Spirit of the Century (henceforth referred to as “SotC”) is a 1920′s pulp pick-up game written by Robert Donoghue, Fred Hicks, Leonard Balsera and published by Evil Hat Productions. For me this is a difficult game to review because it has become my standard against which other games are measured. It would be unfair to review it without saying that since it was published I have become a huge FATE fan. I instinctively modify Spirit of the Century to produce the game I want for any particular campaign, tweaking for flavour or to produce various mechanical effects. Ideas presented in the rules which were truly revolutionary to me when I first read them have become somewhat common place and that initial feeling of wonder has dimmed. When I first discovered SotC I remember enthusing about it to friend – I still consider SotC one of the best games ever written, but I can now see the minor cracks where it’s not quite perfect and know how to work around them.
The Concept
SotC presents itself as a pulp pick-up game:
SotC is set in the 1920s (a little unusual – most Pulp games are set either in the 1890s or 1930s) and hits all the usual Pulp Tropes, offering a high octane rapid paced action romp reminiscent of stories featuring Indiana Jones, the Shadow, Doc Savage, Alan Quatermas or the Rocketeer. Everything from monkey masterminds, through car and plane chases, pyramid traps to fight on top of moving zeppelins gets a look in. The game is highly narrative in flavour, allowing players to do pretty much anything they can imagine, whilst reinforcing character concepts mechanically. In play the system is fast and fun.
However I feel describing the game as pick-up is slightly misleading, and the issue comes down to the authors interpretation of the term pick-up. By a pick-up game, they mean a game that follows a specific mode of play that is well suited to running individual games with little planning or preparation. Each game session is a self-contained story, and the players and characters may change between stories with no real problems. Hence although SotC character generation is a lengthy process, once a set of characters have been generated you should be able to just pick those characters up and play at short notice with little prep, possibly when your regular game falls through. In this context it works well as a pick-up game, but if you view SotC as something you can buy and leap straight into play you’ll be somewhat disappointed.
The downsides – well there a are a few mechanical issues, which I’ll get to, but the biggest downside is the amount the game asks from the players. Many players don’t like narrative control and feel uncomfortable with it.
The Book
SotC is available in three forms – a hardback, a paperback and in electronic form as a pdf. There really isn’t that much difference between the hardback and the paperback. The biggest difference is the icon sized image on the spine. I own both and I can say the paperback will stand up to a battering – mine has made the trip from Europe to South East Asia in a backpack twice and is still in pretty good condition. The hardback by contrast has never been off the bookshelf. The cover image shows an ape in a biplane, a caped individual on the wing, a mechanic hanging under the wing, a jetpack pilot approaching, guns blazing, all played out in front a burning zeppelin backdrop. Each of these characters turns out to be signature characters who appear throughout the book. The cover art whilst not brilliant does a great job of setting the tone for the rest of the book.
All versions are approximately 6×9″ (about the size of an over-sized novel), 420 page, black and white. Interior art is variable in quality, but always fits the flavour of the text and usually features the signature characters. This format makes it perfect for carrying around, and would happily read this rulebook in places I would normally never consider bringing a roleplaying game (places like the London underground).
Layout throughout is excellent. In addition the actual text is awesome, well written, concise and clear. The tone is friendly, new concepts are carefully explained with examples, and often reinforced with quotes from popular media. In addition the entire text is incredibly well cross referenced. The order is logical, the book has a comprehensive table of content, and there is an 8 page index. My success with the index as been mixed though – often it has failed to find key rules for me. I found SotC unique when I first read through it – it is the only roleplaying rulebook I have found pleasurable to read from cover to cover and it never comes across as even remotely dry.
Breaking it down
The book opens with a single page introduction, explaining what the authors hoped to achieve and the concept behind their game. This is followed by a 7 page background which deals partially with their world setting (involving an organisation called the Century club), but is mainly a description of the pulp genre. The authors believe that Pulp runs on the principles of action, science and optimism – sounds about right to me. The game then introduces the basics of play. This chapter, only 8 pages in length, actually describes the entire game. It prepares the reader for more in depth discussions of each concept, but I find that these 8 pages are well worth printing out (from the pdf) for new players. The two concepts here that most new players find hardest to grasp are Aspects and fudge dice.
Because SotC uses FATE 3, which is in turn based on Fudge, the system uses Fudge dice (6 sided dice, with two sides marked plus, two sides marked with a minus, and two blank sides). They are designed to on average roll zero (the plus side counts as plus 1, the minus side as minus one, and the total results are summed.) The down sides to fudge dice are they may not agree with everyone, they can be hard to acquire, and they take a little getting used to. Personally I like them.
Following this introduction the rules dedicate 18 pages to Character Creation, 20 pages to Aspects (one of the most important concepts in FATE), 29 pages to system rules, 15 pages to gadgets and devices, 23 pages dedicated to the Century club setting, and 14 pages to a sample scenario. In addition the rules have a set of sample NPCs, some quick pick packages to make character generation easier, a bibliography and an index. However the most interesting thing about the layout is how the rule book handles skills. Skills are addressed three times: An overview with a description of the skill and common uses, a separate section of stunts (bought abilities akin to d20 feats) associated with the skills, and a GM perspective with rules for adjudicating on the skill. A couple of times key game mechanics are hidden away in this GM skills section – so for example the car chase rules are hidden in the GM section on the drive skill. This layout could have been a nightmare if not for the indexing and the cross referencing between the various sections.
The final section I have yet to mention is titled ‘Tips and Tricks’ and is a superb reference filled with great GMing tips. The theme for much of this advice is improvising games, giving scenes impact and getting your players involved. This section is worth the price of admission on its own, especially if you would like to run a low-prep game. Almost all the recommendations are system independent and would work for almost any game. I recommend that even if you choose not to play SotC, you give this section a read.
Aspects
Every character, object, location or even scene in SotC can have attributes called aspects. Aspects are short phrases which collectively paint a picture of who/what the character/place is, what they are connected to, what they are capable of and what’s important to them. Aspects can be relationships, beliefs, catchphrases, descriptors, items or pretty much anything else that paints a picture.
- Example aspects for a character might include: Lord of the Apes, “Snakes! Why did it have to be snakes?”, Trusty Bullwhip, Hooray Henry, Something to Prove, Leave No Man Behind, “Dr Livingstone I Presume” or Catlike curiosity
- Example aspects for a location might include: ”Wretched hive of scum and villainy”, The edge of the Abyss, “Don’t look down”, Bricks and Mortar, or Dark as Midnight.
Aspects can be changed, and many aspects are considered temporary, so for example a character might acquire the temporary aspect of ‘Off Balance’, ‘Confused’ or ‘Drenched in fish oil’. A temporary aspect is an aspect which will either pass of its own accord, or can be easily removed.
Aspects are important because they allow game effects to be described in narrative terms, tying the game mechanics closely to the fiction of the story, but also because they allow the players to show what they would like to see in the story. If a player takes ‘Snakes! Why did it have to be snakes?’ they are probably indicating that they would like to see snakes feature in the game. Similarly ‘Sucker for a pretty face’ probably indicates a player is interested in romantic entanglements, whilst ‘Death defying’ probably indicates they prefer to get straight to the action.
Character Generation
In most games character generation is something you endure in order to get to the game. In SotC character generation is a mini-game that can be great fun, and because its a group endeavour you could easily run it as a party game.
The first stage is solo – Players select a name and brief background. For players stumped to come up with an idea a comprehensive list of pulp archetypes is presented including: Academic, Gentleman Criminal, Man of Mystery, Two-Fisted Pilot etc. Players then proceed through five phases of character generation. The first two are also solo, although input from other players is strongly encouraged. First, the player describes the characters origin and upbringing. In the second phase the player describes their actions during the great war.
Phases three through five are however definitely a group activity. Each player invents a novel their character stars in as part of phase three. During the Fourth and Fifth phase players get to ‘Guest Star’ in each others novels and add to the story. This normally results in brainstorming ideas along the lines of ”Wouldn’t it be cool if your nemesis was the boyfriend who abandoned me in my story, and then I could meet him again when I guest star in your story.”
During each phase two character ‘Aspects’ are selected. Because these aspects are tied to the stories the group have come up with they actually mean something to the characters and the players. Also the party by this point have a huge network of ties tying them together. There is no question of why they work together – each of them will know at least two of the others (although I found it more common for a character to have ties to four or five other characters through the various guest star roles). As a result when they meet they are with old friends.
There are a couple of minor issues with the character generation:
- The first issue is that the final stage (selecting stunts), is a huge comedown after the fun of the story phases. If anything this just highlights how good the earlier phases are, because stunt selection is a fairly common character generation task and in any other system I wouldn’t have faulted it. It suffers in comparison with the rest of the SotC character rules because the rest of the rules are awesome whilst stunt selection is ordinary.
- The second issue is the difficulty of adding new characters after the initial character generation phase has been completed. SotC character generation really is a group activity. There are two ways around this – you can either perform a minor retcon and write the new character into existing stories as an also ran, or my preferred method, get the whole group together and create three entirely new stories in which the new character can star and two of the existing characters can guest star.
There is an alternative character creation method for getting things moving fast where you literally invent the character in play. I have never tested it and don’t know if it works.
The system
Skills in SotC are named and ranked from ‘Terrible’ through to ‘Legendary’. Each skill level has an associated bonus associated with it – so for example Poor is -1, Average +1 and Excellent +6.
To perform a task a player rolls 4 fudge dice and add the result to your skill level. His total is compared against another number (a difficulty or the total rolled by an opponent) to determine success. If your total for the skill roll is higher than the number required, the overflow or excess is called shifts and can be spent on special effects that enhance the quality of the action. There are specific rules for using shift in combat and in movement.
Remember that fudge dice average to zero, so a character with a Good (+3) skill will probably succeed at any task defined as good (+3) or easier, but more likely to fail than to succeed at any task greater than his skill level. This makes it very easy for GMs to set appropriate difficulty levels.
Aspects affect task resolution. Character (PC or NPC) can bring aspects into play to assist their tasks. This is called invoking if they are bringing their own aspect into play, or tagging if the aspect in question is on another character, and object or a scene. As an example a character might invoke his characters aspect of “Filled with Wrath” to assist him in an attempt to intimidate someone.
Alternatively an aspect can be brought into play in a negative way (known as a compel). The GM might compel a characters aspect of “Filled with Wrath” when someone attempts to taunt him.
Each player has a pool of FATE points which control how often he can invoke or tag aspects. A player spends a point to invoke or tag. The player receives a fate point whenever the GM successfully compels one of his aspects.
Mechanically invoking or tagging an aspect allows the player to add +2 to his roll, to reroll a result, or to take a small amount of narrative control and make a minor declaration.
When an aspect is compelled it usually limits a character’s available choices in a situation (or the player can convince the GM of the same). A player can compel his own actions by alerting the GM to the fact he is acting in line with his aspects. For example if a player had “Lord Byron, My one true foe” as an aspect, yet encountered Lord Byron at a party, the GM might compel the character. The character would have to react in a way appropriate to the aspect. This gains the player a fate point. The player may also decide to not accept the limitation on his actions, but must spend a fate point to do this.
Conflict and Consequences
SotC has a single conflict resolution for all forms of conflict. Physical conflict and social conflict are dealt with explicitly but it could equally well be applied to financial conflict, mental conflict or anything else where multiple characters are opposed over something. Having said this almost all the examples are of physical conflict and some of the subsystems (movement for example) might be hard to apply to other forms of conflict except in a very abstract way.
Each character has two stress tracks – a series of check boxes in a line for tracking how much trauma the character has suffered. The first is the Health stress track, used for physical stress such as wounds and fatigue. The second is the Composure stress track, representing the ability to “keep it together” in the face of social and mental injuries. These work very much like hit points except boxes on the track are marked off individually, so a hit doing 3 stress will mark off the third box on the track, but not affect the first two. If a box is already marked off the damage rolls up to the next unmarked box.
Players get a single action each round and success or failure is determined as per skill above. If their action is a direct attack they inflict stress on the target target and the target marks off the appropriate box on his stress track. Any attack falling off the end of the stress track inflicts consequences which are temporary aspects. A character can take three consequences, and then instead of taking a fourth consequence he is ‘taken out’.
If it’s not a direct attack then the action is generally considered either an attempt to place a temporary aspect on something or someone, or an attempt to move in some way.
Consequences are divided into physical and composure. Physical consequences might include things like: Out of breath, Torn ligament, Bruised, Broken ribs etc. whilst composure consequences might include things like startled, frightened, laughing stock, or bankrupt. Like any other aspects consequences can be invoked, tagged or compelled and are a potential source for fate point replenishment .
The setting
There really isn’t that much to say about the Spirit of the Century setting. It is clearly very generic, and very light to allow players to run any sort of Pulp game they want. Players are all born on the 1st day of the century and are part of something called ‘The Century Club’. I believe the sole reason for this club to exist is as a plot device to get the characters together.
The setting section also includes a concise timeline of the early 20th century, details of the great war, and the league of nations. There is also a layman’s guide to the world in the early 1920s (with an emphasis on America), and a short section of the technology of the day (Air conditioning, Aspirin and Contact lenses are all common, the Brassiere is cutting edge technology, whilst the Aerosol spray wont be invented till 1926.)
Conclusions
Spirit of the Century is my ‘go to‘ game for a reason. When I first read this game it had me very excited. Fate points, aspects and the fudge resolution system produce an economy where characters experience a perfect balance of the good and the bad. Players actually want their character to encounter challenges and complications because these allow them to be awesome later. In addition this lets the game mirror the narrative conceit found in literature where by the characters have a hard time against their opponents yet somehow come out swinging at the end. In SotC each of those minor defeats was a chance to build up fate points. In addition the GM advice in the book is incredible and should be taken to heart by every GM.
There are some minor issues – the conflict system as written makes PCs too tough, and doesn’t bring consequences into play fast enough, also the way the stress tracks work can be confusing to those used to hit point based systems – a fix to both these issues is available on the publishers wiki under the title ‘Faster Conflicts‘. Also stunts can seem unnecessary – in fact I have played SotC without stunts and it plays like the same game. Almost any stunt effect can be achieved through the use of aspects and fate points. Using stunts or not is very much a personal choice. Finally the layout at times seems a little odd, especially the decision to divide skills into three separate sections.
However there is a lot to love about this game. I love the fact that it requires so little prep, that I can stat out a group of minions in under 20 seconds and produce a convincing fight, that the rules allow for almost any dramatic encounter and that what at first appears to be narrative fluff has a very real effect on the mechanics of the game. Most of all though I love the effect this game has on players. Sooner or later they stop thinking about the game in mechanical terms and start thinking in terms of what would be awesome.
Declan Feeney is a guest blogger on Gaming Brouhaha .
loading...





I confess that while I’ve never actually played FATE, I just don’t get the why of Fate points. Why would you want to carefully track invoking or tagging as a meta-game resource? It’s not just my usual objection that it completely breaks immersion, I accept that FATE just isn’t trying for that sort of play, but what do you achieve by making players carefully ration out whether the core Aspects of their character actually affect the outcome? It seems to me like it would be more fun for everyone if they could use Aspects whenever the narrative permits; they still have to roll, so it’s not like the characters would always succeed. I feel like I must be missing something.
loading...
Sure, there are several reasons for having Fate points.
1) Its a balancing agent. An aspect like ‘Fencing Master’ is probably going to be significantly easier to invoke than an aspect like ‘snake charmer’, but by placing a mechanical limit on how often an aspect can be invoked you bring them into line with each other to some degree.
2) It provides a balance between beneficial effects and negative effects for the characters. A story where everything goes prefectly for the protagonists is unlikely to be particularly interesting. A story where everything works against them is going to be incredibly depressing.
3) It provides narrative structure – By allowing players to build up fate points from the unfortunate circumstances they encounter you allow them to to come out hitting hard in the final lap.
As an example, the fate system is being used for the forthcoming Dresden files book. In game mechanics terms at the start of the book when Harry first appears he’s low on fate points. The first ambush is probably a compel, as is the story hook. Harry is likely to get injured in early fights and as a result take consequences. Each time his injuries limit his actions – another compel and more fate points, which is why Harry manages to be awesome in the final scenes. He spent most of the book accumulating fate points.
Hence in game players are likely to find early battles harder because they are low on fate points, but at some point they’ll be able to turn the tables.
4) It makes every downturn less depressing.
5) It encourages players to get involved in interesting plot complications, which only add to the story.
As for carefully tracking fate points – never seen it happen that way. I use poker chips. They are so easy to pass around and so visible they dont slow play down at all. Also players don’t generally ration the way they spend them too heavily – instead they play for lots of compels, placing there characters in situations they know are going to bring them complications and spend those fate points they get pretty freely.
loading...
Fate Points and Aspect are a great way of abstracting what would in other systems be Feats, Advantages, Disadvantages, Modifiers and etc. It is a sort of represents Karma, opportunity and luck all at the same time.
It also helps the GM to have more will and say in the game other than bringing up the rule-books, and gives a structure to GM fiat. Once I have a character charging down a narrow corridor wielding a gigantic two-handed sword and I rule that because of the ‘Narrow Corridor’ aspect, he suffers a penalty. He gets to choose whether he wants to live with it, but get a Fate Point as compensation, or tag an Aspect of his own (and incurring another Fate Point cost) to explain why this aspect does not apply.
It helps to solve a lot of “oh no you don’t, oh yes I do, let’s see what the rules say” debate.
loading...
I understand the point about ruining immersion, as you point out that is important to you and the game isn’t addressing. Fine and dandy.
As to why fate points and aspects exists.
Aspects essentially allow the player to paint a picture of who is character is, what his issues and concerns are and what elements orbit him (organisations, people, etc). Taken together, he sets out, flags, what his story should be about without setting the exact form and turns it will take.
Now, Fate Points.
Fate points are an economy that drives the game, they provide a way to get more and spend them and this is key. Now, a character has the Aspect Reckless pilot, he uses it to gain a bonus in all sorts of over flying moves – eventually he’ll need to accept that consequence of recklessly getting too close to the Nazi’s and having to crash his plain into the desert due to being hit.
Now, possibly the player might have decided for that to happen anyway? Maybe the GM, via fiat, has the plains petrol tanks hit? Isn’t it better that, through the give and take of the currency the story is taken in awesome directions no one predicted when the session started? Not only that, since it’s done through aspects it’ll unexpected directions based on who the character is.
That’s the point of fate points.
loading...
@Declan – Limiting the number of times a player can invoke his signature abilities strikes me as a terrible way to “balance” broad vs. narrow abilities. The broad abilities still get many more opportunities to invoke them at crucial points, so aren’t really balanced, while the narrow abilities require that you keep at least one Fate point locked in reserve or be faced with the truly sucky possibility of reaching a situation where your narrow ability is a perfect fit and it’s your moment to shine…but you have no Fate points and your opportunity is blown. I think it would be a lot better to have the points flow both ways: the player can invoke an Aspect whenever appropriate, but if he’s out of points it gives the GM a point to spend on a negative Aspect; if the GM invokes a negative Aspect, but doesn’t have points from the player, the player gets that point. You’d still have the what goes around comes around Karma thing, but nobody would be robbed of an opportunity to display their signature shtick by the vagaries of the meta-game mechanic.
@Extrakun – I don’t play with rules lawyers, so the “oh no you don’t” thing never comes up. I can sort of see it as a simple replacement for actually having rules about fighting on slippery surfaces and the like…but we just don’t have a problem with GM fiat.
loading...
Joshua, Fate points do flow both ways. Re-read the section of the review on either aspects or system. It is covered in both sections. The player gains a fate point whenever the GM compels an aspect of his, or the GM (either directly or through an NPC) tags one of the players aspects. In addition a character acting in line with his aspects can call for a compel. (ie remind the GM that there was an implicit compel)
loading...
Also, so you know my responses may short for the next few days since I’m using my cellphone to reply from a con – and texting with a phone is slow.
loading...
@Declan unless I’m misreading it, the player can’t use Fate points unless he has them to spend. He can try to accumulate them prior to needing them by suggesting negative uses of an Aspect, or the GM can compel them, but if he reaches a crucial point and is out, he can’t invoke the Aspect, no matter how appropriate. What I actually mean by “flowing both ways” is that the player could invoke an appropriate Aspect even if he was out of points, but doing so would give the GM a Fate point to use later.
loading...
@Joshua – the problem you’re describing though is inherent to any system that has an economy – spending limited resources haphazardly leaves you in the lurch when you really need them. One of the tricks with writing aspects is to come up with ones that are broad enough that they don’t apply to just one single, perfect situation. Therefore, those sorts of situations don’t generally happen.
As for breaking immersion, I think I probably have a very different definition of what it means in the context of a tabletop RPG. My definition of “immersion” involves getting in to the motivations, beliefs, and idiosyncrasies of my characters. All of those involve both “in character” and meta-game elements as both interpreting the story’s events in terms of my character’s point-of-view, but also in terms of what I, as a player, want out of a scene and where I want to steer a game to further develop it & my character. I like narrative control in my games, whether as a player or a GM, because of the unpredictability and spontaneity it creates.
FATE really does that for me (at least for certain genres and settings) because the things that matter or define my character directly affect his performance. I’ve played several games with my MSH/FATE hack and Aspects work awesome at defining all of the things that motivate, impact, and plague Peter Parker/Spider-Man. It’s the only game I’ve played so far where Spider-Man *felt* right.
Actually believing I’m there or that I’m actually the character is not even a consideration because, well to put it bluntly, I’m not delusional. I know I’m sitting around a table, am dressed in jeans & a T-shirt, and am going to roll some dice. If anything is a buzz-kill for true “immersion” it’s your direct environment. The meta-game is completely superfluous in comparison.
Now…if I were doing a LARP things would be very different. I’m not really a LARPer but I have friends who are into it and they’ll go 3 days “in character” walking around in armor. Of course they still wipe their butts with TP and sleep in a tent and sleeping bag so I guess there’s a limit to that too. The LARP rules, not to mention reality, also really limit what you can and can’t do, which means you’re not throwing lightning bolts or flying.
Years ago I played Laser Tag out in the woods behind my friend’s house with a dozen other people and that was both immersive and intense…. but not really a roleplaying game. I had no character…I was just out there to kill or be killed, so to speak.
All this is not really me trying to be snarky, despite how harsh it might come across – I’m just trying to get to my point which is that “immersion” is a very loaded term which means different things to different people and that meta-game activities really shouldn’t have much to do with defining it. At this point I could pull out some GNS theory about differing playstyles but that will just lead us down a dark path. ;op
Thinking about all this…. Would you be interested in writing a guest article about what “immersion” means to you and how you bring it to the table? I think it would be interesting to perhaps get a couple different view points and post them all as one article….we then could compare and contrast the differences. It might be interesting.
loading...
@MJ Harnish – I probably shouldn’t have used the term immersion since it has so much baggage. All I mean by it is thinking “in character” in the same sense that you might speak “in character” by actually saying what your character says instead of paraphrasing it or calling for a roll. Thinking in character doesn’t require that you be delusional, any more than speaking in character requires you to act it out, or use a funny voice or try to speak in Elvish. All it means is that you try to seriously come up with what the character would do based on its knowledge and beliefs, without meta-game influence of what would advance the plot, amuse the other players, gain mechanical bonuses, etc. If you give me resources like Fate points that the character cannot think about, you interfere with my ability to do that. Gronk the Barbarian doesn’t and cannot know about the limitations on how many times his Barbarian Swordsman Aspect can come into play, or how he gets another use of it because of the difficulty he had in that Narrow Corridor… not without turning the game into a parody along the lines of Order of the Stick.
But, as I said, I understand that Spirit of the Century isn’t aimed at the kind of play. I wouldn’t care to play it, but I’d seriously consider running it if my players were interested. What bothers me about SotC, as I understand it, is that Ian’s description of the “economy” seems to be backwards of the mechanics. It’s not that if Pierre is a “Reckless Pilot” he’ll have to accept that eventually the bonuses he gains from his Aspect will result in something like crashing into the desert; it’s the other way around: all else being equal, he has to crash into the desert first before he’s licensed to call on his Reckless Pilot ability to give him an edge in a dogfight. He might start with some freebies, but the equilibrium state seems to be that Compulsion comes prior to Invocation. All I’m suggesting is that the players would have more narrative control and probably have more fun if you in effect allowed them to go into debt on Fate points.
loading...
@ Declan, fantastic review! You covered every major aspect of the game.
@ Discussion, regarding Aspects and Fate points, these types of things have been used in many games on the market now, but from my play of the game it goes so well with this and I lost nothing from the play. In fact, invoking Aspects was the first time I actually felt like the game wasn’t slowed with “heroic” points. Plain and simple, the game works. However, I do sense that it lacks long term character development, which some have noted. I also note that for those not willing to give into the system, play can be dull. One member of a recent game was new to the system and saved his Fate points, only to have nearly all left over by the end of a one off session and not much “action” to show for it.
My impression is it is hard to strike a balance with games. SotC gives a lot, but maybe to get that you need a game limits development somewhat. Or perhaps we need more role and less roll…
loading...