Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5958826" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>Well, I was going to define "objectively" so I could say you may need to reword things, but you went on to say:</p><p></p><p>Okay, so we're weighing it against goals. What is the goal of Game B? Verisimilitude? Good stories? Well, maybe to some (large) degree at times, but I think you hit on it pretty directly:</p><p></p><p>You said it: fun. Fun is probably the ultimate goal. Can you objectively define what is "fun" for me? I mean, not the definition of "fun", but what makes something Fun. Hmm, maybe you can, since you go on to say:</p><p></p><p>So, that's not Fun. Okay... what if it doesn't lead to bad feelings between the players, or a miserable evening? What if a group can play with Game B and, despite how <em>your</em> group feels about it, actually have Fun with it? What if they have more Fun with it than they did with Game A? Is Game A now objectively worse than Game B? Or, perhaps, is a measure of how Fun something is actually subjective, and not objective?</p><p></p><p>Okay, but what if people that like Game B don't have those design goals? What if a group of players can have Fun being one powerful guy and four not-as-powerful guys? And, more importantly, what makes you think that Fun isn't the primary goal of either Game A or Game B, and that all other goals take a backseat to it? Or, for that matter, that Game B is has the "five balanced heroic characters story" design goal?</p><p></p><p>What if Lord of the Rings isn't Fun for the people who like Game B (personally, I'd say Lord of the Rings, taken as a whole with all the main characters, is probably closer to Game B, where you have Gandolf and Pippin in the same party [and let's not get sidetracked with the whole GMPC thing])? Again, does this mean that Game A has objectively failed, even if people do have Fun with Game A?</p><p></p><p>At any rate, again, I like balance. I prefer it, and I'd rather see the game balanced from the beginning, with mods that can upset that, rather than an unbalanced game that you try to balance via mods. That's my preference. But, trying to objectively define Fun (or trying to define the design goals of 5e as creating a heroic fantasy story for five balanced people rather than being Fun) is probably more than a little off. It's not objective, if nothing else. As always, play what you like <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5958826, member: 6668292"] Well, I was going to define "objectively" so I could say you may need to reword things, but you went on to say: Okay, so we're weighing it against goals. What is the goal of Game B? Verisimilitude? Good stories? Well, maybe to some (large) degree at times, but I think you hit on it pretty directly: You said it: fun. Fun is probably the ultimate goal. Can you objectively define what is "fun" for me? I mean, not the definition of "fun", but what makes something Fun. Hmm, maybe you can, since you go on to say: So, that's not Fun. Okay... what if it doesn't lead to bad feelings between the players, or a miserable evening? What if a group can play with Game B and, despite how [I]your[/I] group feels about it, actually have Fun with it? What if they have more Fun with it than they did with Game A? Is Game A now objectively worse than Game B? Or, perhaps, is a measure of how Fun something is actually subjective, and not objective? Okay, but what if people that like Game B don't have those design goals? What if a group of players can have Fun being one powerful guy and four not-as-powerful guys? And, more importantly, what makes you think that Fun isn't the primary goal of either Game A or Game B, and that all other goals take a backseat to it? Or, for that matter, that Game B is has the "five balanced heroic characters story" design goal? What if Lord of the Rings isn't Fun for the people who like Game B (personally, I'd say Lord of the Rings, taken as a whole with all the main characters, is probably closer to Game B, where you have Gandolf and Pippin in the same party [and let's not get sidetracked with the whole GMPC thing])? Again, does this mean that Game A has objectively failed, even if people do have Fun with Game A? At any rate, again, I like balance. I prefer it, and I'd rather see the game balanced from the beginning, with mods that can upset that, rather than an unbalanced game that you try to balance via mods. That's my preference. But, trying to objectively define Fun (or trying to define the design goals of 5e as creating a heroic fantasy story for five balanced people rather than being Fun) is probably more than a little off. It's not objective, if nothing else. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition
Top