[Realisation] Theory is a waste of my precious time

Consonant Dude

Active member
So, recently I bumped into a very old (and formerly very close) friend, a member of my days playing GURPS and Hero. It had been 12 years since we had met. We talked about this and that (I was stunned to learn he now has four children) and it didn't take long for the subject of RPGs to come up. He's still actively into roleplaying but our old gaming buddies have scattered, so it's mostly new folks. I talk about new games but he doesn't recognize a single name. Knows that there is a 3rd edition of D&D but hasn't looked into that. D20 does not register with him but he does click when I say it's about 3rd party licensing with a “yeah, I heard about that”. He has never had an internet connection and does not “follow the hobby”. He told me his current fantasy campaign was going well (soon to be in its 5th year, with long breaks) and asked me if I would attend the next session. Knowing the guy and expecting to be in a relaxed environment, I accepted.

I get there (a modest but still fairly large apartment) and meet some of the players. Some of them refrain from talking about the campaigns but others can't contain their excitement. Turns out the campaign is heavily inspired by Star Wars but also many other sources of fantasy, sci-fi and every popular entertainment they can cram into it but they wrap it up in an Indian feeling. It's all cool as it looks like they are having a lot of fun. After some talk and a drink (yes, alcohol), we go to gaming room once everybody has arrived. There are six players (3 males and 3 females) plus him and me. Age range I would guess is between 17 and 37. They come from all trades. Some are still students. Two of them are actors in amateur plays. Fun stuff! Two players are involved in other campaigns (one is a diehard WoD fan) but many of them are obviously what I would call “occasional players”.

I am struck in awe of the gaming room. The table is cheap and so are the chairs and the room but damn, it oozes of gaming ambiance. Many items are direct cultural reference to India while the others match with said culture. Drawings, paintings, statues, music instruments, textiles. There are three inox plates serving as some sort of dice pots in the middle. Some of the decoration is cheap but it has been tastefully arranged. It all fits and creates a warm atmosphere. Lighting is top notch and they quickly put on appropriate music. There is a large map of the “gaming world” on the wall. It's made up of 8X11 sheets stuck to one another with pencil drawing but again, there is a charm to it. My friend shows me the gaming files of the current campaign. There are tons of maps of his world, all hand-drawn or photocopies of the hand drawing. In different scales, no less! Tons of locales, a huge pantheon, political charts, vehicles, etc... Tons of character sheets, PCs and NPCs. There have been dozens of PCs. Their character sheets all have very nice illustrations (most made by a player who has quit I am told). Some of them retired when the players left the campaign, others who died. When I ask, he counts 17 players having played in the campaign at one point or another (some of the players are scheduled to come back when real life permits). Also, this whole campaign has an occasional co-GM, so my friend gets to be a player too.

My GM buddy begins a recap. As I already knew, this is somewhat inspired by Star Wars in tone. There is a knight order with a mish-mash of powers and attires inspired by Eastern cultures, predominantly India. There is an evil empire. The players are part of a rebellion. But again, I am struck by the charm it all has. ALL the players also have extensive notes and some of them remind my GM-friend of what their characters did during downtime. Two of the players have spiral-bound books containing the entire campaign. One of these books is battered and used to belong to a player who quit. There is some discussion about what the players did last session and the GM gives one of the players a (real, physical) pendant-thingy with beads on it. It's hard to explain in English. I will learn later from a player that effectively, this character gets tons of re-rolls for this session. He is effectively “immune” for this session and gets control of certain scenes. The pendant is awarded to the best player each session.

Meanwhile, I check out the gaming shelf. Almost nothing has changed. Almost all the books there are the books this guy had when I was around, 12 fucking years ago! I see the copy of Harnmaster I left him. I see Star Frontiers. Twilight 2000. An old Greyhawk box set. AD&D 1st edition books. Lots of GURPS 3rd books. Fantasy Hero, Justice Inc, Danger International and Champions. I also see the supplement Strike Force (and immediately figure out where the bluebooking comes from). Some old French games like Hurlement. One or two very old Forgotten Realms products. Many CoC products. Some books with stats for Marvel characters (I don't remember what system, I suppose the old Marvel game). Honnestly, I think that's about it. Old school gaming. Along with this, many books on Hinduism, Star Wars and all sorts of stuff.

The session starts a while later. All the players are pumped up. Some of them are preped impeccably. One of the players has written poems. Another seems to have quite a creative business going but nothing annoying or spotlight-stealing. As far as I can tell, they are playing GURPS 3rd but, while I haven't played in a while, I can see this has been heavily homebrewed too. There are intense “skyship” battles but they obviously have nothing to do with GURPS and seem more like AD&D to me, with a die 20 being thrown to hit opposing ships. A scene where they meet a fallen guru is striking as far as roleplaying is concerned. It's like a script, with most of the players sharing equal spotlight. It is impressive how the retorts are flying and the story is very consistent as far as I can tell. The guru is about to curse them when the pendant-wearing PC uses his re-rolls to save the day. At the end of this “talky scene” comes an intense combat scene. It's homebrewed but I recognize GURPS 3rd in action here.

My buddy then says it's break time. We all leave the room. Chat, have another round of drinks and eat a little. Almost no game talk, though. We then proceed back to game room. The GM asks how it's going. Everybody is thrilled. One gal remarks that another player had very little interaction so far. Others agree with her. My friend seems receptive and says he'll try to remedy that. He asks for more feedback and makes suggestions as well.

The GM sets up the scene saying three months have passed. The players are going to war but we're skipping the boring crap and going right into the action. Doesn't take long for actual combat to begin after certain tactical choices have been made. I am stunned once again when the rules are put to use. This is not GURPS. This is a hint of GURPS in what is otherwise heavily inspired by RISK. Lead minis (I recognize some old Ral Parthas of mine that I had given him a long time ago) and glass beads and rocks! And then RISK rules, except players get to make occasional GURPS rolls to get bonus RISK dice. I'm not really sure how it works out but damn... it is working! They are playing on photocopy maps with delimitations on them and all. The combat is a fucking beauty, with beats of GURPS one-on-one combat. I smile as I notice the player who did not get much action in the first part of the adventure has his unit meet more resistance than the others. It's all very cool as he saves the day, stalls enemy progress and even captures a dark knight.

I won't say much about the rest of the session, except that it involved a giant ape and was again very well done. It was blatantly a rip-off of King Kong but it fit so well with the mood and campaign. The session ended with the players seemingly cornered by the creature. Time for a round table. Players give feedback. Say where they'd like this to go. The merchant is allowed to “control” a NPC during downtime and handle his business. Some of these players have a lot going. The pendant is awarded to a gal that has been proactive and fun all session long but truth be told, they all deserved it and frankly, it seems like they awarded it to her because it was her turn, so to speak. In other words, they are all splendid players and very generous both in and out of game.

We talked a bit about the game and then left the room. Out of the room, talks of the session almost die. Two players leave immediately. The rest of us speak of hockey, politics, work, entertainment. I came home with the sense that I had been pretty entertained. This is the first time ever I have seen people game (when not participating) and not been bored to death. I went there to see another perspective and frankly, was catapulted to where I was years ago.

I'm sure a lot of you have left already but for those still reading, I felt I learned a lot of things from that night. Before I go into that, a little background on me. I consider myself an entertaining GM. My players are happy, entertained. I get the odd burnout but otherwise I am fine. I've been gaming for over 25 years and I've been very open-minded. I've tried (that's actually played, full sessions) well over a hundred different games. I've tested probably twice that number and I've read way more than I care to count. I've followed conversations on message boards, read about gaming theories. All the threefold models and then the (more and more) numerous theory threads started on RPG.net. Delved into homebrew designing. I consider my range of roleplaying tastes to be wide, with robust games such as D&D all the way to the liteness of Hargrove's Freeform.

The experience I lived that night made be think a lot about the fact I think a lot about games. Maybe a bit too much. I play mainly one-shots these days, with the occasional campaign. The rest of the time I think about mechanics, how to facilitate stories or thrills or competitiveness. I have always believed system does matter. This has nothing to do with GNS, which I find to be rubbish. But yeah, I think you're better off having the right tool for the job.

But I now realise I have thought a bit too much about that. System still matters. Gaming theories about why and how I can have fun are still relevant. But other things do matter as well. And these require a lot of time too. This guy had tons of handouts, maps. His gaming room has been decorated exquisitely considering he is on a budget with four children. His music selection is awesome and since he has no computer, all of it was done through actual research. His book selection is awesome. His world records are massive. The world history seems consistent. There have been dozens of smaller story arcs and two bigger story arc closed from what I can tell. He has made sure that the players use the game room exclusively for game talk and he reserves time for general chatter elsewhere in the house. The players are respectful and helpful to each others. They support each others out of game. They separate in-game conflicts from the real thing (two of the characters bickered at one point while the players were laughing their ass off) . My buddy's GMing style uses all the tricks like dramatic cuts and going right to meaningful scenes, and I witnessed one flashback scene where something akin to Adventure's "dramatic editing" was done. This campaign required effort. Time, talent and skill. Time that I could put to use if I wasn't spending it thinking about games and reading so many theories. It was done also with instincts and just a group of people trusting each others and going with the flow. My buddy has no idea what a kicker or a fucking bang is. Social contract means dick to him. GNS, GDS, troupe-style play, Buffy's drama points and dramatic editing are all alien concepts. Even when he used to buy games, he never was a RPG-junkie as far as buying or reading.

I don't lament all the things I read and learned. I like that I can verbalise certain aspects of my gaming experience. I think I have put this to good use. But I swear, I was stunned by how similar the overall gaming experience was at his table compared to mine. It was just fun. I do (respectfully) think that he could benefit from knowing about other systems, rounding out certain inconsistencies in his homebrewing, better defining certain aspects but why? His stuff is working and the time he is not putting into that is time he can spend prepping the game. So basically, it is the law of diminishing return for me. I click on Levi's theory threads. They're well done. On the odd occasion, they are thought-provoking. But long ago I had already determined it was useless to spend time participating to them and after meeting this friend and witnessing this kickass roleplaying session, I now know, deep inside, that it is fucking useless to even read them. Long hours I spend reading them for the small chance one bit might help my gaming by a fraction of a hair? Not worth it.

An interesting analogy I might have is that of RPG.net's own forum rules. Moderators will tell you themselves: “we do have a number of rules here but generally, if you follow that one rule, you'll be fine: don't be a dick”. Well, I have come to the conclusion that roleplaying is much the same. There's a basic principle of having rules and acting out stuff. That's it. If you act decently, like an adult, you should be fine, really. The rest is way above our head. Most of those discussions are pointless. This is a fucking fringe hobby. There will be no serious studies about this hobby, in all likelyhood. The samples would be too small anyway and empirical evidence about fun are kinda hard to come by :D . I don't want to discuss Ron Edward's latest shocking statement anymore than I want to read about Mel Gibson's driving or Angelina Jolie's sex habits. (But I do think being interested in the former is even more sad, considering he's a Joe average and we could ask him what the fuck he means by brain damage instead of interpreting his words like he's Jesus Christ or some mythical, inaccessible figure).

I'm still going to come to RPG.net. I still want to keep my pulse on what new games might interest me. Maybe pop in to suggest a game here and there. But I'm going to try and stay away from theoretical debates about what is fun in roleplaying and all the psycho-babble because deep down, I think it is a monumental loss of time for everybody. Really, I think you find a game that matches your expectation. Trial and error is probably the best way. More importantly, you find the right players and put some effort into it. Might be in prep, props, discussion/feedback. You keep an open mind and you communicate a lot. That's the secret of roleplaying.

Basically, despite all the discussions and theories and new principles that have appeared in 30 years, this hobby is still the same. I could have been in a cell the last 12 years and my gaming experience would be almost identical.

There's irony in the fact my longest post ever is about me realising I don't want to spend so much time discussing games or reading discussions about games anymore but I had to say it :)
 

Asmodai

Warrior Kobold
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Yeah.

I find discussing games here to be a bit of a replacement for actually playing in them. I don't think that's uncommon. When I'm actually playing in a couple campaigns a week and having a good time, discussing them is a lot less appealing.

There's a flipside though. My favorite game is Eden Studio's Buffy. Our local gaming store only carries d20 and White Wolf (and maybe the L5R corebook or something). There's 0% chance I would have heard about it if it wasn't for RPG.net, yet the campaigns I've run with it have been the most successful I've ever done - both in my enjoyment and in the enjoyment of my players. I have discussions about games (and Steve Darlington and Dan Davenport in specific) to thank for that.


I find theory to be helpful for two things.

#1 - If something is going wrong

Sometimes ideas of theories and social contract and so on can help. Not necessarily as a solution, but to help you identify where things aren't working out.

#2 - Improvement

I want to be a better GM. Most of the time I read a theory thread, I throw 90% of it out as not being my style. There's still that 10% though that I learn something from.

For example, I'm not having players make up a list of flags and using them to make conflict webs and scene framing in my next game. I did read those articles though. They made me think a bit and provided a good reminder to study the characters, assume that everything on the sheet is there for a reason, and find ways to make what the players have decided they want included relevant to the game.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, just offering my own take.
 

UKPete

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
I am so, so glad you took the time to write all this down. Thank you. You’ve crystallised something that I’ve been thinking about for quite a while now.

I used to pretty much avoid the Theory threads because I didn’t understand them, basically. I’ve tried to read Ron Edwards stuff and it’s quite frankly beyond me. He is quite clearly an extremely intelligent man, with a vision and a focus that I could only dream of. Academically, he’s so far above and beyond my capacity that he’s leaving contrails in my sky.

Recently, though, I’ve been reading through the sudden rash of Theory threads that have popped, toadstool-like, up through the loam of RPG.net and into the light. I’ve seen the arguments and counter-arguments, the vitriol levelled at Edwards and his ill-advised use of certain phrases. I’ve seen people defending GNS and people attacking it, sometimes with language and arguments that are the stuff of university dissertations.

And, gradually, I’m starting to despair.

I honestly have no feelings about the validity of GNS as a theory one way or the other. It means nothing to me, and has nothing whatsoever to do with my roleplaying experiences. And, as I stated briefly in one of the threads (a moment of weakness and a half-formed idea), I strongly suspect that it means just as little to the vast majority of roleplayers. That’s roleplayers in general, of course, not the microscopic yet vocal subset that frequent the RPG.net boards.

The cause of my despair isn’t the content of the Theory itself, but quite simply the criminal waste of time it represents.

GNS and the Big Model are theories about nothing. The documents that form them, the hundreds if not thousands of hours of research and writing and discussion and argument are all focussed on something that has no purpose whatsoever. The number of people that might find them useful is vanishingly small, but the mental capacities of those people seem to be disproportionally great.

I am, effectively, wasting my time writing this post. But my time isn’t that valuable. The best I could do with my brain, if it wasn’t this, wouldn’t really be world-changing. What horrifies me about Theory is that the people who have created it, and even those who most vehemently defend or attack it, are the kind of people who really could, if their time and energy was diverted elsewhere, accomplish something. I believe I have seen mentioned that Ron Edwards is a biologist. Imagine what advances he could have made in his chosen field if he had never begun GNS.

Now that he has, though, is the world any different?

Not in any measurable way.

Theory represents, to me, a criminal waste of resources. It is an argument about nothing, that changes nothing, that has use to so few people and to such little effect that it really has no use whatsoever. But it seems to attract the attention of some very learned people.

Perhaps those who concern themselves with Theory so much wish to be seen as learned, but can’t bring themselves to be learned about anything worthwhile. I don’t know about that – that’s the cynical and unpleasant direction the whole argument leads me to. But as a waste, not just of time, but of valuable time, the whole idea of Theory offends me greatly.

I don’t agree or disagree with the Theory itself. I just wish it wasn’t there.
 

Imperator

Try RuneQuest instead
Validated User
But I now realise I have thought a bit too much about that. System still matters. Gaming theories about why and how I can have fun are still relevant. But other things do matter as well. And these require a lot of time too. (snip)
Time, talent and skill. Time that I could put to use if I wasn't spending it thinking about games and reading so many theories. It was done also with instincts and just a group of people trusting each others and going with the flow.
One of the best things I've got from discovering the RPG theory and the Nar approach is that my prep time has cut down a lot. Now, I have more time to prep handouts and all that jazz. So, theory's been good for me ;) But I agree fully with your point: with RPG theory, you get lot until you get to the point where you get less and less, until you find yourself discussing how many angels dance in the tip of needle, or something like that.
I don't want to discuss Ron Edward's latest shocking statement anymore than I want to read about Mel Gibson's driving or Angelina Jolie's sex habits. (But I do think being interested in the former is even more sad, considering he's a Joe average and we could ask him what the fuck he means by brain damage instead of interpreting his words like he's Jesus Christ or some mythical, inaccessible figure).
The outrage on the brain damage issue is absolutely alien to me. And I agree with you again: if you take issue with that, go and ask him what does he mean.
Basically, despite all the discussions and theories and new principles that have appeared in 30 years, this hobby is still the same. I could have been in a cell the last 12 years and my gaming experience would be almost identical.
I said that when Vampire came out and started with all the pompous storytelling this and that. At the end of the day, you have players, GM, dice and character sheets. Nothing new on that.

Good post, mate.
 

Balbinus

Repairer of Reputations
Arguing theory I think is a bit like arguing theology, it is an end in itself.

The application of logic, structuring of arguments, chains of causative reasoning, all applied to something that may not exist, and about which if it does exist we lack the data to reach any meaningful conclusions.

How many narrativists can dance on the head of a pin?

Anyway, great thread, quite correct. Theory doesn't matter, if it were not there no doubt we would instead argue something equally abstruse and irrelevant.

Fuck theory, let's game.
 

ru

temporary avatar
RPGnet Member
Validated User
i had a moment like this a couple of years ago: i realised that all this waffle about motivations and thematic questions was just getting in the way of the kind of fun gaming i used to have back when i was a kid.


all i really want to do is blow shit up or take over the world, and look cool doing it :)
 

Jim Bob

New member
Banned
On the thread's topic, I was very interested to read of Consonant Dude's game experience with his friend. It reminds me of how people often say that enthusiasm counts for a lot. I think roleplaying is like sex - enthusiasm is the most important thing, much more important than some particular skill or the latest trend in this and that.

It's good to have passion for things, and even better to have passion for things which can bring other people happiness, too. I see a lot of happiness coming from Consonant Dude's friend's rpg group. I do not see much happiness coming from GNS and the like; most of it seems to be bitterness formalised in a pseudo-academic style.

Still, sounds like the guy is a Cheetoist, Consonant Dude :p :D

II’ve tried to read Ron Edwards stuff and it’s quite frankly beyond me. He is quite clearly an extremely intelligent man, with a vision and a focus that I could only dream of. Academically, he’s so far above and beyond my capacity that he’s leaving contrails in my sky.
I think perhaps you are either overestimating him, or underestimating yourself, or both. Don't mistake obscure writing for wisdom. Ron Edwards has not demonstrated devilish intelligence, nor great stupidity, only obscure writing.

That said, no-one is under any obligation to make any effort at all to get through it all. It's just a matter of your doing what you like to do. I'm a bit of a miner - I'll dig through the crap to get to the good stuff.

UKPete said:
I honestly have no feelings about the validity of GNS as a theory one way or the other. It means nothing to me, and has nothing whatsoever to do with my roleplaying experiences. And, as I stated briefly in one of the threads (a moment of weakness and a half-formed idea), I strongly suspect that it means just as little to the vast majority of roleplayers.
I think you're right. There was another thread where someone was asking what "Simulationism" meant "outside The Forge." I replied, "nothing. Ask some gamer at the FLGS about Simulationism and see what they say." You'd get a blank look.

Much the same goes for other rpg theories, of course, and for most actual roleplaying systems outside D&D, d20, and WoD. Those have fame - everything else is obscure.

UKPete said:
The cause of my despair isn’t the content of the Theory itself, but quite simply the criminal waste of time it represents.
I'm not sure how it's "criminal." On what else ought we to be spending our time? I work to pay my bills and build a life for myself, I set aside time for lover and friends and charity. After that, I have a little spare. If I want to spend it on rpg theory, or roleplaying itself, or model trains, or watching the football, or watching and listening to an opera, or walking in the park, or painting a beautiful picture, or having a wank, is that "criminal"? Should I not entertain myself as I see fit?

UKPete said:
What horrifies me about Theory is that the people who have created it, and even those who most vehemently defend or attack it, are the kind of people who really could, if their time and energy was diverted elsewhere, accomplish something.
I think my mother once said something like this ;)

Human beings are not obliged to spend their lives "productively." But even supposing they were, there are more kinds of being "productive" than you imagine.

For example, let's think of d4-d4. This is a pdf rpg I wrote, and its successs as a pdf rpg on rpgnow.com and in cons, etc, is "low to moderate", not more than a few hundred copies. Let's be optimistic and assume that of the 300 or so people who bought the thing, one in ten of them played it. Of those, let's guess that each ran the game with just two other players. That makes 90 people who played it. Let's be pessimistic and suppose that only one in five of those people enjoyed it. That makes 18 people who had a good game session, due to my efforts. So, by a pessimistic assessment, 18 people had a good evening or day playing a game, had fun partly because of me.

So I contributed to people's happiness in a small way. That is no small thing. Those people being happy with their hobby were able to return with renewed energy to their jobs, or job-hunting, their marriages and parenting. I contributed something to the sum total of human happiness in the world. That's not nothing. It's not amazing and impressive, but it's not nothing. I think it worthwhile. It's "productive" - of human happiness.

UKPete said:
I believe I have seen mentioned that Ron Edwards is a biologist. Imagine what advances he could have made in his chosen field if he had never begun GNS.

Now that he has, though, is the world any different?

Not in any measurable way.
I have not seen it written anywhere in the holy books of the world, the musings of philosophers, that every person is obliged to devote their every energy to the betterment of humanity "in any measurable way." Only we are asked to do no definite harm. I do not think much of Ron Edwards or GNS, but I cannot in all honesty say that I think he or his ideas have done any definite harm.

UKPete said:
Theory represents, to me, a criminal waste of resources. It is an argument about nothing, that changes nothing, that has use to so few people and to such little effect that it really has no use whatsoever. But it seems to attract the attention of some very learned people.
My problem with GNS is that it is wrong. ;) What resources has it wasted? Do you imagine that human intelligence is some limited resource, like world oil reserves, or your bank account? I'm sure Edwards is quite capable of being a GNS guru and a biology researcher. Certainly I'm capable of writing an rpg, and being a chef, a lover, a friend, and so on. Life is not a point-buy system. Human resources are not so limited as you imagine.

UKPete said:
Perhaps those who concern themselves with Theory so much wish to be seen as learned, but can’t bring themselves to be learned about anything worthwhile.
You cannot in one breath say that Ron Edwards is learned in biology and could save the world with it, and then in the next breath complain that he is learned in "nothing worthwhile."

UKPete said:
I don’t know about that – that’s the cynical and unpleasant direction the whole argument leads me to. But as a waste, not just of time, but of valuable time, the whole idea of Theory offends me greatly.

I don’t agree or disagree with the Theory itself. I just wish it wasn’t there.
That's an unusual viewpoint. Pure speculation: could it be that there are issues in your own life, where you are examining its direction and purpose, which cause you to examine the direction and purpose of other people's lives? Each person tends to see their own vices and virtues both in others. Honest people think others are honest, frauds think others are frauds, the depressed think everyone's depressed, violent people think they have to strike first against others as violent as them - and people who think they're wasting their lives think others are, too. But of course this is pure speculation, and I don't know you. I'm only speaking from the perspective of being a human being; there are some patterns to things.
 
Last edited:

Rich Stokes

Registered User
Validated User
Fuck theory, let's game.
S'funny, I've been thinking much the same thing this morning. It's not like I don't find theory useful. I actually have a lot of time for GNS, it's a useful way to think about things and has helped me identify and qualify things and techniques I already knew. Stuff like Kickers, Bangs, Flag Framing and Conflict Webs are all handy, but you don't need them any more than you need a food processor to prepare a meal. They can help. They can save time and effort and they've helped me to get a better fun/effort ratio from my gaming by reducing the prep time. The games aren't better, but they are easier to run and quicker to prepare and they are just as much fun to run and play in, so that's a gain overall.

But formulating theory? Nah. Wading through all that stuff in the blogsphere? Fuck that, life's too short. I'll happily read people's advice and finalised theory stuff, but I'm really not interested in discussing it while it's half baked.

One thing I get irritated about is advice. I like reading advice. I like reading about something cool that you did in a session and why you think it was cool. I like reading about people's techniques and shortcuts and the neat ways they got a given behaviour out of a player or whatever. But whenever someone gives advice, there's a small group of people who tend to start screaming "Advocacy!!!" and get all upset.

Well, duh! Advice is telling people about something you did that was good. How can you not advocate something that you enjoyed?

Still, there you go.

There's the argument that only people who somehow feel they aren't getting the best experience from their gaming ask for advice. How often do you see someone say "My game is awesome! What am I doing wrong?" Only sick people need a doctor and only people who aren't enjoying their games as much as they think they should really need advice. The rest of us are just hypochondriacs.
 

Radical Authority

Rainbow Peace Hippy
I read all the articles at work, so for me theory was a waste of work's precious time.

RA

[Edit: Just to clarify, I don't think theory is a waste of time, either you-know-what or the concept in general. The above is in the nature of a joke, if not actually funny.]
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom