The games designers dictate rather than describe what the Abyssal Exalted are. Also you have to make the unpleasant choice between being a 'slave'' and a 'renegade.' Since the Manual of Exalted Power books are the primary range of supplements, published in hardback, they really would have benefited from being printed in colour like the main rulebook. This is begging to be put into colour. All the dripping blood would look spectacular.
Although the pages are dark didn't find this book physically difficult to read. Instead, actually reading it is a more unpleasant experience. Some of the ideas mentioned in a review about Resonance gave me a better impression than the ones actually thought of by the writers. Heavy emphasis is placed on being Abyssal Exalted rather than deathknights. Playing a morbid revenant is one thing, a very cool one, playing a servant of the Void is something else. This book would have been better if playing a servant to Oblivion was optional and all Abyssals literally lived up to their name of deathknights.
The chapter on Deathlords characterises the off-the-wall style much of the more intense material of Exalted possesses. It's somewhat similar to the way the White Treatise was written.
The section on Charms, the focus for any player, was mixed. At times they can be brilliantly written: 'Abyssal surgeons can quickly determine if the patient will recover from her ailments or if she belongs in the flesh vats with the rest of the raw materials.' They do have a tendency, like the descriptions of the Abyssal Castes, to lean towards a depressive, moribund angle. Something I suspect that could be an influence of Vampire. Luckily, since this is the most critical chapter, a lot of it works but I feel could still be improved. Two martial arts styles are included; the natural Abyssal martial art: Dark Messiah Style, and Hungry Ghost Style. I think that Dark Messiah Style was rather miswritten, and the material would suit a terrestrial martial art better. The emphasis on 'bullying' direct physical violence lacks the depth for a Celestial martial arts style. The 'obscure and terrible' Hungry Ghost Style is quirky and much more stylish.
The Craft Charm for making soulsteel was a disaster. This was one of the things I was most looking forward to but all it consists of is one Charm for hammering a ghost into soulsteel rather than an intricate existential process. On the subject of Craft Charms, they're a good example of the writer constrict the players in their actions since several of the Charms can only be used for destructive purposes were you might find that being able to create something indirectly destructive due to the way the character used it, would be more valuable and give the players room to do what they want.
The chapter on Necrotech was a significant disappointment. Instead of some wonderful piece about how it blurred the differences between life and death like a corporeal version of making soulsteel, all it consists of is stitching together pieces of dead things, which requires no more exotic Abilities than Medicine and Craft (Fire) and then casting a necromancy spell to animate it. There are a lot of different things you can do with Necrotech, there's a full list of how you can use 'creation points' as well as sample creations they thought of, but the whole thing is singularly unimaginative. One fault I have with Exalted is they almost try to eschew having influences. reading Herbert West- Reanimator (particularly chapter 5- which can be found on the Wikipedia article about H.P. Lovecraft) would have ahd a massive effect on this. Necrotech requires mundane maintenance rather than being living engines of death.
It's worth noting there are several new Solar Charms which mirror Abyssal ones other players might be interested in. Back on the subject, several Abyssal Charms require the Whispers Background in a requirement called Avatar. Although their power stems from Oblivion, having Whispers of Oblivion (available to ghosts) isn't necessary but rather Whispers of the Neverborn. There seems to be a lack of proper differentiation between the sources of the Abyssals' power. The Neverborn are portrayed as being rather more alive and in a more concrete way than I feel is good for the game. They definitely are 'alive' and capable of thought and even action among those connected to them. There's no mystery in how cognizant their consciousnesses are, are the Whispers their thoughts or just the final death scream of dead gods?
The Abyssals themselves are particularly beholden to the Neverborn and according to the rulebook fully versed by their Deathlord masters in all the knowledge they want them to know. There's no scope within the existing rules for Abyssals who don't know they even have any connection to the Deathlords or know what they are. Storytellers may even decide it's better if no one even knew that the Deathlords as such even existed. One thing I think they would have benefited from is a heavier emphasis on death than Oblivion. Charms that make the Abyssals take on the aspects of ghosts would have been particularly cool. If the player decided they should take the plunge and learn Charms with the Avatar keyword (for 'Whispers of Oblivion') but allow the presence of Oblivion within them to start becoming part of their soul.
Considering it's importance I didn't actually think much of the Manual of Exalted Power series. This book is an example of why. The game has a lot of potential, but not much actualised brilliance.
Sunday, 16 October 2011
Saturday, 15 October 2011
Do Teachers Really Know How to Teach?
I ask this question because of the dramatic shift in my learning methodology over the last year.
Linguistics is a relatively easy subject to study since much of it is cut and dried. For my personal method of learning Japanese, I'm studying for a JLPT exam, I use an online resource that has the vocabulary syllabus for the previous exams. I learn a set of twenty five words every day from a set of homemade flash cards. On one side is the word and it's meaning, on the other side is the word written in Japanese. Now that I've become more familiar with the vocabulary I've stopped trying to compose sentences out of them and simply go through them word by word, although I would recommend using the words in sentences the first time you use them as it makes it more interesting.
One of the first things I do after I get up is to run through a set of flash cards, trying to remember how to write them in Japanese and if I can't I turn over the card and put it in a pile I come back to when I've finished and try again. Them I flip them all over and try to write down how the words are pronounced and what they mean. I repeat this about an hour later and then again sometime late in the day. One of the key elements is to make it easy. I don't pressure myself trying to come up with words I can't think of. The easier it is, the more fun and more effective learning is. Another key point is that I do a reasonable amount every day.
Studying a subject for up to one and a half hours at a time a couple of times a week is not as effective. Also the teachers seemed far more interested in pupils making notes and keeping their books neat than memorising the information. That's the whole point of going to classes: to learn. I test myself in a no pressure environment three times a day and try to make the tests as easy as possible. Save the stress for when you actually do an exam. You'll probably feel a lot more relaxed about it too. Teachers who bite pupils heads off for making trivial errors are bad teachers. If he classroom environment was more relaxed then pupils wouldn't think so much about behaving properly and think more about the subject the teachers are supposed to be teaching them. I've learned more about drawing from a few hours using a rather cartoony drawing book than I did in all my school art classes. Those who can do, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can teach. I never once received proper instruction on how to draw a person. Manga is an excellent way of learning to draw people's faces, the hardest part of them to capture, because it's so simple.
Linguistics is a relatively easy subject to study since much of it is cut and dried. For my personal method of learning Japanese, I'm studying for a JLPT exam, I use an online resource that has the vocabulary syllabus for the previous exams. I learn a set of twenty five words every day from a set of homemade flash cards. On one side is the word and it's meaning, on the other side is the word written in Japanese. Now that I've become more familiar with the vocabulary I've stopped trying to compose sentences out of them and simply go through them word by word, although I would recommend using the words in sentences the first time you use them as it makes it more interesting.
One of the first things I do after I get up is to run through a set of flash cards, trying to remember how to write them in Japanese and if I can't I turn over the card and put it in a pile I come back to when I've finished and try again. Them I flip them all over and try to write down how the words are pronounced and what they mean. I repeat this about an hour later and then again sometime late in the day. One of the key elements is to make it easy. I don't pressure myself trying to come up with words I can't think of. The easier it is, the more fun and more effective learning is. Another key point is that I do a reasonable amount every day.
Studying a subject for up to one and a half hours at a time a couple of times a week is not as effective. Also the teachers seemed far more interested in pupils making notes and keeping their books neat than memorising the information. That's the whole point of going to classes: to learn. I test myself in a no pressure environment three times a day and try to make the tests as easy as possible. Save the stress for when you actually do an exam. You'll probably feel a lot more relaxed about it too. Teachers who bite pupils heads off for making trivial errors are bad teachers. If he classroom environment was more relaxed then pupils wouldn't think so much about behaving properly and think more about the subject the teachers are supposed to be teaching them. I've learned more about drawing from a few hours using a rather cartoony drawing book than I did in all my school art classes. Those who can do, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can teach. I never once received proper instruction on how to draw a person. Manga is an excellent way of learning to draw people's faces, the hardest part of them to capture, because it's so simple.
Friday, 14 October 2011
The Longbow: Premature Death of Britain's Greatest Weapon
What killed off the longbow? The gun? No. That only replaced it.
This is an article I've wanted to write for some time. Saul David once performed a rather spurious test proclaiming "The longbow was dead" after comparing the point blank effectiveness of a musket against a .45ACP round from a pistol against metal armour. Just what that test proved about the longbow and it's effectiveness vis a vis the gun is lost to me. Not that musket existed at the time the longbow fell out of fashion. It would take several centuries for firearms to get that bad.
It had long been a curiosity of mine why did such a successful weapon fall out of favour and never recover? One reason is the dramatic rise in cost of yew to make bows imported from abroad. But much more important are the historically obscure facts that agriculture changed at that time from harvesting crops to animal herding, which was a far less physically demanding occupation; and more dramatically that a third of the adult working population died of hunger. Not only were bows more expensive to make but the population for levying soldiers had been decimated and over time those who served weren't in condition to use such a weapon.
Still it is a wonder why nobody thought of resurrecting it. Perhaps it had simply become such an anachronism in the miracle age of gunpowder that anybody who gave serious thought to the idea would have been too embarrassed to see it through. Shortly after the gun's ascendancy, one man claimed he could out-shoot a group of bowmen using a pistol at a hundred and twenty yards. I sorely wished when I read that than someone took him up on his offer and illustrated how incorrect he was.
Being made of iron the gun would be a relatively expensive weapon to produce. It burned powder, which was also expensive. Muskets were notoriously unreliable, both under ordinary firing conditions and especially in bad weather. Furthermore they produced copious amounts of smoke that rendered their users blind if there was a still wind.
These are trifles compared to the more serious and damning failings of the gun. The one that stands out by far the most is it's rate of fire. Troops could fire as low as two rounds a minute, with the best trained men managing only four. Accurate range was also pitiful. The chances of hitting an individual man at even fifty paces were low. At short range it had decent hitting power but this quickly wore off, with one source saying "It was an unlucky man who got injured by a musket ball at two hundred yards." Altogether, this reduced the firepower of infantry to the point where while their predecessors had stood in line to face French cavalry charges a few centuries earlier, charges by men in full plate armour, the British soldier of the Napoleonic era had to form square to defend himself against much less well armoured cavalry of his day. Sure historical proof of the dramatic decline of the efficiency of their weapon.
It does make one wonder what history would have been like if far from dying out centuries before it became obsolete, the longbow, having proved itself time and again during the Hundred Years' War, caught on and spread throughout the armies of Europe. An unlikely idea, but if anybody possessed an eye for military efficiency above maintaining the status quo (and it hadn't led to the overthrow of the nobility by the peasantry in England) then they might have considered it.
The place where gunpowder truly created a revolution in the way open battles were fought (rather than sieges) wasn't on land at all. Although firepower at sea was nothing new (the English used it during the first encounter during the Aginourt campaign, where the French had followed the established tactic of chaining their boats together to form a platform for hand to hand combat and were subsequently out-shot.)
Only in 1849 did gunpowder firing small arms truly start to outclass bows (although in this case the crossbow.) It wasn't till breach loading weapons were introduced did gunpowder weapons finally supercede the bow with their high rate of fire combined with ease of shooting.
If you had to go to battle where one side had muskets and the other had longbows, which side would you want to be on?
This is an article I've wanted to write for some time. Saul David once performed a rather spurious test proclaiming "The longbow was dead" after comparing the point blank effectiveness of a musket against a .45ACP round from a pistol against metal armour. Just what that test proved about the longbow and it's effectiveness vis a vis the gun is lost to me. Not that musket existed at the time the longbow fell out of fashion. It would take several centuries for firearms to get that bad.
It had long been a curiosity of mine why did such a successful weapon fall out of favour and never recover? One reason is the dramatic rise in cost of yew to make bows imported from abroad. But much more important are the historically obscure facts that agriculture changed at that time from harvesting crops to animal herding, which was a far less physically demanding occupation; and more dramatically that a third of the adult working population died of hunger. Not only were bows more expensive to make but the population for levying soldiers had been decimated and over time those who served weren't in condition to use such a weapon.
Still it is a wonder why nobody thought of resurrecting it. Perhaps it had simply become such an anachronism in the miracle age of gunpowder that anybody who gave serious thought to the idea would have been too embarrassed to see it through. Shortly after the gun's ascendancy, one man claimed he could out-shoot a group of bowmen using a pistol at a hundred and twenty yards. I sorely wished when I read that than someone took him up on his offer and illustrated how incorrect he was.
Being made of iron the gun would be a relatively expensive weapon to produce. It burned powder, which was also expensive. Muskets were notoriously unreliable, both under ordinary firing conditions and especially in bad weather. Furthermore they produced copious amounts of smoke that rendered their users blind if there was a still wind.
These are trifles compared to the more serious and damning failings of the gun. The one that stands out by far the most is it's rate of fire. Troops could fire as low as two rounds a minute, with the best trained men managing only four. Accurate range was also pitiful. The chances of hitting an individual man at even fifty paces were low. At short range it had decent hitting power but this quickly wore off, with one source saying "It was an unlucky man who got injured by a musket ball at two hundred yards." Altogether, this reduced the firepower of infantry to the point where while their predecessors had stood in line to face French cavalry charges a few centuries earlier, charges by men in full plate armour, the British soldier of the Napoleonic era had to form square to defend himself against much less well armoured cavalry of his day. Sure historical proof of the dramatic decline of the efficiency of their weapon.
It does make one wonder what history would have been like if far from dying out centuries before it became obsolete, the longbow, having proved itself time and again during the Hundred Years' War, caught on and spread throughout the armies of Europe. An unlikely idea, but if anybody possessed an eye for military efficiency above maintaining the status quo (and it hadn't led to the overthrow of the nobility by the peasantry in England) then they might have considered it.
The place where gunpowder truly created a revolution in the way open battles were fought (rather than sieges) wasn't on land at all. Although firepower at sea was nothing new (the English used it during the first encounter during the Aginourt campaign, where the French had followed the established tactic of chaining their boats together to form a platform for hand to hand combat and were subsequently out-shot.)
Only in 1849 did gunpowder firing small arms truly start to outclass bows (although in this case the crossbow.) It wasn't till breach loading weapons were introduced did gunpowder weapons finally supercede the bow with their high rate of fire combined with ease of shooting.
If you had to go to battle where one side had muskets and the other had longbows, which side would you want to be on?
Zombies
"...By removing the head or destroying the brain."
Zombies are a particularly horrifying adversary to face, especially in the Age of Sorrows. Lacking Essence weapons entire villages have been abandoned or devoured by these unholy monsters. On the battlefield zombies possess no training or discipline and are able to only shamble forwards at a slow pace. But they are relentless, feeling no pain from their wounds, experiencing no fear and only stop when their bodies are destroyed entirely. Once within the reach of a zombie's clasping grip there's no escaping it before they pull their victim apart limb from limb and devour them alive.
Strength: 4, Dexterity: 1, Stamina: 2
Perception: 2, Intelligence: 0, Wits: 1
Daft as a Brush: Zombies possess no abilities whatsoever.
Attack: crush attack Speed 6, Accuracy 4, Damage 4B*, Rate 1
DV/Soak: Dodge DV 0, Soak 1L, 2B (special)
Motivation: Feed
SPECIAL RULES
Arisen Hunger, Tear Attack
Zombies are incapable of wielding weapons and have only their hands and teeth to attack with. However they claw and bite so ferociously in their hunger for living flesh their damage is resolved differently to normal bashing damage. Instead of cycling down the victim's entire health chart before inflicting lethal damage, first mark a box with a level of bashing damage, and then if the attack has inflicted another, add the second level of bashing damage to make it lethal damage.
Risen Dead
Trying to stop a zombie is almost impossible. You may be able to run faster but they keep on coming no matter what you throw at them. Only crippling attacks and attacks aimed at the zombie's head inflict any injury. A crippling attack may lop off it's arms or legs, but will do no actual damage on it's health chart. Only attacks aimed at it's head can stop a zombie. Also a zombie is not incapacitated by bashing damage when it reaches it's incapacitated health level but goes on receiving lethal damage while fully active and does not suffer from wound penalties. Only weapons sufficiently powerful to completely destroy it's body such as Essence weaponry or fire can kill it otherwise.
Mask of Winter took the rather devious step of overcoming the zombie's inherent lack of discipline by chaining his zombies together into gangs with iron collars around their necks. This had the added advantage of making it impossible to cut their heads off at the neck.
Zombies are a particularly horrifying adversary to face, especially in the Age of Sorrows. Lacking Essence weapons entire villages have been abandoned or devoured by these unholy monsters. On the battlefield zombies possess no training or discipline and are able to only shamble forwards at a slow pace. But they are relentless, feeling no pain from their wounds, experiencing no fear and only stop when their bodies are destroyed entirely. Once within the reach of a zombie's clasping grip there's no escaping it before they pull their victim apart limb from limb and devour them alive.
Strength: 4, Dexterity: 1, Stamina: 2
Perception: 2, Intelligence: 0, Wits: 1
Daft as a Brush: Zombies possess no abilities whatsoever.
Attack: crush attack Speed 6, Accuracy 4, Damage 4B*, Rate 1
DV/Soak: Dodge DV 0, Soak 1L, 2B (special)
Motivation: Feed
SPECIAL RULES
Arisen Hunger, Tear Attack
Zombies are incapable of wielding weapons and have only their hands and teeth to attack with. However they claw and bite so ferociously in their hunger for living flesh their damage is resolved differently to normal bashing damage. Instead of cycling down the victim's entire health chart before inflicting lethal damage, first mark a box with a level of bashing damage, and then if the attack has inflicted another, add the second level of bashing damage to make it lethal damage.
Risen Dead
Trying to stop a zombie is almost impossible. You may be able to run faster but they keep on coming no matter what you throw at them. Only crippling attacks and attacks aimed at the zombie's head inflict any injury. A crippling attack may lop off it's arms or legs, but will do no actual damage on it's health chart. Only attacks aimed at it's head can stop a zombie. Also a zombie is not incapacitated by bashing damage when it reaches it's incapacitated health level but goes on receiving lethal damage while fully active and does not suffer from wound penalties. Only weapons sufficiently powerful to completely destroy it's body such as Essence weaponry or fire can kill it otherwise.
Mask of Winter took the rather devious step of overcoming the zombie's inherent lack of discipline by chaining his zombies together into gangs with iron collars around their necks. This had the added advantage of making it impossible to cut their heads off at the neck.
Thursday, 13 October 2011
Far North, Sean Bean, Michelle Yeoh, Michelle Krusiec
Despite some poor (and some exaggerated) reviews I'd rate this film as solid. it captures a subtle but distinctive aspect of it's setting (which for one witless reviewer's benefit is somewhere in Siberia at the beginning of the Cold War. The large round structures you see are radar domes.) The film takes place on the frontier where two furtive native women try to survive by avoiding 'civilised people.' The way the natives live, preserving their own way of live contrasts dramatically with the totalitarian Soviet Union who try to wipe them out to claim the land for themselves. "We had to follow orders" explains Sean Bean, a reluctant member of a work unit forced at gunpoint to obey the state.
I never get that connected with this film but overdramatising it would spoil the unique way the director expresses the region it takes place in. It's just as much about the far north and the conflict between the ways of life of the natives who've found a harsh but at the same time comfortable way of living in their environment and the outsiders trying to take it over for purposes that exist outside it's scope, as it is about the relationships and tensions of the characters who live there.
I never get that connected with this film but overdramatising it would spoil the unique way the director expresses the region it takes place in. It's just as much about the far north and the conflict between the ways of life of the natives who've found a harsh but at the same time comfortable way of living in their environment and the outsiders trying to take it over for purposes that exist outside it's scope, as it is about the relationships and tensions of the characters who live there.
Wednesday, 12 October 2011
Editorial: Film Critics (Scum of the Earth)
The first thing I learned being a film fan was never to trust film critics. I've seen the most mediocre films lauded to high heaven. One source claimed Irreversible was 'one of the most important films in the last 20 years.'
Members of the audience go out of their way to watch films. Often paying for the privilege of doing so. The problem is that film reviewers view films indifferently. When I think a film sucks I just turn off the TV or watch something else. Because critics approach all films the same way 'I have to watch this film and come up with an opinion on it' they lose their sense of perspective and alienate themselves from the audience.
Writing about a film, or even sitting through it all isn't obligatory for a member of the audience. Some of the reviews I read are incredibly snotty and even absurdly stupid (see Silent Hill.) I film isn't something you review as a matter of work. It's something you watch because you enjoy it. As a fan I only go after things because I like them. Once I start getting ideas of watching every film I can and putting them up on my website I realise that I need to start taking it less seriously. Once you go into a film with the purpose of reviewing it not watching it because you want to you lose your sense of perspective. Some films I've known were a disaster before I'd even seen one second of them. As soon as the production reel on Cruel Intentions 2 started I knew I would hate it. I didn't watch more than five minutes.
Members of the audience go out of their way to watch films. Often paying for the privilege of doing so. The problem is that film reviewers view films indifferently. When I think a film sucks I just turn off the TV or watch something else. Because critics approach all films the same way 'I have to watch this film and come up with an opinion on it' they lose their sense of perspective and alienate themselves from the audience.
Writing about a film, or even sitting through it all isn't obligatory for a member of the audience. Some of the reviews I read are incredibly snotty and even absurdly stupid (see Silent Hill.) I film isn't something you review as a matter of work. It's something you watch because you enjoy it. As a fan I only go after things because I like them. Once I start getting ideas of watching every film I can and putting them up on my website I realise that I need to start taking it less seriously. Once you go into a film with the purpose of reviewing it not watching it because you want to you lose your sense of perspective. Some films I've known were a disaster before I'd even seen one second of them. As soon as the production reel on Cruel Intentions 2 started I knew I would hate it. I didn't watch more than five minutes.
Ability Essence Floe
Cost: --; Mins: Abilty 1, Essence 2; Type: Permanent
Keywords: None
Duration: Permanent
Prerequisite Charms: Any Ability Excellency
The Solars' knowledge of a discipline gives them insight into how Essence flows through it. For the Solars, with knowledge anything is possible.
An alternative to Essence Flow. A character buy up to two Essence Floe Charms during character creation. The character may learn Charms for a given ability using only the ability rating as a minimum trait level. Use of Essence Flow applies specifically to Charms. Since spells are not Charms initiation into a circle of sorcery or necromancy is not a valid use of this Charm.
Simply put it allows a character to buy Charms for a related ability without regard to minimum Essence needed to know them. Essence Flow is a permanent enhancement of a character's capability resulting from their existing acumen that cannot be cancelled or removed.
Sorcery/Necrotic Essence Floe
Cost: --; Mins: Occult 3, Essence 3; Type: Permanent
Keywords: None
Duration: Permanent
Prerequisite Charms: Occult Essence Floe, Terrestrial Circle Sorcery/Shadowlands Circle Necromancy
Through a supernatural insight into the workings of sorcery that very few Exalted sorcerers possess, the character can learn spells from the circle above the one they have been initiated into. They can also create spells of their own for that circle as if they possessed the relevant sorcery or necromancy Charm.
Keywords: None
Duration: Permanent
Prerequisite Charms: Any Ability Excellency
The Solars' knowledge of a discipline gives them insight into how Essence flows through it. For the Solars, with knowledge anything is possible.
An alternative to Essence Flow. A character buy up to two Essence Floe Charms during character creation. The character may learn Charms for a given ability using only the ability rating as a minimum trait level. Use of Essence Flow applies specifically to Charms. Since spells are not Charms initiation into a circle of sorcery or necromancy is not a valid use of this Charm.
Simply put it allows a character to buy Charms for a related ability without regard to minimum Essence needed to know them. Essence Flow is a permanent enhancement of a character's capability resulting from their existing acumen that cannot be cancelled or removed.
Sorcery/Necrotic Essence Floe
Cost: --; Mins: Occult 3, Essence 3; Type: Permanent
Keywords: None
Duration: Permanent
Prerequisite Charms: Occult Essence Floe, Terrestrial Circle Sorcery/Shadowlands Circle Necromancy
Through a supernatural insight into the workings of sorcery that very few Exalted sorcerers possess, the character can learn spells from the circle above the one they have been initiated into. They can also create spells of their own for that circle as if they possessed the relevant sorcery or necromancy Charm.
Sunday, 9 October 2011
Silent Hill (film), Radha Mitchell, Sean Bean, Kim Coates
This film needs reviewing in light of the absurd critical reception it's received. Always go with the audience rather than the film critics. One moron even described the entirety of the film as 'downright confusing.' It's far from it. It's the only truly good film I've seen based on a video game. Although I wouldn't rate it as highly as some people have it's certainly worth the watch and never seemed to me to be 'overlong.' The ending might jilt you a bit but it's cool in it's own kind of way.
Bad Boys II, Will Smith, Martin Lawrence
I put this one in this list mainly because of the lame reviews it got from most of the media. It's rare to see an action film that's genuinely exciting.
Friday, 7 October 2011
Editorial
The only way we're going to have sensible motoring in this country is if we forbid vehicles incapable of breaking a speed limit from entering an area where the limit is enforced. That will stop idiots who can't go fast enough from getting in our way when we're actually trying to go somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)