2nd Edition Class Kits?

37 posts / 0 new
Last post
Is there any website that has a bunch of custom class kits, or entirely new classes, for 2nd Edition AD&D? I could barely find any, and I want to see if it's as easy to make new classes in AD&D as it is in 3.5.
Is there any website that has a bunch of custom class kits, or entirely new classes, for 2nd Edition AD&D? I could barely find any, and I want to see if it's as easy to make new classes in AD&D as it is in 3.5.

Kits weren't new classes.
Kits weren't new classes.

I know, I meant either or.
There were DM guidelines in AD&D for new class creation that were very well thought out. 3.X designers tossed those (to the detriment of the game).
There were DM guidelines in AD&D for new class creation that were very well thought out. 3.X designers tossed those (to the detriment of the game).

I know that, but are there any websites or forums anywhere that have a collection of created classes by members? I haven't really been able to find any, and that was the main point of this thread.
I know that, but are there any websites or forums anywhere that have a collection of created classes by members? I haven't really been able to find any, and that was the main point of this thread.

Look up "Great Classes & Kits Netbook" on Google. Websites that cater to AD&D players usually have a copy of this, plus other classes and kits.

However, there are several reasons why won't find that many websites on new AD&D classes:
- There are already a lot of new classes and kits in published sources that cover most of the common or setting-specific character concept (see on this board the old threads that list kits and classes).
- AD&D (before PO) did not push the players and DMs to use new classes; while the DMG provides a creation mechanism, it also invites to consider first whether the new class could be represented by a combination of existing class and NWPs.
- Widespread access to the internet (especially to web space) was not as common in the AD&D 2e publishing era as it is now, and TSR for a time specifically went after fan websites. That's why most of the legacy of that time is found in netbooks rather than on websites.
- 3e brought a wave of conversions -- many people decided to convert their favorite classes and kits from AD&D to 3e. OTOH, AD&D 2e differs very little from AD&D 1e, so there wasn't much conversion needed for the few classes that were left out (Barbarian, Cavalier, Monk, and Assassin, plus the oriental classes), and several of these classes were addressed soon enough.

For example, have a look at the classes & kits page on the Vaults of Pandius (the official fan website for the Mystara setting):
http://www.pandius.com/clas_kit.html

You'll see that there are few new base classes for any edition (most of them are 3e racial progressions made to convert OD&D racial classes), but a large number of kits and prestige classes. You'll see that most kits were created between 1997 and 1999 (the site was started in mid 1996, and the 2001 group is mostly mine, so it doesn't count for statistics), while one half of the prestige classes were created in the three months immediately after the release of 3e (late 2000).

G.
- There are already a lot of new classes and kits in published sources that cover most of the common or setting-specific character concept

Thanks a lot for the info. But I don't think the line quoted above really makes a difference. The part that makes D&D really fun is its customizable aspects, and you can create anything you want regardless if it's a typical archetype or not. It can be as weird as you want, and that's why a lot of people create their own stuff instead of using published stuff. Granted, the published stuff is amazing, but I always like to see more from the custom part of it created by the players of the game.
Something to bear in mind though with 1st and 2nd editions was that feats did not exist nor did prestige classes (unless you count the 1st edition bard). Therefore a player would choose an existing class and either multi-class or simply adapt a class to the archtype the player wished. Kits more or less did this by taking a core class and listing a set of skills and stats that would work best to realize the player's archtype.

I never really used the kits myself as I was used to doing this from 1st edition on my own. If I wanted a sea rover I could simply play a ranger and make him focused on the sea instead of the wilderness. Or stack a fighter/thief up on sailing skills to create a pirate freebooter. A spy might be a thief with high charisma and intelligence. Etc, etc...

But there was no shortage on the printed kits. They can likely still be found online somewhere. As for players creating kits and putting them online, that might be a bit more difficult to locate.
Thanks a lot for the info. But I don't think the line quoted above really makes a difference. The part that makes D&D really fun is its customizable aspects, and you can create anything you want regardless if it's a typical archetype or not.

That's mostly a 3e point. In AD&D, the focus is on playing characters, not on building them ;)
Which is also why you get few choices after first level, and why many AD&D players don't like, e.g., dwarven wizards and similar 3e things.

G.
That's mostly a 3e point. In AD&D, the focus is on playing characters, not on building them ;)
Which is also why you get few choices after first level, and why many AD&D players don't like, e.g., dwarven wizards and similar 3e things.

G.

It doesn't really matter what edition it is.
IIRC, as far as finding kits, the "Player's Option: Skills and Powers" had a lot of them. There were guidelines for making new kits somewhere in the "Option" series.

Also IIRC, the "Complete ____'s Handbook" series were the main official source for class-specific kits. (There are a lot of these - the only one I'm aware of that doesn't really do anything in terms of kits is the Psionicist's handbook, which develops the class and psionics system.)

Once you look through those, and read what the DMG says about custom classes (namely, that you're usually better off using a particular flavor of an existing class, of which there were actually quite a few once you got into the optional material), it's easy to understand why there are few custom classes.

Personally, I think in my long career as a DM building a handful of campaign worlds for AD&D games, I designed fewer than ten custom classes - a couple special "racial" classes for unique races, sage, sorcerer (curiously enough, I was using sorcerers with d3 hit die and a particular variety of spontaneous casting years back before WOTC bought the game), doctor, and probably 2-3 others that I don't remember. Even so, I almost never saw a player decide to pick up one of those custom classes when I made those available.

There wasn't much need, really, and everything from runecasters to ninjas were available in optional supplements already. More often than custom classes, you'd see custom rules for existing classes ("In this world, clerics XYZ.")
The notorious tjhairball of legend and lore.
IIRC, as far as finding kits, the "Player's Option: Skills and Powers" had a lot of them. There were guidelines for making new kits somewhere in the "Option" series.

Also IIRC, the "Complete ____'s Handbook" series were the main official source for class-specific kits. (There are a lot of these - the only one I'm aware of that doesn't really do anything in terms of kits is the Psionicist's handbook, which develops the class and psionics system.)

Once you look through those, and read what the DMG says about custom classes (namely, that you're usually better off using a particular flavor of an existing class, of which there were actually quite a few once you got into the optional material), it's easy to understand why there are few custom classes.

Personally, I think in my long career as a DM building a handful of campaign worlds for AD&D games, I designed fewer than ten custom classes - a couple special "racial" classes for unique races, sage, sorcerer (curiously enough, I was using sorcerers with d3 hit die and a particular variety of spontaneous casting years back before WOTC bought the game), doctor, and probably 2-3 others that I don't remember. Even so, I almost never saw a player decide to pick up one of those custom classes when I made those available.

There wasn't much need, really, and everything from runecasters to ninjas were available in optional supplements already. More often than custom classes, you'd see custom rules for existing classes ("In this world, clerics XYZ.")

What about the the magical Omni Warrior class that is Orc-specific and can control various aspects of the sea, make buildings appear out of nowhere, can affect the minds of only Sand Wyrms, can fly through space, control time only at a certain time of day, and can prevent all types of damage inflicted by Fey (not all at starting level, of course)? Is there a class-kit for that?

:D
What about the the magical Omni Warrior class that is Orc-specific and can control various aspects of the sea, make buildings appear out of nowhere, can affect the minds of only Sand Wyrms, can fly through space, control time only at a certain time of day, and can prevent all types of damage inflicted by Fey (not all at starting level, of course)? Is there a class-kit for that?

:D

Uh... in the house rules somewhere... you'd have to build something that ridiculous from several sources.

Base it on the Bladesinger kit from the Elves' handbook as applied to the Scro, alter the mage class to a specialist casting class of some sort (probably water elemental specialist), and add psionicist as a third class (since Elves are horrible at psionics and Scro are super everything orcs). At that point you have everything except the Fey and the restrictions on the powers.

Tres munch, of course, but it can be about 80% pieced together from existing material.
The notorious tjhairball of legend and lore.
Exactly, but sometimes that isn't enough. Even in 3rd edition, races/classes are sometimes based off existing ones or are a mixture of powers of various ones. Sometimes you want to change stuff, though, and not always use the exact powers that other classes have. Even if this new class had the same exact power of another class, i.e. a fireball, maybe the fireball for this class is a completely different type of fireball that does different damage and has special qualities that affect specific things in the game. You just can't always base things off of other classes, and that's why you can always feel free to make kits (for 2nd Ed)/classes (for 3rd) to make exactly what you want (including roleplaying advice). Even if you're just mixing powers from other classes without changing them at all, you can still make a custim kit for it.
My issue isn't with creating new rules and content; it's informing the players on how X works now or what X class is all about and having them retain it without falling back into old ways.
My issue isn't with creating new rules and content; it's informing the players on how X works now or what X class is all about and having them retain it without falling back into old ways.

Maybe not with you, but I LOVE to create new content for D&D. Not being able to do so in the older editions, even if there already is a lot of material provided, would be very hard for me and I would have to do it eventually.
Maybe not with you, but I LOVE to create new content for D&D. Not being able to do so in the older editions, even if there already is a lot of material provided, would be very hard for me and I would have to do it eventually.

Well, it's not really any more of a problem to create new content for older editions than newer ones. Actually, I'm not sure if 3/3.5 is easier to make new custom content for.

The AD&D2 DMG had detailed guidelines on how to create new classes. ;) When I was cooking up custom classes, races, and spells, I had plenty of guidelines to look at (for all of those) if I felt unsure.
The notorious tjhairball of legend and lore.
Well, it's not really any more of a problem to create new content for older editions than newer ones. Actually, I'm not sure if 3/3.5 is easier to make new custom content for.

The AD&D2 DMG had detailed guidelines on how to create new classes. ;) When I was cooking up custom classes, races, and spells, I had plenty of guidelines to look at (for all of those) if I felt unsure.

I'm not saying that it's easier to create new stuff in 3/3.5 since I'm new to 1st and 2nd Edition, but so far it seems to me that creating new stuff in 1st/2nd Edition required you to look at premade stuff as guidelines and you couldn't stray too far off from them. In 3/3.5, you can create stuff from scratch and make things as whacky and overpowered as you want. Of course, you would have to add a LA. :D
I'm not saying that it's easier to create new stuff in 3/3.5 since I'm new to 1st and 2nd Edition, but so far it seems to me that creating new stuff in 1st/2nd Edition required you to look at premade stuff as guidelines and you couldn't stray too far off from them. In 3/3.5, you can create stuff from scratch and make things as whacky and overpowered as you want. Of course, you would have to add a LA. :D

Indeed, AD&D doesn't have level adjustment. As a DM, you're supposed to make races and classes that are as balanced as you need them. For the default power level, you're supported by Player's Option books, which give you menus of abilities to customize base classes. However, if you want to stray from that, you're on your own -- sure, there are things like Council of Wyrm or Warriors of Heaven where characters with different balancings are presented, but these don't mix well (or at all) with the standard characters: you can't expect an Eladrin, a Gold Dragon and a Human Fighter of same level to be balanced in any way in AD&D.

That type of game, however, is supported by 3e, and even better by OD&D (Player Crucible series, to be specific), which provides rules for non-standard characters.

G.
It doesn't really matter what edition it is.

It does, it does. Not all editions put the same stress on class/race customization, and not all people find it as fun. Actually, AD&D 2e, especially before Player's Option, did not encourage the creation of new classes/races at all, even though it provided rules for it. It's only natural that people who find the creation of new races or classes fun moved to 3e or OD&D, and people who didn't remained with AD&D. Hence, it's a perfectly good reason why you won't find many custom AD&D classes around.

G.
It does, it does. Not all editions put the same stress on class/race customization, and not all people find it as fun. Actually, AD&D 2e, especially before Player's Option, did not encourage the creation of new classes/races at all, even though it provided rules for it. It's only natural that people who find the creation of new races or classes fun moved to 3e or OD&D, and people who didn't remained with AD&D. Hence, it's a perfectly good reason why you won't find many custom AD&D classes around.

G.

Ok, I think I understand now. I just thought and still do think it is perfectly possible to create new classes/races in AD&D, but I guess it's as hard as you said it was. What's in OD&D, though, that makes it just as accessible, if not more accessible, than 3.5e?
Ok, I think I understand now. I just thought and still do think it is perfectly possible to create new classes/races in AD&D, but I guess it's as hard as you said it was.

Basically, it's easy if you stay within the bounds of the typical races and classes, hard if you try to create "monstrous" PC races, or classes with powers that go beyond fighting, thieving and spellcasting (e.g., it is not easy to balance classes that have a more freeform access to magic, like the Ghul Lord of Al Qadim or the Psionicists).

Within those bounds, it's much easier to fine tune variations -- most kits and subraces only shift a given class or race by relatively small details, but this is very commonly done. E.g., you'll find that Birthright PC races are somewhat different than the standard subraces, and so are those of other settings, which generally doesn't happen as much in 3e, AFAIK.

What's in OD&D, though, that makes it just as accessible, if not more accessible, than 3.5e?

The Player Crucible series, and the Orcs of Thar Gazetteer before that, introduce rules by which any monster can be played. Basically, the fact that racial classes are used in OD&D is what helps, because if an Elf is just an Elf (not an Elf Fighter/Wizard), then the Sphynx can be just a Sphynx.
Also, non-fixed XP progressions mean that special abilities are compensated by slower progressions in addition to level adjustment (which comes as a sort of "negative" level). This allows finer tuning of special ability costs -- while level adjustment basically accounts for HD and combat abilities.
Racial classes can then be combined by multiclassing with shaman or wokan (wizard).

Here is an example of a custom made racial class:
http://www.pandius.com/pcthoul.html

G.
The Player Crucible series, and the Orcs of Thar Gazetteer before that, introduce rules by which any monster can be played. Basically, the fact that racial classes are used in OD&D is what helps, because if an Elf is just an Elf (not an Elf Fighter/Wizard), then the Sphynx can be just a Sphynx.
Also, non-fixed XP progressions mean that special abilities are compensated by slower progressions in addition to level adjustment (which comes as a sort of "negative" level). This allows finer tuning of special ability costs -- while level adjustment basically accounts for HD and combat abilities.
Racial classes can then be combined by multiclassing with shaman or wokan (wizard).

Here is an example of a custom made racial class:
http://www.pandius.com/pcthoul.html

G.

I'm confused. Is this the same edition as the original boxed set that had Men & Magic, Monsters & Treasure, and The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures? I just looked up the Player Crucible series and the cover looks as if it would belong to AD&D, not OD&D where every book (at least the ones I've seen) are black & white and not really professionally done.
I'm confused. Is this the same edition as the original boxed set that had Men & Magic, Monsters & Treasure, and The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures? I just looked up the Player Crucible series and the cover looks as if it would belong to AD&D, not OD&D where every book (at least the ones I've seen) are black & white and not really professionally done.

D&D has many editions. When AD&D branched off the original game, development continued with the "basic" D&D game.
Going by the Wikipedia classification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons
the Player Crucible series belongs to the 4th (and 5th, they very similar) version of (O)D&D.

G.
D&D has many editions. When AD&D branched off the original game, development continued with the "basic" D&D game.
Going by the Wikipedia classification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons
the Player Crucible series belongs to the 4th (and 5th, they very similar) version of (O)D&D.

G.

Ohhh, I see. So it's Basic D&D, but the 4th/5th edition of it after AD&D came out. Is that correct? So it's a whole different rule set than any other edition?

That also means that when 4th edition comes out, it's really the *6th* edition because of OD&D and Basic D&D, plus the 4 other main editions.
Ohhh, I see. So it's Basic D&D, but the 4th/5th edition of it after AD&D came out. Is that correct? So it's a whole different rule set than any other edition?

Actually, the count of D&D goes from 1 (original wooden boxes, Gygax/Arneson) to 2 (edited by Holmes), 3 (Moldvay), 4 (Mentzer) and 5 (Allston). Only 2 can be really called "Basic", since all others include other sets other than the Basic (one doesn't call it "Expert D&D", so no reason to call it Basic either, unless referring to the Basic Set/Red Box only). And since version 2 is actually very near to the original (not to mention the fact that it is designed as a bridge between the original and AD&D 1e), and quite different from 3, 4, and 5, there's really no way to get around the lack of formal edition names except by mentioning the editor...

The Player Crucible series works with the Mentzer and Allston revisions (Moldvay's version I know little -- it's the only one I've never read), but it should be fairly similar, though more limited).
It is as different from the original wooden boxes as is AD&D. With respect to 1e, it is more streamlined (much like 2e). With respect to the original, it's much more complete, especially in its last incarnation.

If you are interested in the design of D&D games, there are at least two subsystems of the Mentzer/Allston version that are worth checking out. One is the already mentioned "Creature PC" system (which is actually due to Bruce Heard, AFAIK), and the other is the Weapon Masteries system (a system for variable damage and combat maneveurs depending on skill with specific weapons).
The Creature PC system is the ancestor of the 3e racial progressions, while the Weapon Mastery system is really not paralleled by any weapon specialization or combat feat system in AD&D or 3e, though 4e seems to implement a similar, though not directly related, system with its martial exploits.

That also means that when 4th edition comes out, it's really the *6th* edition because of OD&D and Basic D&D, plus the 4 other main editions.

Ah, there's no way to count them right... Basically, the story is that D&D went OOP after 5th version (Allston), more or less at the time of AD&D 2.5e.
When 3e was designed, the "A" was dropped because there was no other D&D game around, but the 3e version number refers to AD&D, considering 3e as a third edition of AD&D (even though 3e is much less compatible with AD&D 2e than any other edition, except perhaps the original Gygax/Arneson).

All this, not counting the fact that it's fairly difficult to say how many "main" editions of OD&D we have... does Holmes and Moldvay count as major (actually, they are fairly similar to their neighbours)? Do Mentzer and Allston count as different (I'd say no, even though Allston's Rules Cyclopedia does a great integration job -- it's the only D&D that comes in a single book)?

And, before I forget, there's also a mini-edition between AD&D and 3e -- the free standalone game called Dragonfist. It is basically AD&D 2e, with reversed AC as in 3e, progression limited to 10 levels and starting at 3rd, uniform ability score bonuses (in the form of bonus dice) that grow with level and a feat-like system for martial arts...

GP
Actually, the count of D&D goes from 1 (original wooden boxes, Gygax/Arneson) to 2 (edited by Holmes), 3 (Moldvay), 4 (Mentzer) and 5 (Allston). Only 2 can be really called "Basic", since all others include other sets other than the Basic (one doesn't call it "Expert D&D", so no reason to call it Basic either, unless referring to the Basic Set/Red Box only). And since version 2 is actually very near to the original (not to mention the fact that it is designed as a bridge between the original and AD&D 1e), and quite different from 3, 4, and 5, there's really no way to get around the lack of formal edition names except by mentioning the editor...

The Player Crucible series works with the Mentzer and Allston revisions (Moldvay's version I know little -- it's the only one I've never read), but it should be fairly similar, though more limited).
It is as different from the original wooden boxes as is AD&D. With respect to 1e, it is more streamlined (much like 2e). With respect to the original, it's much more complete, especially in its last incarnation.

If you are interested in the design of D&D games, there are at least two subsystems of the Mentzer/Allston version that are worth checking out. One is the already mentioned "Creature PC" system (which is actually due to Bruce Heard, AFAIK), and the other is the Weapon Masteries system (a system for variable damage and combat maneveurs depending on skill with specific weapons).
The Creature PC system is the ancestor of the 3e racial progressions, while the Weapon Mastery system is really not paralleled by any weapon specialization or combat feat system in AD&D or 3e, though 4e seems to implement a similar, though not directly related, system with its martial exploits.



Ah, there's no way to count them right... Basically, the story is that D&D went OOP after 5th version (Allston), more or less at the time of AD&D 2.5e.
When 3e was designed, the "A" was dropped because there was no other D&D game around, but the 3e version number refers to AD&D, considering 3e as a third edition of AD&D (even though 3e is much less compatible with AD&D 2e than any other edition, except perhaps the original Gygax/Arneson).

All this, not counting the fact that it's fairly difficult to say how many "main" editions of OD&D we have... does Holmes and Moldvay count as major (actually, they are fairly similar to their neighbours)? Do Mentzer and Allston count as different (I'd say no, even though Allston's Rules Cyclopedia does a great integration job -- it's the only D&D that comes in a single book)?

And, before I forget, there's also a mini-edition between AD&D and 3e -- the free standalone game called Dragonfist. It is basically AD&D 2e, with reversed AC as in 3e, progression limited to 10 levels and starting at 3rd, uniform ability score bonuses (in the form of bonus dice) that grow with level and a feat-like system for martial arts...

GP

So basically, it's just confusing...
What you need to seek out is Core Rules 2.0 CD-ROM.

2nd Ed AD&D, on CD-Rom, plus 80-90% of the brown books, with classes in print at that time.

It's got a PC character roller, all sorts of bells and whistles beyond that. Editable books in .rtf format..so you can rewite the PHB or DMG from scratch if you want to, except it's already typed in by TSR.
HTML versions of books.

It's a goldmine for 2.0 Guys.

If you are looking to build kits, and don't want to track down dead tree versions of brown books, that's the way to go.
Wow, people who play Magical Teaparty Make-Believe Time bashing people who play Magical Live-Action Make-Believe Time? It's like I'm really on the Internet! - Rustmonster, commenting on RPGers vs. LARPers
The Core rules 2.0 cd-rom is i wonderful tool for both players and DM's, and with the expansion to it, it really is a "must have" for all who plays or want to play ad&d.

It is not only a compilation of kits and classes books at that time, it also has monsters manual in it and along with that an encountermanager, which i use a lot for my sessions.

Really some of the best i've seen of its kind.
That and my hardback books and I'm ready to launch my new campaign mid april.
Wow, people who play Magical Teaparty Make-Believe Time bashing people who play Magical Live-Action Make-Believe Time? It's like I'm really on the Internet! - Rustmonster, commenting on RPGers vs. LARPers
It does, it does. Not all editions put the same stress on class/race customization, and not all people find it as fun. Actually, AD&D 2e, especially before Player's Option, did not encourage the creation of new classes/races at all, even though it provided rules for it. It's only natural that people who find the creation of new races or classes fun moved to 3e or OD&D, and people who didn't remained with AD&D. Hence, it's a perfectly good reason why you won't find many custom AD&D classes around.

G.

I disagree. The idea in the past was - create any new stuf you need for your setting but first ask yourself, "Do I really need it?" The monster creation rules were fun and easy, class creation too and there were really cool rules for creating new spells and magic items.

In 3E the player created content is usually pretty balanced - it's the stuff you buy that is crazy powerful.

2E even had feats in the Celts green book - to represent the feats of the Irish and Celtic heroes (they were pretty powerful and required the investment of WP's over several levels).

But TSR's attacks on fan-sites and the lack of internet access at the time (I mean, in school as an AD&D player I had no internet access, so house rules were just that - rules that stayed in the house) were probably the biggest reasons why there isn't so much of that stuff. Still I think some new (fan created) content for the old editions would be a cool way to keep them fresh and alive.
Still I think some new (fan created) content for the old editions would be a cool way to keep them fresh and alive.

I'm actually creating a new thread pretty soon that will hopefully become a compendium for all custom content for 1E. Any races, classes, house rules, campaigns, adventures, variants, etc. will be welcome and anyone can contribute.
Have you seen OZRIC? It's like a 1E version of 3E's SRD that compiles 1E rules and material. There are actually several sites that produce free content for AD&D.
Have you seen OZRIC? It's like a 1E version of 3E's SRD that compiles 1E rules and material. There are actually several sites that produce free content for AD&D.

No, I haven't. Could you provide a link? I've never heard of it. I'll still create my thread on these forums, though, because it's going to be a compilation of custom content mostly created by board members, and then will probably also provide links to other websites with created material. I don't want to create something that compiles official rules which everyone keeps thinking. Just additional rules, etc (like a new Unearthed Arcana, but with more stuff and content). Maybe in the end I'll actually make it a PDF file that's like a book :D
Actually, I just found it: http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/osric/

It looks really cool and interesting, but it's actually a different system (even though it's compatible with 1E). I just want to create a thread on these forums, as I said before, with custom content for 1E that doesn't involve OSRIC whatsoever.
Osric is actually the same rules as 1e, just diffrerent write ups (copyright laws alòw you to use game rules but not the text describing them). But the rules are 1E rules just as the SRD rules are D&D rules in a drier text.

Knights and knaves might be a good place to start looking around for this stuff anyway.

Oh yeah and sorry for spelling it wrong!
Osric is actually the same rules as 1e, just diffrerent write ups (copyright laws alòw you to use game rules but not the text describing them). But the rules are 1E rules just as the SRD rules are D&D rules in a drier text.

Knights and knaves might be a good place to start looking around for this stuff anyway.

Ohh, I see. Maybe, I'll have to look into it.

Oh yeah and sorry for spelling it wrong!

Yeah, I actually had trouble finding it because of the spelling lol. :D
Sign In to post comments