Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
[Let's Read] ARES Magazine
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 6836576" data-attributes="member: 27780"><p><strong><u>Ares 06 - Voyage of the BSM Pandora: January 1981</u></strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>43 pages. What Flame the dragon was to Dungeon Magazine, the BSM pandora is to ARES, an iconic character/setting that they can return too again in a different form to give continuity to their games. If the magazine had lasted longer, we would probably have seen it show up again on big anniversaries and the like, and got nostalgic posts about playing the games involving it and weaving the bits of setting they gave us into a larger canon. Oh, for what could have been. Time to confront the reality of what actually is again. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Muse: Nothing much to see here, just an affirmation of the fact that as time goes on, they are indeed increasing the proportion of game material here, and also trying to create more ambitious games. Fair enough, if difficult to comment on. After you've been doing things for a while, and gained new skills, you do naturally want to push your limits, and nothing wrong with that. Dragon didn't start to level off in production values until about 10 years in, and 10,000 hours is cited as the amount of time needed to get really god at something. You can't manage that kind of mastery in just one year. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>2 adventures and a GM screen are already out for DragonQuest. A timely reminder that even many less popular games back then had supplement treadmills that put 5e to shame. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Pandora Tech: Our setting detail this time isn't a story. It's a bunch of tech specs for things in the B.S.M Pandora. This serves to make them all the more stealable for other games, as it gives you solid numbers that you can use to build your game stats. It also gives you an idea of the feel of the place, which is less formal than you would expect. When you're trapped together on long-range space voyages for years at a time, getting sloppy about protocol is eventually inevitable, which of course gets them into the mess we saw last time. This is only short, but it's both entertaining and consistent with what we've already seen, so I like it quite a bit and wish it was longer. Their worldbuilding continues to be far above what it needs to be to create their games, and all the better for it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Facts for Fantasy: Back up to 2+1/3 pages for this column, and they put indian and incan tidbits in alongside the usual european and egyptian smorgasboard. They seem particularly keen on Herodotus, as he turns up twice. Even before modern technology was developed, people came up with some pretty impressive infrastructure, and human imagination has always exceeded it's achievements. As ever, the shallow dipping means It's telling me little I didn't know before, and I find it hard to sustain interest. It takes a long time to put together a big picture from a collection of tiny little scraps, and I've already done it before. Ed Greenwood could spin this kind of stuff out forever and stay interesting. This can't. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Science for Science Fiction: Inequality in these columns for the first time, as this is only 1+2/3 pages long. |t also overlaps with the previous column a little when it talks about icelandic history, as the gap between history and mythology gets fuzzy after a certain distance. As ever, the ruminations on both astronomy and genetics are long since superceded, as we've improved our information gathering equipment a lot since then. The info on endangered animals has also changed a fair bit since then, and I have no doubt it will continue to do so given the way we treat the environment. So this continues to be slightly more interesting than the fantasy column because it shows just how much our understanding of the world has changed over the years, and how it might continue to do so within our lifespan. That's worth more than another flight of pure imagination. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Film & Television: Flash Gordon gets a thoroughly mixed review where the reviewer feels the good bits just throw the awful cheesy parts into even sharper relief. The supporting cast and effects are good, but the lead actor is terrible, the story is weak, and the whole thing is thoroughly unfaithful to the source material. Just another example of how hollywood doesn't take sci-fi seriously despite the enormous commercial successes Star Wars & Trek have had. That crap could really do with a cull. A good example of how things have actually got better for geeks in recent decades. </p><p></p><p>Altered States also gets a mixed, but slightly more positive review. It's basically a riff on Jekyll & Hyde/The incredible Hulk with lots of 60's psychedelia thrown in, and whether you'll find it deep and meaningful, or merely incoherent nonsense will very much be a matter of taste. Not everyone has the same inner demons, so playing with symbolism is very much hit and miss. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Media: This column delves into the murky world of hollywood accounting, and the ways they try and ensure a profit, while making it look like they never actually make one for tax purposes. The studio system has become bloated and corrupt with price gouging and forcing cinemas to do several month guaranteed runs even if the film flops. They're even asking for percentages of the food sold at the cinema, which just forces them to jack the prices up even further, and makes sneaking your own in make far more sense. It's a system rife with abuse, and means the profitability of a film is heavily based on the deal negotiated rather than actual audience response. All together now. THAT'S SHOWBIZ!!! As with the previous article, It's funny to see how things have changed. The internet may mean there's less money in media as a whole due to the ease of pirating, but people are more able to find and buy precisely what they want, rather than what's advertised, and there's fewer limitations due to manufacturing and distribution logistics. But there's still plenty of scummy backroom stuff and legal shenanigans big companies can pull to stack the deck in their favour, and nepotism is just as strong a force as ever. So this article is very interesting indeed, even if it's not particularly game related. Nice to see them applying their analytical cynicism to other areas. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Voyage of the B.S.M Pandora: In contrast with all their previous games, this is a solitaire one, where the challenges you face are heavily determined by the dice, but there's also a strong element of player choice and resource management as you choose how long your voyage is and how you deal with the things you encounter. Like the old choose your own adventure books, which this strongly resembles, you can get different results even if you choose the same route. (presuming you don't cheat on the dice, which is always a particular temptation in a solitaire game) It has more depth to it than most CYOA books though, despite being dramatically compressed, due to the larger scope of play than simply controlling a single character on an adventure. So once again, while something like this doesn't give you the full flexibility of an actual roleplaying game, it has a lot more depth than most boardgames while still giving you a clear objective and path of play, (which is where RPG's can often fall down) and shows off their ambitions in quite an interesting way. I definitely want to see what else they have planned before they go down. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dragon deigns to advertise in it's competitor's pages. Guess that shows TSR are taking SPI seriously as challengers. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Books: The Devil's Game by Poul Anderson is unusually light on the supernatural elements for him, which allows the reviewer to praise him for being versatile and trying different things. There's things you can do with ambiguity that you simply can't if everyone knows for certain all the weirdness is real. </p><p></p><p>Malafrena by Ursula Le Guin is set in a fantasy world, but is also devoid of any other supernatural phenomena. This means she can do a historical drama without feeling beholden to the details of real world history. Your own fanbase can become your worst enemy if they don't buy into the details. </p><p></p><p>The Mind Game by Norman Spinrad continues this theme, making the point yet again that fantasy and sci-fi still aren't as credible as other genres, and it's quite possible they're doing it to get more mainstream success and literary plaudits. It's a tiresome business chasing money and respect, but I guess that's what you've got to do when you aren't a megastar and have a family to feed. And why should a writer feel compelled to stick to one genre just because it makes life easier for the marketers anyway? More stuff that definitely gets better in the intervening decades. </p><p></p><p>Leviathan's Deep by Jayge Carr sees the grumbles about feminism show up again, which also feels increasingly irritating, especially as he only does so to say that this particular novel avoids those problems despite being written by a woman and featuring interspecies gender politics as an integral plot point. I grow increasingly grateful that I won't have to put up with this for too long. </p><p></p><p>Antinomy by Spider Robinson is a collection of his short stories. It gets a positive result because it's interesting without being depressing or particularly challenging, which once again highlights the conservative tendencies of the reviewer. Once again, I grow distinctly more unimpressed. </p><p></p><p>Star Driver by Lee Correy gets a positive review for more agreeable reasons. Combining solid sci-fi speculations with properly written characters? That ought to work in any era, regardless of the political trends. </p><p></p><p>Beyond Rejection by Justin Leiber gets even higher praise, made all the moreso because it's a debut novel. If he can keep it up, he has a bright future ahead of him. Since he publishes 5 novels, then leaves fiction behind for academia, the commercial realities at least don't agree with the reviewer in hindsight. Trying to predict the future rarely works too well, unfortunately. </p><p></p><p>And finally, The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy gets a brief, but very positive recommendation. Given it's longevity, I think this doesn't really need any analysis. Just another voice in the choir. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Quick Combat II: A second, different way of speeding up DragonQuest in this magazine? That really does rub in the fact that most people don't want a combat system that heavy and detail obsessed. Still, this one is crunchier than the previous one, which was basically just GM fiat. It seems to be aimed at boiling down larger group combat into a few rolls, and there's still a fair bit of math involved. It also assumes fighting to the death without surrender as the default, which means total death for the loser, and high casualties for the winning side, which will please neither fans of realism, or players who have to argue about which PC's in the group die after a single die exchange even if they win. For that reason, I really can't see this system working in an actual campaign, as it'd be far too lethal and divisive to maintain a functional group dynamic unless every player had multiple characters and was ok with them being replaced regularly. But it's still interesting to see them trying to make things work better. Will one of them stick?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>DragonNotes: Completely unsurprisingly, they institute a regular column for DragonQuest material as part of their increased focus on gaming. This first one isn't that interesting though, being entirely self-promotion, much of which is repeated from the advert earlier in the issue. Lots of stuff coming out in the near future, both adventures and game aids. You might want to hold off on buying the core for a few months if you haven't already though, as they plan on incorporating all the errata people have found in the next print run. Is it really a good idea to say something like that? Oh well, at least it's admitting your flaws. And this shows again how serious they are about building this up into an extensive gameline to rival D&D. Hopefully they'll give us some useful material in here while it lasts. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Games: Shooting Stars gets a long and very sardonically negative review that leaves you in absolutely no doubt why they don't like it. Shovelware that's a poor copy of a previous game they liked? Why even bother? Save your money and time, and leave the suffering to the professionals. </p><p></p><p>Azhanti High Lightning, on the other hand, they rather like. It works as both a game, and worldbuilding, and the ship plans are a thing of beauty. They're useful for anyone who wants to play in a large-scale sci-fi spaceship, whether active or crashed dungeon crawl. Well worth checking out. </p><p></p><p>Asteroid is by the same team as Azhanti, but has simpler rules, and a far more humorous tone, as a band of oddballs (and their dog mascot) have to save the world from an asteroid headed towards it, while dealing with some ridiculous subplots. Again, the ideas in here are eminently stealable to use in another format. GDW are really on a roll at the moment creatively. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Feedback: The feedback form becomes concerned with the competition, asking which other gaming magazines you read/subscribe too, and what they could change to get your sweet reliable subscription money. The number of very specific DragonQuest questions increases, as they try to pinpoint what supplements will sell best, and we get an interesting hint that they're considering adding computer gaming to the mix, as they ask what computers you own as well. They're still planning a fair number of standalone wargames though, even if a greater proportion of them are sci-fi. So we can definitely see the transitions in focus over the year just from looking at these forms. Let's hope that continues to be the case. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Once again, some quite high contrasts in here between the bits that I like and the ones I don't, with the ambition of the game material feeling like it comes from a different world to the very critical and weirdly conservative review sections and somewhat dull columns. It does make for quite a strange mix, and not one I would have kept on buying myself back in the day. But as we're already a third of the way through this, doing the rest doesn't seem too onerous. Lets see what strangeness the next issue brings.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="(un)reason, post: 6836576, member: 27780"] [B][U]Ares 06 - Voyage of the BSM Pandora: January 1981[/U][/B] 43 pages. What Flame the dragon was to Dungeon Magazine, the BSM pandora is to ARES, an iconic character/setting that they can return too again in a different form to give continuity to their games. If the magazine had lasted longer, we would probably have seen it show up again on big anniversaries and the like, and got nostalgic posts about playing the games involving it and weaving the bits of setting they gave us into a larger canon. Oh, for what could have been. Time to confront the reality of what actually is again. Muse: Nothing much to see here, just an affirmation of the fact that as time goes on, they are indeed increasing the proportion of game material here, and also trying to create more ambitious games. Fair enough, if difficult to comment on. After you've been doing things for a while, and gained new skills, you do naturally want to push your limits, and nothing wrong with that. Dragon didn't start to level off in production values until about 10 years in, and 10,000 hours is cited as the amount of time needed to get really god at something. You can't manage that kind of mastery in just one year. 2 adventures and a GM screen are already out for DragonQuest. A timely reminder that even many less popular games back then had supplement treadmills that put 5e to shame. Pandora Tech: Our setting detail this time isn't a story. It's a bunch of tech specs for things in the B.S.M Pandora. This serves to make them all the more stealable for other games, as it gives you solid numbers that you can use to build your game stats. It also gives you an idea of the feel of the place, which is less formal than you would expect. When you're trapped together on long-range space voyages for years at a time, getting sloppy about protocol is eventually inevitable, which of course gets them into the mess we saw last time. This is only short, but it's both entertaining and consistent with what we've already seen, so I like it quite a bit and wish it was longer. Their worldbuilding continues to be far above what it needs to be to create their games, and all the better for it. Facts for Fantasy: Back up to 2+1/3 pages for this column, and they put indian and incan tidbits in alongside the usual european and egyptian smorgasboard. They seem particularly keen on Herodotus, as he turns up twice. Even before modern technology was developed, people came up with some pretty impressive infrastructure, and human imagination has always exceeded it's achievements. As ever, the shallow dipping means It's telling me little I didn't know before, and I find it hard to sustain interest. It takes a long time to put together a big picture from a collection of tiny little scraps, and I've already done it before. Ed Greenwood could spin this kind of stuff out forever and stay interesting. This can't. Science for Science Fiction: Inequality in these columns for the first time, as this is only 1+2/3 pages long. |t also overlaps with the previous column a little when it talks about icelandic history, as the gap between history and mythology gets fuzzy after a certain distance. As ever, the ruminations on both astronomy and genetics are long since superceded, as we've improved our information gathering equipment a lot since then. The info on endangered animals has also changed a fair bit since then, and I have no doubt it will continue to do so given the way we treat the environment. So this continues to be slightly more interesting than the fantasy column because it shows just how much our understanding of the world has changed over the years, and how it might continue to do so within our lifespan. That's worth more than another flight of pure imagination. Film & Television: Flash Gordon gets a thoroughly mixed review where the reviewer feels the good bits just throw the awful cheesy parts into even sharper relief. The supporting cast and effects are good, but the lead actor is terrible, the story is weak, and the whole thing is thoroughly unfaithful to the source material. Just another example of how hollywood doesn't take sci-fi seriously despite the enormous commercial successes Star Wars & Trek have had. That crap could really do with a cull. A good example of how things have actually got better for geeks in recent decades. Altered States also gets a mixed, but slightly more positive review. It's basically a riff on Jekyll & Hyde/The incredible Hulk with lots of 60's psychedelia thrown in, and whether you'll find it deep and meaningful, or merely incoherent nonsense will very much be a matter of taste. Not everyone has the same inner demons, so playing with symbolism is very much hit and miss. Media: This column delves into the murky world of hollywood accounting, and the ways they try and ensure a profit, while making it look like they never actually make one for tax purposes. The studio system has become bloated and corrupt with price gouging and forcing cinemas to do several month guaranteed runs even if the film flops. They're even asking for percentages of the food sold at the cinema, which just forces them to jack the prices up even further, and makes sneaking your own in make far more sense. It's a system rife with abuse, and means the profitability of a film is heavily based on the deal negotiated rather than actual audience response. All together now. THAT'S SHOWBIZ!!! As with the previous article, It's funny to see how things have changed. The internet may mean there's less money in media as a whole due to the ease of pirating, but people are more able to find and buy precisely what they want, rather than what's advertised, and there's fewer limitations due to manufacturing and distribution logistics. But there's still plenty of scummy backroom stuff and legal shenanigans big companies can pull to stack the deck in their favour, and nepotism is just as strong a force as ever. So this article is very interesting indeed, even if it's not particularly game related. Nice to see them applying their analytical cynicism to other areas. Voyage of the B.S.M Pandora: In contrast with all their previous games, this is a solitaire one, where the challenges you face are heavily determined by the dice, but there's also a strong element of player choice and resource management as you choose how long your voyage is and how you deal with the things you encounter. Like the old choose your own adventure books, which this strongly resembles, you can get different results even if you choose the same route. (presuming you don't cheat on the dice, which is always a particular temptation in a solitaire game) It has more depth to it than most CYOA books though, despite being dramatically compressed, due to the larger scope of play than simply controlling a single character on an adventure. So once again, while something like this doesn't give you the full flexibility of an actual roleplaying game, it has a lot more depth than most boardgames while still giving you a clear objective and path of play, (which is where RPG's can often fall down) and shows off their ambitions in quite an interesting way. I definitely want to see what else they have planned before they go down. Dragon deigns to advertise in it's competitor's pages. Guess that shows TSR are taking SPI seriously as challengers. Books: The Devil's Game by Poul Anderson is unusually light on the supernatural elements for him, which allows the reviewer to praise him for being versatile and trying different things. There's things you can do with ambiguity that you simply can't if everyone knows for certain all the weirdness is real. Malafrena by Ursula Le Guin is set in a fantasy world, but is also devoid of any other supernatural phenomena. This means she can do a historical drama without feeling beholden to the details of real world history. Your own fanbase can become your worst enemy if they don't buy into the details. The Mind Game by Norman Spinrad continues this theme, making the point yet again that fantasy and sci-fi still aren't as credible as other genres, and it's quite possible they're doing it to get more mainstream success and literary plaudits. It's a tiresome business chasing money and respect, but I guess that's what you've got to do when you aren't a megastar and have a family to feed. And why should a writer feel compelled to stick to one genre just because it makes life easier for the marketers anyway? More stuff that definitely gets better in the intervening decades. Leviathan's Deep by Jayge Carr sees the grumbles about feminism show up again, which also feels increasingly irritating, especially as he only does so to say that this particular novel avoids those problems despite being written by a woman and featuring interspecies gender politics as an integral plot point. I grow increasingly grateful that I won't have to put up with this for too long. Antinomy by Spider Robinson is a collection of his short stories. It gets a positive result because it's interesting without being depressing or particularly challenging, which once again highlights the conservative tendencies of the reviewer. Once again, I grow distinctly more unimpressed. Star Driver by Lee Correy gets a positive review for more agreeable reasons. Combining solid sci-fi speculations with properly written characters? That ought to work in any era, regardless of the political trends. Beyond Rejection by Justin Leiber gets even higher praise, made all the moreso because it's a debut novel. If he can keep it up, he has a bright future ahead of him. Since he publishes 5 novels, then leaves fiction behind for academia, the commercial realities at least don't agree with the reviewer in hindsight. Trying to predict the future rarely works too well, unfortunately. And finally, The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy gets a brief, but very positive recommendation. Given it's longevity, I think this doesn't really need any analysis. Just another voice in the choir. Quick Combat II: A second, different way of speeding up DragonQuest in this magazine? That really does rub in the fact that most people don't want a combat system that heavy and detail obsessed. Still, this one is crunchier than the previous one, which was basically just GM fiat. It seems to be aimed at boiling down larger group combat into a few rolls, and there's still a fair bit of math involved. It also assumes fighting to the death without surrender as the default, which means total death for the loser, and high casualties for the winning side, which will please neither fans of realism, or players who have to argue about which PC's in the group die after a single die exchange even if they win. For that reason, I really can't see this system working in an actual campaign, as it'd be far too lethal and divisive to maintain a functional group dynamic unless every player had multiple characters and was ok with them being replaced regularly. But it's still interesting to see them trying to make things work better. Will one of them stick? DragonNotes: Completely unsurprisingly, they institute a regular column for DragonQuest material as part of their increased focus on gaming. This first one isn't that interesting though, being entirely self-promotion, much of which is repeated from the advert earlier in the issue. Lots of stuff coming out in the near future, both adventures and game aids. You might want to hold off on buying the core for a few months if you haven't already though, as they plan on incorporating all the errata people have found in the next print run. Is it really a good idea to say something like that? Oh well, at least it's admitting your flaws. And this shows again how serious they are about building this up into an extensive gameline to rival D&D. Hopefully they'll give us some useful material in here while it lasts. Games: Shooting Stars gets a long and very sardonically negative review that leaves you in absolutely no doubt why they don't like it. Shovelware that's a poor copy of a previous game they liked? Why even bother? Save your money and time, and leave the suffering to the professionals. Azhanti High Lightning, on the other hand, they rather like. It works as both a game, and worldbuilding, and the ship plans are a thing of beauty. They're useful for anyone who wants to play in a large-scale sci-fi spaceship, whether active or crashed dungeon crawl. Well worth checking out. Asteroid is by the same team as Azhanti, but has simpler rules, and a far more humorous tone, as a band of oddballs (and their dog mascot) have to save the world from an asteroid headed towards it, while dealing with some ridiculous subplots. Again, the ideas in here are eminently stealable to use in another format. GDW are really on a roll at the moment creatively. Feedback: The feedback form becomes concerned with the competition, asking which other gaming magazines you read/subscribe too, and what they could change to get your sweet reliable subscription money. The number of very specific DragonQuest questions increases, as they try to pinpoint what supplements will sell best, and we get an interesting hint that they're considering adding computer gaming to the mix, as they ask what computers you own as well. They're still planning a fair number of standalone wargames though, even if a greater proportion of them are sci-fi. So we can definitely see the transitions in focus over the year just from looking at these forms. Let's hope that continues to be the case. Once again, some quite high contrasts in here between the bits that I like and the ones I don't, with the ambition of the game material feeling like it comes from a different world to the very critical and weirdly conservative review sections and somewhat dull columns. It does make for quite a strange mix, and not one I would have kept on buying myself back in the day. But as we're already a third of the way through this, doing the rest doesn't seem too onerous. Lets see what strangeness the next issue brings. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
[Let's Read] ARES Magazine
Top