do not belief that there is no reason to be annoyed at the system to an extend. I also do not know exactly what lead up to the destruction of your keep except what I witnessed. So there can be more to what you are upset about than I know.

I know there was a deal with the Eternal Order to seize creating undead and pretty much then they saw their job fulfilled and would have left the banites alone. I could have even imagined them making some sort of alliance one day, especially as undeath is not really a big pillar of Bane's doctrine. I also saw the huge amount of pvp which of course brought the banites in to the center of attention and everyone was riled up against them. Perhaps it was just too late to calm the lynch mob out for the Banites after the amount of bloodshed they caused.

What I meant with tyranny was the following. Mind the following is only input of something that I found very interesting and like a lot. It is less about high fantasy rituals, battle and devil summonings but extreme tyranny. I do not want it interpreted as "you must do this like that" and I am not sure how well it would work with the amia bane church. The following quote is from the Ravenloft SD:

Quote:

The doctrine of the Lawgiver is explained in five holy texts: The Truth of Iron, The Fetters of Bronze, The Black Trials, Crimson Faith and The Book of Stone. The Truth of Iron lays out principles of government and moral behavior, while the complementary Fetters of Bronze details laws and punishments. The Black Trials delivers a mythicpseudo-history relating the creation and fall of humanity, while Crimson Faith discusses theology and cosmology. The Book of Stone is a collection of prophecies, proverbs and allegories. The Lawgiver himself has many titles, including the Iron Tyrant and the Divine Emperor, but he is never named; it is held that since the First Judgment mortals have been too impure to withstand the full might and glory of the Lawgiver's true name.

(...)

The will of the Lawgiver is expressed through the laws of the land. Failing to uphold any law, no matter how minor, is sinful. Those who properly observe their station and follow the laws in this life will be rewarded in the next. Labor hard in service to your master, and you may receive temporal rewards. Those who live as rebels or lawbreakers will be damned to an eternity of torment.

(...)

At the heart of the Church's beliefs is an unswerving dedication to order and law and to the rightness of the established order.

Evil needs popular support.

If you think about some currently good-aligned characters, you could make a case for them being evil-aligned if things had gone differently. But only if those around them were similarly aligned, if the place where they lived and worked was devoted to the pursuit of conquest, not peace.

This would mean that when people start playing Amia, they would have a new place to pick as their starting location, and they could be influenced by those who have chosen to make it their home.

Obviously you're going to have to throw in some kind of sanity check so that paladins don't start in Evil Central. But on the whole I think it would be fun to see how evil factions would move in on this place and try to work out their differences peacefully... aw who am I kidding, bar brawls will be so common that the proprietor would have a whole room full of back-ordered chairs and tables in the back to replace what gets broken. But it'll be fun.

I think the whole 'impenetrable wall' thing is really crappy. How again is this sorta thing good to have on amia?

You need to expound on your post, instead of giving a one line answer. What impenetrable wall? In what way? What manner shape and form?

Murex wrote:

I think the whole 'impenetrable wall' thing is really crappy. How again is this sorta thing good to have on amia?

It isn't good. And yet it is.

If a new settlement is to exist at all, it must be able to hold out against an attack, in the exact same way that the other major settlements can. Otherwise, it goes into the module one week and gets replaced next week with a smoking crater.

That's not to say that you can't (for example) find out about the secret construction of a new stronghold and sabotage it before it's finished but, if it does get finished and manned with defenders, then you can't just lob a Flame Arrow down the exhaust port and hope it will do something. That only works in movies.

The problems with attacking a city or fortress are numerous, especially when magic is involved. That isn't to say that they can't be overcome, and in fact you shouldn't assume that the place is impenetrable for a second. However, due to the limitations of NWN, you can't change city tiles to destroyed while the module is running. It's easier to assume that a minor force will be unable to do much damage during an assault and not require a time-consuming module update. By the time a major force is mobilised to assault that same place, there has been plenty of time to work on the area design to show the impact of a recent attack.

I'm sorry if I come off as rude...

Why are players still posting on this? I don't understand the reason for it. If you feel that evil is gone then, why not make a evil character and be evil? RPing evil is not hard people..

Yes, you will die -Alot-
Yes, you will have to endure 3 hours of death rp
Yes, you will have to do pvp ( Even though alot of people hate it, pvp is a part of RP as everything else)
Yes, you will lose -alot-
Yes, people will hate you and talk down to you.

But in the end. Everyone is having fun. You get the excitement of being evil, and they get the enjoyment of defeating a obstacle. Its all up to the players. Alot of you have great ideas on being evil; I know because I've read them. Why not try it? Why not put your imagination to effect? It may fail, but working for it is half the fun. Being evil is about be creative and really freaking active.

But talking about it on a post that has been going on long enough to do something about it; is not going to help your issue at all...I don't know about you guys, but i'm actually going to do something about it.

It's called "constructive dialogue" and why exactly shouldn't people want to talk about stuff before doing it?

The fact that there's six pages says that either people really like long-winded discussions (the thought had crossed my mind) or they really want to talk about something in particular.

Yes, I understand that. But you're not getting my point. What is the point in talking about a problem when the solution is simple? We can say all day; Amia has no bad-guys, what is good and evil? and so forth...but sitting here and making a long "constructive Dialogue" will not make a solution. Sorry Selmak, that's just my opinion. Amia players need to do something if they want something to happen, not have long six page discussions.

Last edited by 762 on Thu, Nov 11 2010, 23:44 PM, edited 1 time in total.

...are you trolling? Because I think you need to reread the thread if not.

More to the point, who was it that said to try the same thing over and over again and expect different results is insanity? Or something like that.

Seriously? No..i'm not trying to piss people off. Ok, i'm sorry. I don't usually post on the forums. So i'll back off. Sorry. Cya in game.

Last edited by 762 on Thu, Nov 11 2010, 23:46 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Yes. And please stop if you are, because I don't want this to get locked over it.

There's plenty that's already been discussed to refute your oversimplified argument.

I'm not..

Like I said, i'll stop putting my two-cents into it.

(edit so I could make more details)

I apologize because perhaps I failed to understand the uses of forums. I'm sorry. Perhaps what I posted was out of line. Discussion is not bad, and i'm sure people enjoy doing it. Sorry again.

I asked because several people stated they had tried different things (including some of the things being suggested here) that hadn't worked. So saying "just play" is not really a good answer.

Obviously as with any faction, activity in the game is a good thing. But in the case of evil characters at the moment, it's not possible to do much what with all the goodies showing up and crashing the party. You can understand the point of view that the goodies don't want the baddies to have a chance to become a serious threat, but in actual fact they need to become a serious threat to give the goodies something else to do.

Think on it as Sustainable Evil. Though it may not be the same evil faction each week that is the threat, there should always be someone next week. And you can't really do that unless the evil factions have a place where they can co-ordinate their efforts, without the immediate danger of an attack (from one of their supposed partners, even).

I may be wrong, and there may be absolutely no common ground for said evil factions to build on, and every meeting may be punctuated by furious outbursts and walk-outs. But even that would be a hell of a lot better than being out in the wilds getting picked off a few at a time.

762 wrote:

So saying "just play" is not really a good answer.

I beg to differ.

I believe saying "just play" is a perfectly acceptable answer. I have read the whole thread and have kept up to date with it pretty well and I see a lot of good ideas about things evil characters could do being posted by people notorious for playing good characters.

Also, the paraphrased quote you used about the definition of insanity isn't quite applicable here. For example, attempting to cross a river by swimming it and failing, but then going back and building a bridge isn't the same as repeatedly trying to swim the river. The former is a form of constructive problem solving and the latter is insane. Thusly, attempting to overthrow the same outpost numerous times using different methods is devotion to one's goals, whereas using the exact same tactic over and over and over is not only redundant and boring, but insane.

I, for one, feel that the constructive part of this thread long since passed. It's tough to be evil on Amia. We all know this. Now is the time to stand up and do something about it or to wallow in our own evil filth. I am no pig and I do not wallow, so I'm going to get in game and do some lovely evil things.

'Just play' is sticking your fingers in your earholes and ignoring any problems.

Just for once I'd like to see someone say, "No way this topic is deep and philosophical, don't shut it down." Instead of summarily putting a bullet in said topic.

"No way this topic is deep and philosophical, don't shut it down."

It isn't deep and philosophical, but it isn't under any threat of getting locked. So feel free to keep chatting. I've nothing left that's worth contributing that anyone cares to hear and I'll just keep glancing at it in the hopes that maybe something I haven't thought of on my own or that hasn't been stated in the past comes about.

ainjyll wrote:

762 wrote:

So saying "just play" is not really a good answer.

I beg to differ.

I believe saying "just play" is a perfectly acceptable answer. I have read the whole thread and have kept up to date with it pretty well and I see a lot of good ideas about things evil characters could do being posted by people notorious for playing good characters.

Also, the paraphrased quote you used about the definition of insanity isn't quite applicable here. For example, attempting to cross a river by swimming it and failing, but then going back and building a bridge isn't the same as repeatedly trying to swim the river. The former is a form of constructive problem solving and the latter is insane. Thusly, attempting to overthrow the same outpost numerous times using different methods is devotion to one's goals, whereas using the exact same tactic over and over and over is not only redundant and boring, but insane.

I, for one, feel that the constructive part of this thread long since passed. It's tough to be evil on Amia. We all know this. Now is the time to stand up and do something about it or to wallow in our own evil filth. I am no pig and I do not wallow, so I'm going to get in game and do some lovely evil things.

Thank you. I really do appreciate that comment.

Last edited by Dwagin on Fri, Nov 12 2010, 12:00 PM, edited 2 times in total.

"All things come into being by conflict of opposites, and the sum of things flows like a stream. We must know that war is common to all and strife is justice, and that all things come into being through strife necessarily." - Diogenes Laërtius, Hērákleitos ho Ephésios

Epic.

Dwagin wrote:

"All things come into being by conflict of opposites, and the sum of things flows like a stream. We must know that war is common to all and strife is justice, and that all things come into being through strife necessarily." - Diogenes Laërtius, Hērákleitos ho Ephésios

Don't worry be happy

Except the bridge has been built a dozen times already, ainjyll . First we made it of wood, then we made it of stone, then we tried bribing the troll under it.

For some reason we still keep drowning.

If you can do better with it than Mago or I did, then power to you.

Bribed a troll? That's your problem! You must fluff the hair!
Observe!

762 wrote:

Except the bridge has been built a dozen times already, ainjyll . First we made it of wood, then we made it of stone, then we tried bribing the troll under it.

For some reason we still keep drowning.

If you can do better with it than Mago or I did, then power to you.

Which one is Evil-People's problem here?
There is not enough evil people
or
Evil-People haven't achieved world domination yet
?

Because I really haven't gotten idea to which the gallons are turning to..

The problem is that there isn't enough evil characters to keep the good characters occupied, so the ones which do show up get omnomnomed like the last cookies on a plate.

What they need is some way to regroup, get back their strength and numbers, and really take the fight to the good guys. Which at the moment, they don't have.

As things stand, an increase in the numbers of evil characters might let them fight good characters on even terms, but not over the long haul; because they lack the backing of a people who believe as they do, or at the very least are willing to support them.

If Good is to do battle with Evil, it should be an epic battle worthy of song, not a quick and brutal scuffle.

The Banites under Darth and myself had no problems in the numbers/combat arena. We relentlessly trained, powerbuilt and trained some more so we could take all comers, because we knew the minute we stuck our head up there would be plenty of comers. And there were.

We lost some fights, but won many more, even when outnumbered 2-3 to 1 at times. And we were rarely the aggressors.

The problem is not the disparity in PC numbers. That can be overcome with tactics and training (as well as recruiting), as we did. The problem is the disparity in the setting.

Take Kohl as an example. It has an NPC army and navy, as well as Imperator. No evil faction would ever be given that much power, no matter how much RP was done.

The setting needs to be balanced. Amia needs an actively evil city, or some other major NPC presence, that plots and visibly makes things happen in the rest of the world. Tarkuul is too passive and exclusive to fit the bill, and the other "evil" cities such as they are, don't do anything visible.

Evil will always be a come-and-go fad until that happens.

I kind of disagree with that. For me a great setting is not where good and evil is balanced in present power. If you have a server set in Thay evil will have the dominance and the good guys will need to resist evil from their underground places or hide what they are to the present government. If you have a server set in Cormyr you will have it the other way around. If you play good in Cormyr your characters will need different tactics than if they play good in Thay.

What I would rather see the ability for evil to be helped to do real cool stuff where they win proper victories without having to build up a city all of the rest of amia will reject like a failed organ donation. For instance allow the banites to sneak into Kohlingen in an event and murder an important npc and hanging his flaid corpse from the ceiling of the temple of the triad. To raid caravans which means real consequences of a food crisis. For them being able to make a difference without having to need some big bad castle of doom in a set of islands where most of the population will instantly rise against it, because it damn well knows not doing so right away will be the biggest mistake they will ever do. I for one would love to see that as a player of a good character and I would love to play on the side of evil for such too.

But a huge scaled war in a small proximity like an isle between two huge cities will mean the ruin of one of those cities. And then instead having the power in the hands of the good guys you will have it the other way around. Which can be a lot of fun too, but then the good guys will exactly have the same "problem". -Except- if the server is of course changed greatly so it could support a huge ongoing war in a sensible way, which pretty much means the DMs, Developers and Designers will all need to commit to that style. Could be fun, but that is a lot to ask in my eyes.

It doesn't have to be open warfare. I'm not arguing for that.

Nor does it have to be Cormyr or Thay, where one side holds dominance. Two mutually antagonistic cities can form wonderful opportunities for conflict even if it they are nominally at peace.

Take the Vast for example. You have Tantras and Calaunt, two cities that have warred in the past and now live nominally at peace, though with vastly different goals and ambitions.

Remove Calaunt from that setting and you are left with Cormyr/Amia. Conflict RP is reduced to playing whack-a-mole, with evil as the mole.

What happened to the days when evil BGs and Paladins would shoot the shit and try to turn one another to the light/dark using that sexy charisma mod? By the same token that there should be intelligently played intellectual evil, there should be intelligently played intellectual goody two shoes as well.

DustSpray101 wrote:

What happened to the days when evil BGs and Paladins would shoot the shit and try to turn one another to the light/dark using that sexy charisma mod? By the same token that there should be intelligently played intellectual evil, there should be intelligently played intellectual goody two shoes as well.

That is a good point, as when a evil character is found out, the good paladins will always give the same "Leave your evil ways, or I shall smite you!". Not much dialouge before a fight, as the evil person who has not been swayed in anyway to leave his faith, or life style will certainly take up arms rather than say "Oh wait... I think your right, I will just listen to you now..."

Of course, a slyer evil person could fake their redemption, but that sort of tactic only works for a particular few.

@Dustspray - Dude. It's a 'Blackguard', A guy that devotes his entire life to the ways of rape, Plunder, child-murder, extortion and not paying his taxes.

Imagine trying to turn say, Gordon brown over to the other party?
Or George bush to the Democrats?

Let's say just for the moment that it's a bad idea to build a big honking evil fortress above ground. There's plenty of precedent for lairs to be built underground, in fact there's a quest that sends you to an underground crypt full of evil cultists.

The downside is of course, it leaves you fairly isolated from the world above and there's no guarantees that the other folks who live underground will leave you alone.

However, the isolation is also a great advantage, since it will take a while for anyone intent on finding and destroying said lair to get there on foot.

You know, I facepalmed a little when I came back to Amia and learned that Darth was planning to build a massive Banite fort out above ground.

Until I remembered that the super secret one that Gurth had built underground had been razed as well.

In the end it doesn't matter. In a land where there are no penalties for metagaming and where death means nothing to spies, your fort could be on the moon and it won't matter.

When you put it like that, maybe forgo any kind of base and just have a room full of epic traps that you use to throw people off when you're portalling to this week's meet.

Except that would be wrong.

Why?

Personally I've never understood the advantage of a big evil base. Unless you have the alliances and manpower to back up such a place then your not going to last very long.

Anyway, the big base was never the problem, it was the behavior of the faction and the actions taken that destroyed the Banite keep. Half the factions involved in the alliance against them wouldn't have joined if they had more control over their members and Darth didn't attack anything and everything that moved.

As I said in the beginning. Piss off enough people, and your fucked. Banites pissed off people other then just the good guys. If they had been more careful and strategic about who it was they attacked it wouldn't have been a problem. Now I don't know if Gurth continued this behavior or not, but I know Darth started it and let it continue, and Gurth did have to come into the game picking up the mess and having the mass of enemies left behind. I'm not sure if 762 tried to change how the way the Banites where going about things, but by that stage I imagine it was too heavily ingrained into the majority of the Banite population to be changed, and thus the big horde of angry pissed off people that razed the keep.

762 can't be held responsible completely for the Banites situation. Gurth inherited a monster created around smashing everything and everyone. I don't think that he could have done anything to change the way things where heading at that point. As someone who also had the reigns of leadership thrust upon him at a very crappy time, I can relate and say that I didn't envy your position 762, could not have been very fun.

The only suggestion I have for future incarnations of the Banites is this. Do some research. A little knowledge about potential enemies, how they can be kept from becoming enemies, and just a bit of respect for said enemies, can go a long way. I'm pretty sure that the Banite dogma doesn't say something like "Your enemies are spit, they are weak, underestimate them and treat them like dirt". A healthy dose of respect can go a long way.

Very_Svensk wrote:

...Imagine trying to turn say, Gordon brown over to the other party?
Or George bush to the Democrats?

I consider myself an American, I keep matters of Church/Faith and State separate and this is clearly a matter of make-believe church/faith :wink:

Some players simply lack the depth of character or the debate skills to do so, but in DnD it is very possible. Blackguard in NWN also includes fallen paladins fyi.

Very_Svensk wrote:

...It's a 'Blackguard', A guy that devotes his entire life to the ways of rape, Plunder, child-murder, extortion and not paying his taxes...

Yes, and Paladins are zealous pseudo-politicians blessing babies on the side, getting involved in scandalous prostitution rings in order to seek redemption as a show that they are more than just an Emo in "Shining Armor," all while slaying people left and right in the name of all that is holy, your point?

Both have mouths, both have ears, and both have tendency to suffer from tragically high charisma scores.

Selvec...don't feel too bad for me. At first I was slightly "wtf" but as I opened my mind I realized what Darth's approach had going for it. He generated conflict RP, and lots of it. It was a direct and brutal way and it worked.

I know for damn sure it pissed off a myriad of people and generated a fuckton of OOC whining to the DM staff. But for all the bitching by the thin skinned people who (apparently) wanted a carebear RP experience, I knew there were many more who were glad to have a real, tangible open villain that could bring the conflict RP to life.

What makes me sad is not the whining that took place, but the fact that I knew it couldn't possibly last in the current setting.

As far as who were our enemies...Gurth went out of his way to make peace with both the Black Caravan and Cordor, but in the end it made no difference. Our main enemies could still bring enough NPC mojo to bring us down.

Not sure what you mean by NPC mojo. Far as I know the only NPC's that brang the Banites down where a few sailors on a boat. Everything else was all PC stuff.

Evil folks - where are you ?

Who is online