Merits & Flaws and 2E

[Requiem of Forgotten Lore]

Is there any 2E book in particular that has M&F detailed like in 1E, or must I never truly put my 1E core book away?


I've been looking around - maybe not hard enough - to find if there is anything about M&F in 2E and I pretty much come up empty handed (well, minus the hair I've been pulling out trying to find something concrete) for strictly using 2E alone; it seems that most people are using 1E M&F for 2E characters.


If there is something in 2E about M&F, would someone mind pointing me in the right direction (book & page #, website or otherwise)?


Thanks in advance.

 

[Quchu]

Merits and flaws will be a part of Exalted, but there haven't been any book that detailed them yet. I think it'll be a part of the upcoming books, though.

 

[skafte]

Most of the time you can use the publiced mutations, but real merits and flaws will first appear in Scroll of Heroes - book about half-caste and x-blooded minus demon blooded which apparently will show up in MoEP: Infernals.

 

[Kkat]

When is Scroll of Heroes due out? (Or is it out already and I somehow missed it?)


--Kkat

 

[Dracogryff]

It has not yet been stated WHEN it is due out, only that it is (supposedly) the next SoEW book due out, and will feature mortals and merits and flaws. To judge by Scroll of Lesser (formerly Fallen) Races and it being moved to after Scroll of Kings...I'm not sure how much to trust that.

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

This coming Tuesday, according to the guys at the local gaming shop, is when Scroll of Heroes comes out. They've even preordered it for me. They'll actually be receiving the shipment on Monday, but they're good, and aren't giving it out 'til the next day when it's due out.

 

[Kkat]

That's great news!


I find that many times I really need a merit or flaw to properly realize a character concept.


--Kkat

 

[Heaven's Thunder Hammer]

Cool

This coming Tuesday' date=' according to the guys at the local gaming shop, is when Scroll of Heroes comes out. They've even preordered it for me. They'll actually be receiving the shipment on Monday, but they're good, and aren't giving it out 'til the next day when it's due out.[/quote']
Cool. I'm curious to see what changes have happened from 1e to 2e.

 

[Kkat]

As long as they keep "short" and "child", I'll be a happy player.


--Kkat

 

[Dracogryff]

Mmmmh. Child, I'm not too fond of...most of the time it's like an excuse to play a whiny annoying character that adds nothing, or ends up free points, as the character that takes it is a major scary killing machine and so is taken seriously when it matters, and so it fails to be a real flaw.


May just be the players I've run into that take it...I don't know. But...I'm seriously tempted to start banning it if it remains a takable feat and I run any future games.


Then again, Short has annoyed me as well, when taken by a Lunar and tried to be used as a Merit instead of a Flaw (IE, trying to use it to make shapes they can take without having Humble Mouse Shape be small enough to fit through tiny cracks and stuff). *sighs*

 

[Requiem of Forgotten Lore]

I kind of agree with Dracogryff on this. If someone takes "child" and they think that it'll be free points for them they will be sorely mistaken when I make them realize the truth of the matter in game; of course I've never had someone take it past character creation when they realized they'll be hitting a cap as far as points allowed in given areas.


I don't care what the book states, for 3 dots being given there sure isn't much draw back; so for someone who wants to play a kid up to the (rough) age of 12 will be getting only 1 dot in strength (maybe two if I'm feeling generous) and here's why: simply enough, exalt or not, their body has not matured and so lifting 100 pounds with ease is out of the question, much less as a feat with an "adrenaline rush" a 2-3 die stunt. As far as appearance is concerned they will cap out at 2 - 3 dots. I do agree with the book as far as losing up to 3 die on social rolls dealing with young adults on up (when dealing business but not lying - e.g. hitting a ball/rock through someones window, and calling it an accident, in order to try and sneak inside which wouldn't lose them any dice and in fact might net them a 1 or 2 bonus die), but when dealing with children their age they don't lose any dice at all. And this flaw will be coupled with "short" so unless they decide to keep short, when they go into their teens they will have to "buy off" being short so they can get taller.


For those who want to play a teenager in my group - aka the anime cliché "teenage hero" - (13 - roughly 16) will get only be able to get 2 dots of strength max (unless they're pushing late teens 15-16 then I might let them get a third). Same reason for reasons as stated above; however since they penalties are lifted somewhat the flaw isn't called "Child" I call it "Teenager" which is only a 2 point flaw and they take up to a 2 die penalty when dealing with grown adults. Since the character will be going through their adolescent years and puberty, for an added flaw point (if they want to take it) they will remove a dot in appearance (to no less than 1 dot) for the acne that will trouble them for the (long) time that they will spend in puberty; this does not mean they can move the point to some other spot and if already at 1 dot they cannot take (that part of) the flaw... seeing as how a blind man would already consider them ugly.


I also let them know, depending on their exalt type, that it could be decades to centuries before the cap is lightened (moving from "Child" to "Teenager') or removed altogether.


As for the "short" flaw, I let them know unless they get some sort of divine intervention, they will be capped out roughly 3 - 6 dots of strength (this all depends on the characters height), appearance is a permanent loss of 1 - 3 points; but they don't lose any points in social rolls unless they are dealing with giants that might consider a smaller inferior or that they think that their parents might have been cursed or angered a god to have birthed such a short person.


All that being said, if someone ever wanted to make a character in my group that took child &/or short and teenager, and is willing to forgo being awesome in a fight to be able to do other things (as the one could be the example of getting into a house used in above) I would very much welcome it.

 

[Kkat]

I kind of agree with Dracogryff on this. If someone takes "child" and they think that it'll be free points for them they will be sorely mistaken when I make them realize the truth of the matter in game; of course I've never had someone take it past character creation when they realized they'll be hitting a cap as far as points allowed in given areas.

Well, I definitely can't agree with that. A skilled Storyteller can make a flaw worth being a flaw without resorting to adding extra mechanical penalties.


Frankly, the granted penalty for both "short" is more than equal to the cost, and the mechanical penalty for "child" is quite sufficient as an enhancement to the difficulties that being a child would cause in a game under a competent Storyteller. The only reason to implement the sorts of restrictions that you are suggesting is if the game is purely hack-n-slash, in which case a great many other flaws are even more problematic.


A game where being "a major scary killing machine" is enough to compensate for being a small child in a social situation? Seriously? Hell, even if the Storyteller isn't capable of handling it, what about the other players? If there is a single hour of the gaming session where somebody doesn't say "shut up, kid" or otherwise treat the character appropriately as a child, then something's wrong. If the character is even allowed in rooms where adults are talking serious business, much less allowed to speak, then there's something amiss. If the character can get people to follow his or her leadership without the constant use of charms, then omgwtfbbq.


For that matter, if the game involves any mature content, even if off-screen, and the player isn't kicking himself or herself because they have the only character who will never, ever get any in the entire chronicle, then... well, hell, you have deeper problems than weak roleplaying skills or over-reliance on mechanics.


--Kkat

 

[Requiem of Forgotten Lore]

First and foremost, I do NOT take kindly to you calling me an incompetent Storyteller with weak roleplaying skills; and I don't know where you get off telling people here that or think that it's ok to say that to someone other than in jest - which your comment was not taken that way - but you need to check yourself.


I've been hard pressed to find any player that has not been reluctant to leave one of my sessions; so a weak ST I am not. Also my games are not "slaughter-fests" in that there's a fight every 15 minutes. I run a 10 hour session every Saturday I'm available and the "tanks" are lucky if there is a fight once in that whole session - and that's really only to do two things:


1- It helps the new players get comfortable with the fighting system in Exalted and get use to describing their attacks so they can start thinking fluidly during these fights - and hopefully outside of combat as well when I start giving them storyline time crunches.


2- It helps keep them from feeling like the combat charms they bought are pretty much useless.


Giving a (temporary) cap on strength for someone who's taking child does not mean that they cannot be useful in a fight, on the contrary they can use a some sort of bow or a firewand or boomstick or anything that doesn't rely on strength. Hell they could run around during the fight and try and use bolas to trip up the guards while their circle mates are keeping them distracted by actually fighting them, and when the guards are tripped their that much easier to neutralize. Or better yet, they could be one of the most bad ass "casters" that the circle has ever seen - act as a child that's awe inspired by the circle's rival army, befriends one of the soldiers and gets a tour of the garrison and barracks and pretending to go and use the restroom (or just plain hides) and then casts Hideous Confusion of Tongues and let the army pretty much fall apart would be insanely helpful. They can be highly useful in other areas, but they cannot be useful as far a melee or martial arts in concerned in my book.


I don't know if you've ever been anything other than a player, and from the looks of it (of course I could be wrong) your post before your previous one in this thread states that you are in fact a player and not a storyteller. Players want to get as many (free) points as they can (I know I use to be one), while the storyteller wants you to earn those points.


I can speak only for myself in exactly why I dislike "child." Point for point it's one of the cheapest flaws you can take in terms of drawbacks by comparison to other 3 point flaws. It also probably the only flaw you just simply grow out of - while all of the other flaws you have to do a quest to fix if that's even possible. Say a circle decides they want to stop traveling to rule a nation they just fixed for the next 300 years, one of the circle is an amputee and the other is a child; at the end of the 300 year rule, guess which one is still going to have their flaw and which one isn't.

Frankly, the granted penalty for both "short" is more than equal to the cost [...]

They drawback to a flaw cannot just be another flaw otherwise the player might as well just buy "small" and say they have it because the character is a child, and a good storyteller will not just give 6 bonus points because getting one flaw requires getting another without some serious drawbacks. And again, since getting "child" means you need to get "small" both of these flaws will just disappear over time.
Having the one of the social drawbacks of child be that the other players still treat him as though he's dead weight, just because that player is a child, after several months of the circle traveling together is asinine - and if that's the case then you might as well have all the other players take a 1 to 2 point flaw of "disciple" until the player who took child grows up and can pull their own weight.


Unlike a movie, if the player who took child can pull their own weight, like sneak into the guards quarters and unlock the door or steal the captains keys, or can do what I talked about above and try to trip up the enemy or is a highly skilled caster or in some way cause childish mischief to help further the circle's towards their goals and can do any of these or anything else as good or better than any other player, then it would make no sense for them to treat the character has 'just a child' after a while when that character should be excepted by the circle.


Lastly I don't run much "adult" storytelling, I let my players do that. I have a player that wanted to go to a brothel at one point, so the NPC pointed him the way; I roleplayed the rules (or really just the rule of having to check in his weapon while he's inside), described the inside of the place somewhat, how he picked the girls then told him that we're not roleplaying anything in the brothel. And I really don't use adult/mature themes unless the player wants to do something (like stated above) or they're looking for someone and the character type of the NPC that the circle is looking for, is one who is always surrounded by (slave) whores or maybe something like the second scene in "House of Flying Daggers."


All-in-all, how I see flaws is that the player doesn't think that there are enough points give "in the box" so they need to get a flaw. Fine, however just make them realize that they are now penalized inside the box so if they want to "get around" these flaws they just took, they need to start thinking outside of the box; otherwise they should forgo the flaw if they don't feel they can properly think outside of the box.

 

[Vanman]

I don't know if you've ever been anything other than a player' date=' and from the looks of it (of course I could be wrong) your post before your previous one in this thread states that you are in fact a player and not a storyteller. Players want to get as many (free) points as they can (I know I use to be one), while the storyteller wants you to earn those points.[/quote']
Not all players are like that. Some are. Some actually consider their flaws just as important to their characters as their stats, skills, charms or whatever. To assume a player just wants free points and will take a flaw to get those free points is just as dangerous as someone assuming your additional restrictions on the flaw make you a poor ST.

I can speak only for myself in exactly why I dislike "child." Point for point it's one of the cheapest flaws you can take in terms of drawbacks by comparison to other 3 point flaws. It also probably the only flaw you just simply grow out of - while all of the other flaws you have to do a quest to fix if that's even possible. Say a circle decides they want to stop traveling to rule a nation they just fixed for the next 300 years' date=' one of the circle is an amputee and the other is a child; at the end of the 300 year rule, guess which one is still going to have their flaw and which one isn't.[/quote']
So you tell the player he has to buy off the flaw when he "comes of age." I don't see the problem here. And it's not the only flaw that you can outgrow. You can "outgrow" Diminished Attributes (by raising that attribute with XP), Unskilled (ditto), and even Barbarian (the character comes to live in the city and learns its ways). While other flaws may need some sort of quest to overcome, the character with the Child flaw deals with this every day of his life. So the total time the character spends ridding himself of the flaw equals out. Particularly considering the time frame. It takes a while to outgrow the Child label, so it's going to take time, in game, to get rid of the flaw.


As for your 300 year rule, if the amputee hasn't found a decent Twilight to forge him a new arm by that time, then his priorities don't require the use of said arm. I'd be surprised if the time it took him to craft the limb (or get the limb crafted for him) took as much time as it did for the child to grow to adulthood.


It's your game, Req. If you want to play the flaw that way, more power to you. Not everyone is going to agree with the way you do things, but they can do what they want in their own game. That's what the forum is for. An exchange of ideas. Some will mesh with your idea of running a story. Others will not. If you're happy with your story, and your players are happy with your story and your game, then anything others say doesn't matter. I'll shut up now.


:wink:

 

[Kkat]

First and foremost' date=' I do [i']NOT[/i] take kindly to you calling me an incompetent Storyteller with weak roleplaying skills

I would not expect you to. And I accept the tongue-lashing. My words were a bit harsh; but then, they were meant as a condemnation of your approach to flaws. In truth, it takes more than one weakness to make you a poor Storyteller; I certainly have a few weaknesses of my own and based on the opinions of my players over the last fifteen years, I'm apparently exceptionally skilled as a ST. (Although I personally tend to think of myself as merely above average, having had the benefit of some tremendously skilled ST's and DM's over the years to learn from.) Therefore, I have no place to say that you are either a weak roleplayer or an incompetent Storyteller... you are almost certainly neither.


Rather, it is only your ability to handle flaws that is weak, and your method of attempting to compensate for that particular weakness which is sad and lame.

My apologies.


Now, moving on...

Giving a (temporary) cap on strength for someone who's taking child does not mean that they cannot be useful in a fight...

True. But that is hardly the problem with what you are doing. The problem is that you are adding mechanical penalties to the flaw, regardless of what those penalties are, because you aren't capable (or at least don't believe you are capable) of making that flaw worth its points with roleplay as is intended.


Now this might be because your game doesn't involve much roleplaying, or you tend to forget that the flaw exists or your simply not creative enough to figure out how being a child could be a detriment in a roleplayed situation without resorting to adding mechanical penalties. Whatever the case, this is a problem with your own capabilities, not a problem inherent with the flaw itself.

I don't know if you've ever been anything other than a player, and from the looks of it (of course I could be wrong) your post before your previous one in this thread states that you are in fact a player and not a storyteller.

That's quite the assumption. I too am tempted to make an assumption. Specifically, one about the size of your local gaming community, as the idea that someone could simultaneously be a player and a Storyteller is apparently foreign to you.

Instead, I'll merely confide a great secret... there are some places where you can find more than one Exalted game ongoing at the same time. ...ooooooh!

Players want to get as many (free) points as they can (I know I use to be one), while the storyteller wants you to earn those points.

...and then there might be an issue with the quality of your players.

J/K. I'm sure they're fine.

Even the good ones do that occasionally. But a good player will be taking flaws because they are important to the character. Because they help define the character as much as any ability. And because flaws make characters more fun to play.


Particularly with Solars, in my experience. Solars are, after all, the pure awesome of Creation. You need weaknesses just to make them more interesting!


Or... possible shocker... some players may end up with flaws because the Storyteller insists they need to take one in order to play the concept they want.


Two examples:


1) You want to play a Djala? Awesome. I love Djala. But if you want to play one, as the Storyteller, I require you to take the Short flaw.


2) You want to play an Abyssal who serves the Dowager? Well, She's only got the one. So you're gonna have to take the Child flaw.


And thus why those are the first two flaws I want to make sure are still intact. (And yes, I impose the same restrictions on myself when I want to play such characters.)

It also probably the only flaw you just simply grow out of...

Well, obviously not in the example above.

However, if the Chronicle should take place over such a time period that the character would out-grow the Child flaw, then the Storyteller could simply require the player to pay off the cost of the flaw. But this is really only necessary if the "growing up" is done over downtime. And in that case, if the player doesn't want to spend the XP or simply doesn't have enough, the Storyteller could alternatively have the player remove the appropriate number of dots in backgrounds. It's just as easy to justify losing things during downtime as gaining them.


Of course, if the growing up is happening on-screen, through roleplay, with the character struggling against a significant amount of flaw-created difficulties, then there is no reason the flaw can't be outgrown with roleplay. Many flaws can be.

Having the one of the social drawbacks of child be that the other players still treat him as though he's dead weight, just because that player is a child, after several months of the circle traveling together is asinine...

Treated as dead weight? No. Never suggested that.


Treated as a child, yes! Because he or she is one. And several months of travel isn't going to change that.


There is a difference between "dead weight" and a child.


He or she might be a skilled, precocious child, sure. The character might prove his or her worth in battle or usefulness elsewhere. But that's not going to change the fact that the kid is kid. The child still won't be treated like an adult, just like a useful and skilled child.


It's like having a roleplaying group that is made up of thirty-somethings except for one gamer who is a teenage girl. The teenager may have good roleplaying skills, be likable, and be accepted into the group. But you're not going to forget that she's a teenage girl. In-game, you're not going to expect her to come up with the plans. You're going to have players ready to curb her character's more ill-thought actions, which you will expect to occur. Out-of-game, you're going to have to make sure she's home by curfew. You're not going to let her walk home after dark, even if she only lives a quarter-mile away. You're not going to let her have any of the alcohol, even if everyone else is. You're going to censor yourself in front of her. And your going to have to deal with the possible problems her parents (and anyone else) might have with her being out with adults.


--Kkat

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

When the child is a Lunar, can pop claws and shred most threats, and can easilly just gain a form that doesn't appear like a child at all...child has no meaning.

 

[Kkat]

Shapeshifting does tend to limit the detrimental effects of any physical flaw. I couldn't blame Storyteller for reducing the point value of physical flaws in a Lunar game.


Not a problem with the Child flaw; rather an extra coolness of shapeshifting. Of course, the child flaw would still carry a degree of stigma with everyone who knew the character's age. And since the character would (if properly roleplayed) still behave like someone who isn't fully mature, the obvious immaturity of the apparent adult would generate similar social penalties amongst NPCs.


--Kkat


(The "pop claws and shred threats" bit, on the other paw, should have no impact on the value of Child whatsoever.)

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

Kind of hard to be able to say,"Get out of the fight kid, maybe when you're older," when the character is far and away the strongest combatant in the group, with Str: 4, Dex: 5, Sta: 5, and 5s in their combat abilities, 3 dot specialties that's appropriate, and more combat charms than anyone else in the group, since they aren't intending to deal with much of anything else.

 

[Dracogryff]

Aya...that would be the primary reason I dislike it...the person most likely to take in in the primary group of Exalted players I can get will take it on a physical high character, want to look like a scrawny, underweight shrimpy fourteen year old girl with no muscles despite the 3-4 Str, 5 Dex, and 3-4 Con the char has, and will be the biggest badass in combat. And keeps out of social situations almost completely.


Not much of a flaw. And then, because they have small, and are a Lunar, they try to use that to say that they should be able to fit through tiny cracks with their housecat form because it's 'Small' while having Ox Body to compensate for the HL loss, and Shapeshifting to compensate for the other issues.


If they were to actually make a character that actually would get involved in social situations, I would bet money they wouldn't take Child on them. It's in a sense, less an issue with the flaw itself, as watching players take it, and then actively negate the penalties from it by having the highest physicals in the party.


In that respect, I do agree with Requiem. But, I have to deal with one of the people who sees flaws as 'how can I get the full 10 points in these with as little penalty as possible to what I want my character to be able to do?' With such a player...I am seriously tempted to require limitations on physical stats in any future game I run.


As this was the first game I ran, I didn't realize they were making a 4-5-4 physical combat monkey when they asked if taking 'Small' and 'Child' would be all right. Small is their justification for looking like an underfed fourteen year old despite these stats...which still bugs me, too.


When you DO have players that actively try to exploit things...and actively avoid situations where their flaws may be called on them...this is what can lead to the dislike of certain flaws because they're easy prey for such players. If someone took it and then acted like a child (without acting like they were four, or a kender) instead of acting like a total adult, and being the scariest killing machine in leagues...I'm willing to bet I'd dislike it a lot less. But, you live with what you've got, I guess.

 

[Kkat]

And whether or not the kid participates in a fight is the full measure of whether or not the character is disadvantaged for having a flaw?


This would be true in a hack-n-slash game. But Exalted is really the wrong system for that sort of play.


Child is a social-oriented flaw, not a combat-oriented flaw. If you have problems with flaws that don't impact combat, then it's my opinion that the problem isn't with the flaws.


--Kkat


(Not, mind you, that Child can't have an effect on how a combat goes. It could certainly take a role in stunts! Imagine the stunts you could pull if your opponent was only knee-high to a horse! Of course, the reverse is also true.)

 

[Dracogryff]

Yes, but when the player takes it, makes a badass combat monkey and then ACTIVELY avoids the social side of things...it really isn't a flaw. And that's what I tend to end up dealing with...is someone who took it on their combat monkey, and then just keeps away from the social stuff (by, say, turning into a housecat and hiding in the corner). Either that, or does so...when in Deadly Beastman, with silver claws and armor, usually after having just shredded something without any real effort.


When this is the case, it's all but free points.


Edit: I admit, probably part of the issue is my inexperience as a DM...but this, I'm fairly certain, is a difficult case no matter the experience. And this isn't the first time this has happened. *shrugs* It makes one tempted to ban such flaws, as for me, it goes somewhat against the grain to have to spend a lot of extra time trying to force a particular player into situations where their flaw affects them...time that could be spent making the game fun for EVERYONE.


To me, it's a lot easier to either simply ban the flaw or give it some limitations such as Requiem did rather than spend hours coming up with ways to force this single player's flaws to come into play instead of coming up with plots for the group as a whole.

 

[Kkat]

If they were to actually make a character that actually would get involved in social situations, I would bet money they wouldn't take Child on them. It's in a sense, less an issue with the flaw itself, as watching players take it, and then actively negate the penalties from it by having the highest physicals in the party.

While I do sympathize with you for having to deal with players who try to get away with that, that only works if you let it. As a Storyteller, part of your job is to make use of the flaws. If you don't chose to do so, that's not a problem with either the flaw or the player. High physical stats, or combat ability, should not be able to negate a primarily social-oriented flaw.


Of course, the sort of game you run is also going to have a big impact on this. If you run hack-n-slash, with little pressure to roleplay, then flaws that don't have combat-related penalties will be nothing more than a cheap source of points. If you run a game where combat occurs maybe once every three or four sessions, then anyone building a character like the one you describe above will more than pay for the points in sheer boredom...


...or they will get involved in non-combat situations -- situations where the social relevance of being just a child will come into effect -- in order to actually get to play.

But, I have to deal with one of the people who sees flaws as 'how can I get the full 10 points in these with as little penalty as possible to what I want my character to be able to do?' With such a player...I am seriously tempted to require limitations on physical stats in any future game I run.

I've had a couple players like that in the past. One of them came into my Shadowrun game expecting to use Amnesia as a free pass for points. He was rather upset when the character turned out to have a past that didn't match his vision of the character, and moreso when that past came back to make his life very difficult for over a month of sessions.


That player eventually learned that I would take flaws seriously and would use them against the players. He eventually started treated flaws as important elements of the character concept, only taking them when they were what he really wanted to play.


The other player was a terrible munchkin who didn't catch on. He was invited to leave my gaming group and never return.


I'm curious how you would react to my current character The Shoat of the Mire. She is a small child, as she is supposed to be. She is a very capable Dusk Caste, as she is supposed to be. She's a very troubled, scary, naive character with an (appropriately) child-like loyalty to a Deathlord who she's terrified of. In the hands of the wrong player, she could be everything you don't like about the child flaw. In the hands of the right player...


--Kkat

 

[Dracogryff]

Well, I would sort of make the point that Shoat of the Mire isn't technically your character, being a canon character concept...that's beside the point. It is a canon concept that I do agree is quite an interesting one.


In your hands, from the sounds of things, it is quite possible that I wouldn't mind Shoat. In the hands of this other player I speak of...I would want to tear my hair out. *shrugs* I have never said that in the right hands it could be a good flaw...just that in the hands that I always see it in...it's an attempt for free points.


I will also make the point that Shoat cannot transform into a walking deathbeast with killer Claws of 'shred you to pieces' and Soak of 'you can't hurt me.' Or a housecat. So, it's a lot harder to simply evade situatiosn where the flaw comes into play as an Abyssal.


In the right hands, I'm sure I wouldn't have half the issue. Because someone like that would play the child as a child. Imagine that.

 

[Requiem of Forgotten Lore]

Ack! I'm actually heading out to a business conference in Oklahoma City for the next five days in a couple hours, so I didn't want to leave some things unsaid.


First I want to apologize for the tongue lashing that I gave.


Secondly I forgive you Kkat for the one you gave me.


I realize this is like talking about tapioca pudding, some like it, some hate it and some are indifferent to it.


I look forward to reading up when I get back!

 

[Kkat]

First I want to apologize for the tongue lashing that I gave.
Secondly I forgive you Kkat for the one you gave me.

Enjoy your trip!


--Kkat