Other Player Don't Understand Nothing is Forever

[tkuremento]

My friend wants to do a Zendikar 5e and I'm down for it. One person doesn't seem to realize that all stories come to an end, you don't just play levels into the high 100s until you die in real life.

"Though as I mentioned, in less polite terms, I'm not overly fond of the whole... 'Game over, start from scratch.'

If I put that much effort in to something and all I can look forward to at the end is ripping it all up... then I'm not doing it."

I then explain how long it can take and how many campaigns one can go through to even reach a normal level 20

"How about this. In a group of four, two don't like something. How many games do you think those four players are going to attend. If half the group is displeased?"

What do I even say to this as another player? The DM has also said to this: "And what happens when we reach max level and can't advance any farther." I understand that people can homebrew epic levels or start taking levels in other classes past 20 but this player is whining on the fact that nothing is forever. My DM doesn't exactly know what to do either, with the player attempting to guilt trip to stay in. What to do?

[ClintACK]

Maybe agree to cross that bridge when you get to it?

You're disagreeing about what you might do two or three years down the road. Who knows -- when the time comes, you might be attached enough to the party to *want* to try to home-brew an epic campaign. Or your friend may lose interest long before then.

[Arkhios]

Maybe agree to cross that bridge when you get to it?

You're disagreeing about what you might do two or three years down the road. Who knows -- your friend may lose interest long before then.

This. It's not at all unheard of that groups change overtime, with some people dropping off for various reasons. Cut the deal and "never say never". Nothing is static. Only change is universally true.

[tkuremento]

This. It's not at all unheard of that groups change overtime, with some people dropping off for various reasons. Cut the deal and "never say never". Nothing is static. Only change is universally true.

Yea but they want to just have this one character for everything. On their side of the argument they reference how they have 1000+ hour save files in certain games. I just find this absurd. They just want a character that goes on and on and on. They don't want to have to end, even if it means having the story force you into a new world, etc. I'm trying to say how like most things, there is a story and generally you come to an end and that is it.

[Arkhios]

Yea but they want to just have this one character for everything. On their side of the argument they reference how they have 1000+ hour save files in certain games. I just find this absurd. They just want a character that goes on and on and on. They don't want to have to end, even if it means having the story force you into a new world, etc. I'm trying to say how like most things, there is a story and generally you come to an end and that is it.

That is a difficult situation indeed. Might be a bit harsh deduction, but this is what happens when MMO generation learns of their beloved video games' likely origins in D&D, where even character death is permanent (barring rather expensive raise dead/resurrection at a rather late level) with no chance for a "corpserun" or a "save file".

One thing you can try is to exclamate the fact that this is how THIS game works. If it doesn't work for them, then maybe it might be a time to move on to other games or to get back to those video games with "no flesh on the bones" of a never-ending story.

[SLIMEPRIEST]

"Oh no hobbits, this isn't the end. This is only the beginning. Now, the elves and Baggins and I are going to heaven. Sam, you're in charge. Have fun."

[Sabeta]

Semi-related? I'm not sure that I understand the question, but here goes.

I like to do something similar to Jojo's Bizarre Adventure. Basically, nothing is lost after a "Roll Credits". You move onto a new story, but it's set in the near Future. For example, let's say four heroes go off on a quest and save THE WHOLE WORLD. Cool, Story over, new characters. Set it in the same world though. Make the story related to the previous ones. Maybe your adventurer's now are adventurer's inspired by how totally epic your last characters were.

I mean, look at how HotDQ leads to Storm King or whatever. Play as new characters living in a world that's dealing with the consequences of the old characters. Even if that means playing in a world that's already been ruined by the BBEG because the previous party TPKd right at the end. (See: Final Fantasy VI)

This sounds like a decent compromise to me, but I had trouble fully understanding the question. Sorry if this isn't what advice you're looking for.

=Edit=

After reading your later comment I see that this might not be the case. Consider a sort of Prestige system? I mean, Samus Aran can't start a game without tripping over a rock and losing all her power-ups. (or willfully turning them off because 'daddy' told her to in that one game we're not allowed to talk about). If they're 100% committed to ONLY playing one character forever, that's about as fair a compromise as I can think of.

[Arkhios]

I was thinking about this matter a while, and I just came up with one possible solution. If all the players are up for it, use the slow experience progression, or even multiply it so that it takes even longer to gain a level. That way you all get to experience the game for a longer time with same characters. To alleviate the long wait for next level, you might advance in maximum hit points (no rolls and no average) each level to give you more survivability in the long run. (And even if the greedy-needy player decides that D&D is not for him/her at a later point and leaves the group, you could speed up the pace afterwards).

[CaptainSarathai]

Yeah, this just seems stupid. Tell them to just play. Chances are your game/group won't even hit level 20 unless you run milestones and basically force it. It takes years. And I've never really seen anyone complain, to be honest. I did a HoTDQ run, from 1-15, and it took us about 30, 4hr sessions to get through. Our group met bi-weekly. We started at Lv1 in August of 2014 and finished at level 15 in November, 2015. A total of 120+hrs of play.

The TL/DR version of the spoiler below is that I've run 4 campaigns since 5th launched. Timelines have been:
Tyranny of Dragons 1-15: 30 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 1.25yrs
Tyranny "Epilogue" 1-20: 22 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 11months
Homebrew "The Land of Little Kings" 1-14: 24 4hr sessions, weekly, for 6 months
Homebrew "Tiger&Bunny" 1-14: 12+ 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 6+ months (still running, nearing cometion)

Total time logged as 5e DM: ~360hrs
That's also not counting 1-shots run for Halloween, any DungeonCrawls that I run at local conventions, or any time logged away from the table writing adventures or stories.


I had enough homebrew material to take the party all the way up to level 20, but they just weren't interested. We started with 5 players and ended with 4, only 3 of which had started with us from Session 0. People got bored with the game, commitments came up, work schedules changed. By the time we'd been played for a year, everyone was ready to write up new characters. The general consensus was,
"Yeah, we'll play from 15-20, but can we start new characters at Lv15?"

Instead, we started over at Lv1. Before revealing that we'd start a new campaign, I asked where the players saw their characters going after the fall of Tiamat, and what their goals and aspirations were.

When we started the new campaign, it was set immediately after the fall of Tiamat. In fact, the PCs started out as survivors of the massive battle outside of the mountain which held the ritual chamber. It used the 15-20 material I had written as the basis for a new chapter in the same world. Much like 'Borderlands 2,' their former characters were still present and could be sought out. By the time they found them, the timeline had moved forward about 2 years.

That campaign just wrapped up at level 20, after a little less than a year, using the milestone XP system and slightly expedited by me, as the DM. During this time we again had some personnel changes, to the point that we started with the 4 who finished Rise, and ended with 5. Three of the ones who finished Rise also finished the "epilogue" campaign, 1 who had dropped out of Rise returned and finished the epilogue, and we had a completely new player join as well.

During that time I also started two totally homebrewed campaigns to run from level1-14. One ran every week at a local shop with entirely new people (try DMing one campaign for 4hrs on Saturday, and another campaign for 4hrs on Sunday). I'll never do that again. So once that wrapped up, I started a bi-weekly 1-14 campaign opposite the "epilogue," and it is currently nearing its end. Once the "epilogue" campaign ended, I used that slot to finally get some time in running a Character outside of AL, as I joined a sort of "newby-oriented" campaign with my girlfriend about a month ago.

[Spore]

Advise him to play a spellcaster with a long lifespan. Tell him the following: "If you can make up a convincing reason on how your character is able to join adventures several decades or centuries apart then I will make it possible."

If he has to play a Lich for that that should not be your problem. But the story should not bow to make one character possible. That is the downfall of many a syndicated series (and this is the reason why I dislike so many comic book series with alternate timelines, alternate universes and writers pulling reasons out of the aether for the main character to join this month's fad).

[Addaran]

I'm the only one who understood the OP as being: "DM and me wants to start Zendikar in a near futur, ending the present campaign even if we're not 20 yet"?

The other player seem to imply that another one isn't too keen on switching to Zendikar? Is it 2 vs 2?

[CaptainSarathai]

I'm the only one who understood the OP as being: "DM and me wants to start Zendikar in a near futur, ending the present campaign even if we're not 20 yet"?

The other player seem to imply that another one isn't too keen on switching to Zendikar? Is it 2 vs 2?


Yea but they want to just have this one character for everything. On their side of the argument they reference how they have 1000+ hour save files in certain games. I just find this absurd. They just want a character that goes on and on and on. They don't want to have to end, even if it means having the story force you into a new world, etc. I'm trying to say how like most things, there is a story and generally you come to an end and that is it.

Yeah, you're the only one who read it that way.
These guys want to play 1 character in every campaign and just keep leveling and leveling forever.

[Coffee_Dragon]

I'm the only one who understood the OP as being: "DM and me wants to start Zendikar in a near futur, ending the present campaign even if we're not 20 yet"?

The other player seem to imply that another one isn't too keen on switching to Zendikar? Is it 2 vs 2?

I read it the same as you. Two players want to switch campaigns but the other two, and this "other player" in particular, are more attached to the current campaign.

I'm also not sure it's the best thing to get random internet people's opinion on with limited clarity and context, but if I have any advice, it would be:

Talk to each other. Find out what everyone wants out of your gaming. No one's preferences are a bad thing in themselves. If your preferences diverge, look for solutions that satisfy each to some extent, but that don't have anyone doing stuff they simply don't want to do. There's too little context to be more specific.

[Biggstick]

This. It's not at all unheard of that groups change overtime, with some people dropping off for various reasons. Cut the deal and "never say never". Nothing is static. Only change is universally true.

I couldn't help but think, "We found the Chaotic Neutral."

[Sir cryosin]

I'll be the **** here and say the DM can just throw a monster at him that is really to over power for the pc to take on.

So now just let him know that this is not a video game and his character ages, can die, and is part of a living world. You can spend years playing a single character if the campaign takes years but that is really rare to happen. Let him know that this is a different game it has it own rules and the DM runs and determine the rules of the game.

On a side note I don't see how people play one character and don't want to play anything else. I love playing every class and all different kinds of people.

[Arkhios]

I couldn't help but think, "We found the Chaotic Neutral."

Ha! ...well, now that you mentioned it, it does seem a bit chaotic if you consider change as chaotic. I actually see change as a natural course of life, so I would put it more along true neutral rather than Chaotic, but YMMV.

[Sigreid]

Well, in 1e you could have solved this by having an undead creature drain him back to level 1 and he could start all over again. In 5e, the closest I see is true-polymorph him into a rock until it sticks then he can only be true polymorphed into level 8 or 9. :smallbiggrin:

[tkuremento]

I was thinking about this matter a while, and I just came up with one possible solution. If all the players are up for it, use the slow experience progression, or even multiply it so that it takes even longer to gain a level. That way you all get to experience the game for a longer time with same characters. To alleviate the long wait for next level, you might advance in maximum hit points (no rolls and no average) each level to give you more survivability in the long run. (And even if the greedy-needy player decides that D&D is not for him/her at a later point and leaves the group, you could speed up the pace afterwards).

We had actually considered using a gestalt like method so it'd take us longer to level up and we'd be more likely to have everyone have some spellcasting. Honestly I know very little about MTG but apparently the DM says it could make sense because everyone and their grandma has magic, or so I've been told.


Yeah, this just seems stupid. Tell them to just play. Chances are your game/group won't even hit level 20 unless you run milestones and basically force it. It takes years. And I've never really seen anyone complain, to be honest. I did a HoTDQ run, from 1-15, and it took us about 30, 4hr sessions to get through. Our group met bi-weekly. We started at Lv1 in August of 2014 and finished at level 15 in November, 2015. A total of 120+hrs of play.

The TL/DR version of the spoiler below is that I've run 4 campaigns since 5th launched. Timelines have been:
Tyranny of Dragons 1-15: 30 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 1.25yrs
Tyranny "Epilogue" 1-20: 22 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 11months
Homebrew "The Land of Little Kings" 1-14: 24 4hr sessions, weekly, for 6 months
Homebrew "Tiger&Bunny" 1-14: 12+ 4hr sessions, bi-weekly for 6+ months (still running, nearing cometion)

Total time logged as 5e DM: ~360hrs
That's also not counting 1-shots run for Halloween, any DungeonCrawls that I run at local conventions, or any time logged away from the table writing adventures or stories.

Yea, that is what I also tried to mention. It is even more so because the DM is the one we all know and the reason we even are a group. I literally didn't know the others before this. It is likely that it won't last. I actually think I have a curse, I've never seen a campaign to completion.


I'm the only one who understood the OP as being: "DM and me wants to start Zendikar in a near futur, ending the present campaign even if we're not 20 yet"?

The other player seem to imply that another one isn't too keen on switching to Zendikar? Is it 2 vs 2?

No, this is our first game in this particular group. Though that reminds me that as a compromise we offered to maybe go to other planes or whatever like Innistrad afterward. However I don't think it is going to end up working out because this person is being really stern and the other person is only that because of this person. Like I said, I am cursed.

[Addaran]

No, this is our first game in this particular group. Though that reminds me that as a compromise we offered to maybe go to other planes or whatever like Innistrad afterward. However I don't think it is going to end up working out because this person is being really stern and the other person is only that because of this person. Like I said, I am cursed.

In that case, i wouldn't worry about it for now. You'll probably have 6months to 1-2 years before the campaign actually end. Plenty of time for the group to fall appart (work, moving out, etc), for him to get bored with his character, for you to fall madly in love with your character, for the DM to want a break, for the DM to find another idea then Zendikar, etc.

Settling it now will at worst break the group now, and at best, you'll just know the plan for the futur, assuming nothing changes.

[tkuremento]

In that case, i wouldn't worry about it for now. You'll probably have 6months to 1-2 years before the campaign actually end. Plenty of time for the group to fall appart (work, moving out, etc), for him to get bored with his character, for you to fall madly in love with your character, for the DM to want a break, for the DM to find another idea then Zendikar, etc.

Settling it now will at worst break the group now, and at best, you'll just know the plan for the futur, assuming nothing changes.

Well because of some minor things here and there we are talking on Skype for now. We aren't even a session 0, that will be soon hopefully. And no this won't be online, we are just trying to figure this out via Skype. However I have a strong feeling this person will probably leave and as such their friend will too. It makes me sad, even though I know so little about MTG and don't really like playing card games, I was SO attached to the idea of a Goblin Ranger with a Black Bear fluffed as a smaller Gnarlid than the Brown Bear reskinned as a Gnarlid in the Zendikar book. Because a Goblin riding on the back of a weird horned bear thing sounds SO BADASS! :D and if Gestalt I'd probably also do Druid cause I mean I'd basically try to strive to be as Green as I can ;D

[Sitri]

I like the idea of having a main story and several mini-stories that may or may not feed into the main. By the time you get the end of the main, it is not only ok, it feels great to have denouement. When I DM, I also like knowing lots of mini and major plot hooks ahead of time, and let the players see details that won't make sense until they understand the hooks better with later events. This type of anticipation of answers leads me to more closure. This is not to say railroad, you will likely need to change your plan to some degree, just keep in mind the foreshadowing created when changes are made.

[Foxhound438]

ANOTHER SETTLEMENT NEEDS OUR HEEEEEEELLLLP

is all I could think about when the idea of 1000+ hours on a single save file for a game. It seriously becomes boring after a while.

I honestly think your best option is to let the player think the way he wants to, and eventually he should get board enough with his character that he'll be willing to make a new one... if not, tough luck for him. call it mean to go on saying they can when you aren't going to continue letting them play that character in future campaigns, but if the player honestly expects the campaign to continue forever doing increasingly trivial and repetitive tasks, and drag a whole party through that with him, let him be salty about it while everyone else moves on.

[Sabeta]

Playing devil's advocate here, but there is a way to completely cater to them.

The problem with "forever" gameplay in D&D is that the game stops scaling at 20; however there are plenty of games where max level isn't the end. What you need to start doing then is sending them on completely inane quests to get some super duper powerful gear that will enable them to fight a new monster that drops super duper powerful gear which they can use to fight a new monster, and the cycle continues. Let's start with the weapon

1) Find the Legendary Blacksmith
2) He'll request that you Aquire a +3 Weapon to use as a base for your Legendary Weapon
3) He'll then tell you to go through a dungeon where you can find the remains of the Legendary Weapon he'll be recreating
4) Find and defeat three bosses, a Terrasque, a Lich, and a Kraken. You need to do this for extremely precious materials that will be used to forge your Legendary Weapon

This gets you Legendary Weapon: Zenith

Step 5: Legendary BS will send you to 12 Locations across the world. Once you're there you must accept every random quest that comes your way. None of them are exciting, all of them are "Kill X Goblins" or something similar. Every time you complete a quest, roll a d20. On a Natural 20, you obtain "Atma of the 'X'", where X is one of the 12 Astral Zodiacs (Not counting Ophiuchus)

This gets you Legendary Weapon: Atma
By the way Atma doesn't improve your stats. It's just a tempering process to get it ready for the real fun.

Step 6) You must spend 5k Gold on a Book which contains the instructions necessary for further powering up the Weapon
Step 6a) You must kill 100 of 10 different types of enemies
Step 6b) You must explore 10 different dungeons, your DM decides where you go
Step 6c) You must complete 5 randomly assigned quests at your DMs discretion
Step 6d) You must craft 20 items following the PHB's crafting rules, each with a total GP worth of 100 Gold.
Step 7) Repeat Step 6 three more times, as well as all substeps.

This gets you Legendary Weapon: Animus
Your weapon is now a +4 Weapon, and it gains a nice glowing particle effect.

Step 8) You must now infuse 75 Alexandrites into the weapon, as well as various Gems. These will determine it's stats.
Step 8a) You can aqcuire Alexandrites from Treasure Maps. The Treasure Maps are aquired as a random reward for quests or dungeons. Roll a d20, and on a 20 you get the map. The Map has extremely esoteric clues that your DM thinks is clever and that no level of Intelligence checks can solve. You must figure it out on your own.
Step 8b) You must purchase the gems or find them. The first 25 gems must be worth at least 500 gold. The next 25 must be worth 1000 gold. The last 25 are worth 2000 gold. Also, every gem you put in adds a 1% change that you destroy the gem instead. Meaning the last gem only has a 25% chance of working.

Ruby=Strength
Emerald=Dexterity
Topaz=Vitality
Diamond=Intelligence
Sapphire=Wisdom
Amethyst=Charisma

Doing this gets you Legendary Weapon: Novus
Your weapon is now +5, and for every 25 of one Gemstone you put into the weapon you gain +1 to that Ability Score. So 50 Emeralds nets you +2 Dexterity.

Step 9) Your weapon can now seal souls. For every CR 20 or above creature you defeat roll a d6, and that to the Weapons Soul Counter.

Once you acquire 2000 Soul Points, you now have Legendary Weapon: Nexus
By the way your weapons are now glowing with such intensity that they can be seen from outer space. Oh, and it's +6 I guess
https://38.media.tumblr.com/823eb61fac7a9ddb8787c8e743d44440/tumblr_ncb92rWwUn1td58jso1_400.gif
Courtesy FFXIV

Step 10) Repeat Steps 1-9, including all substeps, but the requirements are halved because you're a nice DM.

Completing this gives you Legendary Weapon: Zeta
Your weapon is now +7, and you get to choose Two Major Boons and three Minor Boons from the Artifact weapons list; however you lost the bonus Ability Scores that the Novus step gave you.

Once it's all said and done with, your players pat themselves on the back. Then "That guy" asks the dreaded question that all of them had been avoiding mention this whole time.
"What about armor?"

[Âmesang]

Then "That guy" asks the dreaded question that all of them had been avoiding mention this whole time.
"What about armor?"
That's when you build a campaign around 8-Bit Theater (http://www.nuklearpower.com/8-bit-theater/). :smalltongue:

[TrinculoLives]

This sounds ridiculous. Reaching level 20 is so rare that arguing about what happens to the game after that is practically a non-issue. Conversely, arguing that the game needs to end at some point when there are literally years of gameplay ahead is just unnecessary.

What level is the party currently?

[Arkhios]

This sounds ridiculous. Reaching level 20 is so rare that arguing about what happens to the game after that is practically a non-issue. Conversely, arguing that the game needs to end at some point when there are literally years of gameplay ahead is just unnecessary.

What level is the party currently?

That's the "fun" part; they haven't even started yet.

[TrinculoLives]

That's the "fun" part; they haven't even started yet.

...


The player complaining about the game ending at some point is absolutely in the wrong. A story is meant to be experienced in the format of: beginning, middle, and ending. This is true of every story ever. Even The Neverending Story has a final page.

That a thing must necessarily end does not detract from the value of a thing.


That they are arguing about this before the campaign even begins is so pointless. It is fruitless argument for its own sake. I don't think this even falls into the "Expectations" category of pre-game D&D discussion. This is more of a pre-RPGs-in-general discussion. I guess that's the point.

...Who are these four people?? A circle of friends who want to all of a sudden jump into a two-year game of D&D without ever having tried the game before?

[tkuremento]

...


The player complaining about the game ending at some point is absolutely in the wrong. A story is meant to be experienced in the format of: beginning, middle, and ending. This is true of every story ever. Even The Neverending Story has a final page.

That a thing must necessarily end does not detract from the value of a thing.


That they are arguing about this before the campaign even begins is so pointless. It is fruitless argument for its own sake. I don't think this even falls into the "Expectations" category of pre-game D&D discussion. This is more of a pre-RPGs-in-general discussion. I guess that's the point.

...Who are these four people?? A circle of friends who want to all of a sudden jump into a two-year game of D&D without ever having tried the game before?

No, I'm in another game and the DM knows Pathfinder and 5e. The other two players are new I think though. I mean when we brought up the possibility of Gestalt we had to explain for like a good 20 minutes how that is like having 40 levels of class in 20 levels of character and they kept being like "I'd rather havet the level 40 character" and we are just cringing so hard :| we being the DM and I.

[Beleriphon]

No, I'm in another game and the DM knows Pathfinder and 5e. The other two players are new I think though. I mean when we brought up the possibility of Gestalt we had to explain for like a good 20 minutes how that is like having 40 levels of class in 20 levels of character and they kept being like "I'd rather havet the level 40 character" and we are just cringing so hard :| we being the DM and I.

So this person seems to like the idea of perpetually playing the same character and exploring every option they have? Why not just declare them the immortal planeswalker, each time a new game starts they have to start at level 1, but with the last class they had from the previous game. Drop hints about why this happens to them through out each campaign. Never, ever have an answer though and never make it about why it seems to happen to them.

[tkuremento]

So this person seems to like the idea of perpetually playing the same character and exploring every option they have? Why not just declare them the immortal planeswalker, each time a new game starts they have to start at level 1, but with the last class they had from the previous game. Drop hints about why this happens to them through out each campaign. Never, ever have an answer though and never make it about why it seems to happen to them.

we also discussed this aspect and they didn't like the idea of starting at level 1 again but instead getting some kind of debuff, they are hellbent on epic levels x.X I think we are going to give this one more attempt at compromise with them and if not this is probably dead

[MaxWilson]

My friend wants to do a Zendikar 5e and I'm down for it. One person doesn't seem to realize that all stories come to an end, you don't just play levels into the high 100s until you die in real life.

"Though as I mentioned, in less polite terms, I'm not overly fond of the whole... 'Game over, start from scratch.'

If I put that much effort in to something and all I can look forward to at the end is ripping it all up... then I'm not doing it."

I then explain how long it can take and how many campaigns one can go through to even reach a normal level 20

"How about this. In a group of four, two don't like something. How many games do you think those four players are going to attend. If half the group is displeased?"

What do I even say to this as another player? The DM has also said to this: "And what happens when we reach max level and can't advance any farther." I understand that people can homebrew epic levels or start taking levels in other classes past 20 but this player is whining on the fact that nothing is forever. My DM doesn't exactly know what to do either, with the player attempting to guilt trip to stay in. What to do?

Two thoughts:

(1) Some people really want closure. Even if it's just an epic adventure with a 90% chance of "everybody dies" vs. a 10% chance of "you conquer the world," at least you'll know how the story *ends*. See if the DM is willing to end the story.

(2) There are two kinds of games: finite games, where the reward for good play is "winning", and infinite games, where the reward for good play is "you get to keep playing." If your friend is approaching the game as an infinite game and the DM is running it as a finite game, then even closure won't help--it will still feel like losing. Check and see if this is the case.

[tkuremento]

(2) There are two kinds of games: finite games, where the reward for good play is "winning", and infinite games, where the reward for good play is "you get to keep playing." If your friend is approaching the game as an infinite game and the DM is running it as a finite game, then even closure won't help--it will still feel like losing. Check and see if this is the case.

“Then nothing became something, and I was born, and I wrought great havoc in the world in the time allotted to me, and I returned to nothingness”
― Bangambiki Habyarimana, Pearls Of Eternity

Nothing is forever.