* 
Welcome Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?


*
gfxgfx Home Forum Help Search Login Register   gfxgfx
gfx gfx
gfx
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: Wind School: Sphere 1 (Spiritual): Lightness: Floating Thoughts (L1)  (Read 6993 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Aos
Aspiring Member
**

Gained Aura: 9
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 67


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: 04 August 2010, 03:11:02 »

Quote from: Drasil
[...]the Earth mage "binds" the earthen portions of the mind to an object or place, thus creating a spirit or a wraith.  Since Earth is the element of permanence, it was decided that the portions of the mind (and thus the thoughts) it dominated would be those pertaining to memories and the past.  The spiritual domination of Earth in the wraith or ghost is also what explains its repetitive actions (hauntings) and single-minded nature.  [...]

This brought a rather mischievous smile to my face. Earth "binding" the mind/memories to an object to create a wraith and Fire imbuing a dead body with the "Spark of Life" is valid - but using lightness (wind) to make thoughts float is unacceptably metaphorical/poetical?  grin



Status update:
(1) Made the requested change re 'thoughts' + updated the main post

(2) The only issue that needs to be resolved concerns the 'lightness' property now. For your convenience:

Coren and Drasil disagree on whether the property of lightness can be used in the way I described here. Coren thinks it can, Drasil does not:


Quote from: Aos
Floating Thoughts causes the thoughts of the target to become lighter and float away like a feather caught in a morning breeze. Eventually the whole mind becomes as light and fleeting as a puff of air, making the target more likely to drift off to other worlds. As this spiritual form of “lightness” becomes dominant in the carall, the victim starts to forget his duties and gets distracted easily. This may also cause the target to become inattentive to his immediate environment: his thoughts may have wandered off elsewhere...

Quote from: Drasil
I'm not comfortable with your property choice here, though what the spell does is fine.  Would it be possible to switch it to the element's property of being insubstantial and impermanent or something along those lines.  Then you could make them have less 'weight' and disappear.  The idea of them becoming so light that they float away doesn't really strike me as plausible.

Quote from: Drasil
like the general idea of working through the properties and creating spells for each to show newer members the differences between them.  That being said, they still need to be plausible spells.  Having thoughts "float" away is far too metaphorical.  A floating thought is a description used by a poet to provide a better image for his or her reader, not what actually happens.  In reality, when you "forget" a thought, it disappears from your mind, hence why the property of insubstantiability is what is actually being used.  By increasing the influence of wind, you are dimming the 'physical' form of the wind, causing it to fade, and disperse and disappear (or 'float') out of the caster's mind.

Quote from: Drasil
As I mentioned, above, I'm still very opposed to the use of the lightness property.  If you insist on using it, you are going to need to dredge Mina or Fox from the depths of the world to do it because I am not comfortable blarrowing it.

The solution (or rather: clarification) I proposed, with which Coren agrees

Quote from: Aos
Increasing the property of lightness in a solid object will make it less heavy (see: Feather L1) – but it would take quite a bit of effort to make it so light that levitates off the ground and begins to float away (see: Levitation). Thoughts on the other hand are things of Wind – weightless, wispy, ephemeral; here one second and gone the next... Thoughts are already light, enough to coast effortlessly on the currents of the mind (Water) – the slightest inducement and off they fly.

In the words of the scholar Coren FrozenZephyr: ‘Thoughts are like tides; constantly they course, swell and reflect off the shores of the mind. One wave passes away so the next can be born into the Dream. Water flows, and so does the mind, shifting from one idea (wind) to the next.’ (Extract from Serenity L4)

Knowledge is Wind, but cognition (or awareness) arises from Water, from the currents circulating through the mind, carrying the thoughts, bringing ideas (Wind) together, integrating them, providing the opportunity for connections to form like a lacework of foam riding the crest of the wave.

Every mind has a unique balance between the weight of its thoughts (Wind) and the current on which they coast (Water). Increasing the influence of Wind in the carall does not cause the influence of Water to rise too – if anything, as the influence of Wind waxes, that of the other three elements wane. If thoughts abruptly grow lighter but the speed of the main current (the speed at which a mind thinks, the speed at which it sifts through ideas) remains constant, cognition can no longer keep up with these thoughts and they will be swept away by the next impromptu current surging past.

Mina/Fox's input would be greatly appreciated  undecided
« Last Edit: 04 August 2010, 03:39:26 by Drasil Razorfang » Logged

"Logic in the service of appreciation, and appreciation in the service of reverence, which, in the face of wonders not of our making, is our only proper response." Colin Tudge, The Secret Life of Trees
Drasil Razorfang
Moderator
****

Gained Aura: 47
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2.034



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: 04 August 2010, 03:39:47 »

I reduced the size of your font because that was utterly obnoxious.


Quote
Increasing the property of lightness in a solid object will make it less heavy (see: Feather L1) – but it would take quite a bit of effort to make it so light that levitates off the ground and begins to float away (see: Levitation). Thoughts on the other hand are things of Wind – weightless, wispy, ephemeral; here one second and gone the next... Thoughts are already light, enough to coast effortlessly on the currents of the mind (Water) – the slightest inducement and off they fly.

I must have missed this argument earlier but this reasoning is invalid because you are comparing two extremely different things.  One is spiritual, the other is physical.  Simply because of this they behave different.

Quote
This brought a rather mischievous smile to my face. Earth "binding" the mind/memories to an object to create a wraith and Fire imbuing a dead body with the "Spark of Life" is valid - but using lightness (wind) to make thoughts float is unacceptably metaphorical/poetical

Yes, they are rather different.  You chose to highlight the more metaphorical aspects in which people describe Earth and Fire necromancy, however there is a technical, scientific explanation that is present to back both up.  If you really want to press the point I can sit here and bore you with all the details but it was you who "humbly requested that we not clutter your thread."  Your floating thoughts are nothing but metaphor that doesn't have the technical, scientific side to back it up, and, to make it worse, your spell doesn't even touch upon what Coren likes to call "high magical theory," where such overdone metaphor is accepted, its just a basic little spell.

In its simplest form, the point I am trying to make here is insubstantiability is a better property to use than floating thoughts.  Whether or not it is a valid metaphor is all well and good of a discussion but making them invisible is the best solution.
« Last Edit: 04 August 2010, 04:22:05 by Drasil Razorfang » Logged
Aos
Aspiring Member
**

Gained Aura: 9
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 67


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: 04 August 2010, 03:43:44 »

I think obnoxious is a bit of a strong word.

I'm doing my best to be helpful: I summarised the whole discussion so that others can quickly skim what was said. But then the two points I wanted to make got lost in all the quoted text so I made it larger to stand out - again to help people scan the thread faster. How big is too big? Is this not a personal preference?
Logged

"Logic in the service of appreciation, and appreciation in the service of reverence, which, in the face of wonders not of our making, is our only proper response." Colin Tudge, The Secret Life of Trees
Drasil Razorfang
Moderator
****

Gained Aura: 47
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2.034



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: 04 August 2010, 03:49:19 »

Sixteen point font was overkill.  12 point does the job just fine. 
Logged
Mina
Moderator
****

Gained Aura: 63
Offline Offline

Posts: 2.833



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: 05 August 2010, 19:44:25 »

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that the main issue is what the nature of thought is, and whether it is something that can be affected by "lightness"? 

There seems to be the assumption on both sides that thoughts are discrete objects or entities.  I don't that's necessarily the case, but that's alright too I suppose.  Or maybe by "thought" you are referring to ideas and other things that are thought about, rather than the process of thinking itself.  I am slightly confused here. 

As for lightness, like I said to Coren, I was more inclined to agree with Drasil that making thoughts light is taking a metaphor too literally.  Lightness, as I understood it, was a physical property, and the mind is spiritual, isn't it?  So it didn't quite make sense that thoughts and other mental things could be lightened.  Then again, maybe properties don't have to be one way or the other.  After all, the elements are both, and the properties are just specific aspects of them.  In the past, I have thought (or maybe someone else suggested, I don't really remember anymore) that some properties look like they could be explained in terms of others.  For example, solidity seem to be related to permanence, which as I understand it is the tendency to not change, in the sense of tending to not change shape.  I've not given it that much thought, but maybe each element has just one property, and all others are derived from it.  But I think that's getting a little off-topic. 

So perhaps thoughts actually do have weight, and if sufficiently lightened they might drift off.  But a possible odd consequence of that, it seems to me, would be that there could be random thoughts just drifting around, waiting to "bump into" someone, where I guess it would probably seem to the person that he or she has just randomly thought of something.  Hmm, that's actually quite interesting.  On the other hand, I think thoughts are a little like pieces of the mind.  Selectively lightening parts of a body doesn't seem to me like it would make them any more likely to drift away, unless they're not really attached, or at least not very tightly attached. 

Regarding the mind, I definitely agree with Drasil that it's not quite right to say that it is completely Wind, though it doesn't really seem to me that Coren was saying that anyway.  Are your views here really that different?  Both of you seem to be saying that thought is mostly Wind, with the other elements present in different quantities depending on the specific thoughts.  That said, some of the things Drasil mentioned seemed more like emotions than thoughts to me.  Are we making a distinction between thoughts and emotions and other mental things, or are they all being lumped together?  Perhaps the contents of thoughts (ie. what is being thought about/remembered) are Wind, and the other elements provide the emotions associated with them? 

I think it'd also really help if we were to define how thinking works, ie. what it means to think about something.  I suppose the premise of this spell is that thinking has something to do with thoughts being present in (or maybe "on" would be more accurate here, if such terms are even useful for nonphysical things) the mind, and they are no longer being thought of if they leave the mind somehow.  But where do they come from, and where do they go?  If memories are considered a form of thought too, shouldn't there be somewhere where they are stored until they are being accessed?  Where might that be? 

I hope this doesn't scare you away from magic, Aos.  I think you write quite well.   :)  This spell just happened to be about something that, as far as I know, hasn't been that clearly defined yet. 

A few other things I noticed along the way:

1.
I don't think there's much point to discussing the elements of the Chosen.  They aren't typical magi, and are in fact probably more like clerics.  Even if their gods are associated with a certain element, they aren't necessarily limited to it in the way Ximaxian elemental magi are. 

2.
Quote
(Extract from Understanding Magic through Logic – and Logic alone!: A Ximaxian Treatise, by Wizard Thaelnoric Tempestbringer of Astran - a major opponent of Aelephtháer’s teachings. Thaelnoric was human mage hailing from the Erpheronian people, a tribe known in Santharia as ‘the Proudmen’)
Maybe it's just me, but the extract felt more like it came from a speech than from someone's writings. 

3.
Quote
It is a bit like releasing a cluster of balloons – the lighter ones will go up and vanish faster, leaving only the blue balloon in sight.
Do we actually have balloons? 
Logged

Aos
Aspiring Member
**

Gained Aura: 9
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 67


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: 06 August 2010, 23:09:55 »

Thank you, everyone, for your comments. I am learning a lot by going through them.

Quote from: Drasil
I'm not comfortable with your property choice here, though what the spell does is fine.  Would it be possible to switch it to the element's property of being insubstantial and impermanent or something along those lines.  Then you could make them have less 'weight' and disappear.  The idea of them becoming so light that they float away doesn't really strike me as plausible.

Quote from: Drasil
In its simplest form, the point I am trying to make here is insubstantiability is a better property to use than floating thoughts.  Whether or not it is a valid metaphor is all well and good of a discussion but making them invisible is the best solution.

Drasil, I'm slightly confused. These two statements seem to suggest two different things. Would the following make this spell work (please let me know if I understood you correctly): Based on Quote-1, you are not objecting to thoughts 'disappearing' (or 'floating away,' to use a more poetic expression). If I use the property of insubstantialness or weightlessness, then that could make thoughts have less 'weight' and disappear. You're saying that you don't think the property of lightness can make something (in this case: a thought) so light that it floats away on its own - whereas 'weightlessness'/'insubstantiallity' would do the trick. So the objection is one of degree - 'lightness' is not 'powerful' (in inverted commas) to do the job, 'weightlessness/insubstantiality' is.



Quote
I reduced the size of your font because that was utterly obnoxious.

Quote
Yes, they are rather different.  You chose to highlight the more metaphorical aspects in which people describe Earth and Fire necromancy, however there is a technical, scientific explanation that is present to back both up.  If you really want to press the point I can sit here and bore you with all the details but it was you who "humbly requested that we not clutter your thread."  Your floating thoughts are nothing but metaphor that doesn't have the technical, scientific side to back it up, and, to make it worse, your spell doesn't even touch upon what Coren likes to call "high magical theory," where such overdone metaphor is accepted, its just a basic little spell.

Drasil, I respect your knowledge and expertise, and the points you raise are instructive in that they help fill in gaps that were not clear from the entries on the site - however, could you please perhaps take more care in the way you phrase yourself? I don't object to the content of your comments - but the tone you sometimes use is teetering on the verge of being offensive.

Please allow me to clarify: I do not object to your saying that this spell does not work. I do not mind reworking an entry over and over and over and over again until it works. I'm also willing to kill my own entries, regardless of how much effort has gone into them, for the sake of sound explanation. I am also more than happy to read up on any discussions between experts on magic theory. I am willing to - and indeed have - put in hours reading up the magic entries on the site, going through the various spells, and researching as much of the older debates to which links were provided as time allowed. None of that would scare me away from magic (or Santharia).

The quid pro quo for this, the only thing I ask in return, is that I am treated with a certain degree of courtesy. As a contributor to this development forum, I believe I am entitled to some respect. Being a 'newbie' should not preclude that. (And if it does, I am not sure I wish to be part of this project.)

The font size is of course a trivial matter - but it illustrates the point I wish to make well. People have different views on what is too large. People have different eyesight. Now, as moderator, I appreciate that you need to have special powers and take certain actions such as editing other people's posts to change the font size, as you are responsible for keeping the forum organised. If you told me: "16 font seems a bit too large. As a rule of thumb, we recommend/require that 12 should be used when you wish to draw attention to something" - that would have been perfectly fine. But saying "I reduced the size of your font because that was utterly obnoxious" is downright rude.

Just because I am a newcomer, does this mean more experienced members get to talk down to me?

"Your floating thoughts are nothing but metaphor that doesn't have the technical, scientific side to back it up": Had this been an utterly unresearched spell and all the magic experts were unanimous that it contravened the way magic works here, fine. But at least one magic expert, Coren Frozenzephyr, said, multiple times, that he thought the spell was valid and in line with established principles. Now please understand: I am not saying this spell  and/or Coren's opinion is "right" or the "best" solution. But doesn't the fact that at least one magic expert supports it show that it was not as totally ill-researched as you assert? Again, perhaps after discussion it will be decided that an alternative view is more convincing and should replace the explanation here. That is fine. But I find the totalitarian tone of the quote disrespectful towards me, and to Coren indirectly, for having said that he agreed with the spell and the explanation behind it.

In the future, please do feel free to tear into pieces any spell or entry I write. I will regard that as a challenge and a valuable learning experience. But do please take more care with the way you word things, lest you cause offence where none was intended.




« Last Edit: 06 August 2010, 23:12:30 by Aos » Logged

"Logic in the service of appreciation, and appreciation in the service of reverence, which, in the face of wonders not of our making, is our only proper response." Colin Tudge, The Secret Life of Trees
Drasil Razorfang
Moderator
****

Gained Aura: 47
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2.034



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: 07 August 2010, 05:28:33 »

Quote
Drasil, I'm slightly confused. These two statements seem to suggest two different things. Would the following make this spell work (please let me know if I understood you correctly): Based on Quote-1, you are not objecting to thoughts 'disappearing' (or 'floating away,' to use a more poetic expression). If I use the property of insubstantialness or weightlessness, then that could make thoughts have less 'weight' and disappear. You're saying that you don't think the property of lightness can make something (in this case: a thought) so light that it floats away on its own - whereas 'weightlessness'/'insubstantiallity' would do the trick. So the objection is one of degree - 'lightness' is not 'powerful' (in inverted commas) to do the job, 'weightlessness/insubstantiality' is.

That is a good point.  I didn't phrase myself very well there.  When I said insubstantiality, I meant it in the sense that the thought takes on a less solid form, in a sense "disappearing.", not that it loses mass and float away.  Its been ages since I've looked at the official properties thread so I only have the official names of properties memorized for Earth, but the one I was trying to reference was the wind property that allows it to make things invisible.  If you increase the influence of wind, making the thought invisible, then it disappears in the person's mind.  At least that's how I see it.

Concerning the rest of your post, I'll start off first by saying I'm a rather blunt person.  I don't believe in sugar coating my words and critique which is probably where some of the language you found to be unfriendly came from.  I didn't choose to come and pick on you because you are new.  I spoke with you the same way I speak with any of my other colleagues who submit an entry; mater-of-factly stating things I believed to be truths.  If you wish to get to know me, as a person, better, pop into the IRC.  I'm quite chatty and friendly in there, especially with those who are familiar with magic (I'm always up for a good magic debate).

In addition, in the two forums I moderate I try to ensure that the entries I approve are as close to perfect as possible, often to an extent that some others think is a bit too far.  My expectations are heightened further for those who I see have great potential.  It is no secret that this was an impressive first spell.  You clearly have a solid handle on the concepts of magic and will be very successful on this board in the future.  As such I chose to, as you phrased it "tear your spell to pieces" because you clearly had all the fundamentals in your grasp and only made more complicated, detail-oriented errors. 

All that being said, a large part of the response you received from me is because you were starting to grate on my nerves.  I have no problem having people ask for further elaboration upon comments that I make that they don't completely understand, but I have no tolerance for those who ignore comments nor those who are disrespectful.  After your first few posts you began, at least in the way I saw it, do both of these things.  Rather than addressing what would have been a fairly basic change (changing lightness do another property) that would have had almost no effect on the content of your spell, you blew it off as well as my subsequent explanations.  The tone you adopted was condescending, almost as though you thought because Coren agreed with you you were suddenly above my requests.  As a person who fought quite hard to get any sort of standing on these boards, especially in this forum in particular people talking down to me or ignoring me warrants a violent reaction.

I am glad, however, that you brought this up so that we can clear the air.  I don't know about you, but I do tend to hold grudges for quite some time.  I respect the fact that you were mature enough to address the issue and look forward to seeing your next submission. 
« Last Edit: 07 August 2010, 06:05:12 by Drasil Razorfang » Logged
Rayne (Alýr)
Dreamress
Santh. Member
***

Gained Aura: 117
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 4.466



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: 31 December 2011, 06:18:05 »

The board always gets a bit nervous when bringing up old entries, but as I was asked to comment, I shall.


Oh, Aos, you’re a terribly charming writer, with a brimming enthusiasm that shows in your work. I love this in discussions. For entries, though, be careful not to let the details pull you all sorts of esoteric ways, for, particularly in magic (which is terribly confusing), clarity and concision are of the upmost!

Krean monks! My goodness! Not only are Krean monks unlikely to come to Santharia (supposing they ever did!) but they are generally considered an extinct tribe, hence why the tribal entry is all in past-tense. In addition, the resistance to this spell you noted is likely to be repeated in many high-level mages, as well as anyone who has a strong will.

“Spiritual” spells of this nature are difficult to cast because they are cast on a living car’all. All car’allia seek to return to their natural state, such that if you make a rock float through magic, it will eventually, in time, return to the ground. Living car’allia are the same way, except they also have a will. Everything remaining equal, I have more control over my car’all that you have over it, regardless if I am a magic user or not. The stronger the target car’all’s will, the harder the spell will be, because it will fight against any change to its natural state.

With regards to elves and Ximaxian magic: there’s a great quote from Artimidor that goes, “Are there elves in Ximax? I don't think so.” It was Artimidor’s way of saying that elves don’t practice Ximaxian magic, nor do they think in Ximaxian terms. The site is so misleading, since I believe many tribal entries mention wind mages and xeua mages among elves--but in truth, I remember Artimidor once saying that if you brought up ounia and xeua with an elf, they would likely give you a puzzled look. Magic is more intuitive for elves, who are deeply connected to the Dream, so more than likely, your Maeverhim would be unable to help you with this spell, though perhaps a human Ximaxian scholar might!

If I were to go out and seek the effect of this spell in nature (not the spell, just the effect), I imagine I would find it among those meditating. This seems to me a spell that many might cast on themselves to meditate and help calm them down. Elves probably ‘cast’ this spell unknowingly, being a meditative race.

Those are my thoughts. I hope this helps!
Logged

"There is much misjudgment in the world. Now, I knew you for a unicorn when I first saw you, and I know that I am your friend. Yet you take me for a clown, or a clod, or a betrayer, and so I must be if you see me so. The magic on you is only magic and will vanish as soon as you are free, but the enchantment of error that you put on me I must wear forever in your eyes. We are not always what we seem..." -Schmendrick the Magician, The Last Unicorn
Aos
Aspiring Member
**

Gained Aura: 9
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 67


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: 31 December 2011, 07:07:31 »

Oh dear. It seems Coren may have saddled me with a topic *slightly* more complicated than I realised... Oh well. On the basis that the best way out is often through, I will overhaul the entry and post a clean version. Thank you, Rayne. Your comments were very helpful.

I think what Coren had in mind was to introduce me to the Ximaxian system by working the properties of a given element one spell at a time. I tried to use his 'Calm' and 'Serenity' spells as a template.

1) I swear Krean monks were Coren's idea! From the way he was talking, I got the sense that the Ancient Krean ('Aestera Kreankra Lillivear') were extinct, but there were many 'Krean' tribes, descendants of the mythical Ancient Krean, scattered around the world. I think he envisioned the Krean monks mentioned here as wandering sages. He may have used the word 'Peregrine', but upon research that seems to be a species of falcon! Unless these monks could fly?  shocked

I wonder if the whole Krean monk thing was something of an inside joke. I get the feeling that smuggling in a reference to the Krean at the most bizarre places may have been Coren's trademark...

I'll see if I can rework the section. In the worst case scenario it could be removed and perhaps 'recycled' for a future entry on these monks? I just found a copy of 10 page msn discussion with Coren, which started with 'You know those Krean monks I suggested for your spell? They have quite an interesting story actually. Briefly: [...]". With hindsight, I suppose that 'briefly' ought to have been my cue.

Does he always have a  readily-accessible encyclopedia on everything Krean nestled in his head?   speechless Actually, that seems like an excellent idea to quickly get a couple of entries under my belt. Just ask him a question on the Krean, and write down verbatim what he says 'off the top of (his) head' for the next forty minutes. Should give one enough material for a masterwork or two.

2) Got you on the Maeverhim! :) I was a bit sloppy with my wording there. He wasn't actually lecturing on Ximaxian magic. Rather I wanted to have a scenario where human mages discovered that elves could intuitively achieve an effect very similar to this spell and went to see him to hear about how the elves described what they were doing.

All right, I'm officially tired now and may have started to make less and less sense. Time for bed!

Thanks again, Rayne! hug
Logged

"Logic in the service of appreciation, and appreciation in the service of reverence, which, in the face of wonders not of our making, is our only proper response." Colin Tudge, The Secret Life of Trees
Rayne (Alýr)
Dreamress
Santh. Member
***

Gained Aura: 117
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 4.466



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: 31 December 2011, 08:08:10 »

Coren was an invaluable resource. Aside from Artimidor, I do not know anyone who has such a clear, complex, comprehensive vision of a culture here at Santharia. A remarkable developer--an even more remarkable friend. I miss him terribly, and hope he one day returns.

It sounds like there will be some changes to this entry--please don't hesitate to let me know if you would like for me to take another look. I love your ideas, and I feel your vision is very clear, the angel in the marble. All that is needed is to cut away the excess and polish the stone.  heart
Logged

"There is much misjudgment in the world. Now, I knew you for a unicorn when I first saw you, and I know that I am your friend. Yet you take me for a clown, or a clod, or a betrayer, and so I must be if you see me so. The magic on you is only magic and will vanish as soon as you are free, but the enchantment of error that you put on me I must wear forever in your eyes. We are not always what we seem..." -Schmendrick the Magician, The Last Unicorn
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to:  

Recent
[27 March 2019, 00:01:57]

[21 June 2018, 14:28:00]

[31 May 2017, 06:35:55]

[06 May 2017, 05:27:04]

[03 April 2017, 01:15:03]

[26 March 2017, 12:48:25]

[15 March 2017, 02:23:07]

[15 March 2017, 02:20:28]

[15 March 2017, 02:17:52]

[14 March 2017, 20:23:43]

[06 February 2017, 04:53:35]

[31 January 2017, 08:45:52]

[15 December 2016, 15:50:49]

[26 November 2016, 23:16:38]

[27 October 2016, 07:42:01]

[27 September 2016, 18:51:05]

[11 September 2016, 23:17:33]

[11 September 2016, 23:15:27]

[11 September 2016, 22:58:56]

[03 September 2016, 22:22:23]
Members
Total Members: 1019
Latest: lolanixon
Stats
Total Posts: 144586
Total Topics: 11052
Online Today: 26
Online Ever: 700
(23 January 2020, 20:05:39)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 34
Total: 34

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2005, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Theme based on Cerberus with Risen adjustments by Bloc and Krelia
Modified By Artimidor for The Santharian Dream
gfx
gfxgfx gfxgfx