"Fun"

[Reynard]

I like the new DMG. I like the fact that it is both geared toward new DM's, actively teaching them how to run a game of (4E) D&D, and that is full of useful material like traps and monster creations rules and diseases and the like. However, I found something in it that irritates me to no end and brings back all that teeth gnashing resistence I felt during the lead up to release.

First, though, a little bit from the introduction:

Different people have different ideas of what’s fun about D&D. Remember that the “right way” to play D&D is the way that you and your players agree on and enjoy. If everyone comes to the table prepared to contribute to the game, everyone has fun.

This is a nice little statement early on in the game, reminding the DM thatthe definition of fun varies between folks. But later, at the very end of a very good encounter chapter, we get this definition of "fun":

Fun is one element you shouldn’t vary. Every encounter in an adventure should be fun. As much as possible, fast-forward through the parts of an adventure that aren’t fun. An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn’t fun. Tell the players they get through the gate without much trouble and move on to the fun. Niggling details of food supplies and encumbrance usually aren’t fun, so don’t sweat them, and let the players get to the adventure and on to the fun. Long treks through endless corridors in the ancient dwarven stronghold beneath the mountains aren’t fun. Move the PCs quickly from encounter to encounter, and on to the fun!

This is stuff straight out of the pre-release hype machine that badwrongfun'd pretty much everything about earlier editions. This is stuff that says that Mearls and Co. know fun, and your ain't it. This is stuff that just plane pisses me off. To some people, some of those listed things are, in fact, fun. For a few, all of those things are fun. I think those 100 words or so would have been better spent reiterating the point of the first quote, that there is no right (or more importantly in this case, wrong) definition of fun and what matters is that the group as a whole shares a similar definition.

Instead, we've got badwrongfunism forever enshrined in the DMG, and thus, if goal are met, a whole generation of D&D players that don't waste time on unfun stuff like talking to guards, exploring dungeon coorridors or managing "real" resources.

 

[Wormwood]

. . . if goal are met, a whole generation of D&D players that don't waste time on unfun stuff like talking to guards, exploring dungeon coorridors or managing "real" resources.

They'll be welcome at my table any time.

 

[LeaderDesslok]

Whenever my players come to a new city and have to get through the guards at the entryway, we inevitably go through the Monty Python's Holy Grail bit with Lancelot approaching the city guards. It's been done to death, and we still do it and love it every damn time.

Who is WotC to tell me that getting past the guards isn't fun? As you say, that paragraph is both filler and contradiction.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Yeah, 2 guards at a gate isn't exciting or of use, since the GM isn't counting on the, fighting them, it isn't fun, right?

Nobody asks guards: "So what guilds are here? How's things in the city? Hey, it's hot out here and I'll bet you're thirsty, here's some silver for you to go and get something to drink rather than search my dusty packs..." or anything else that might contribute to the game.

The quoted section of fun could have been yanked from D&DO, since they got rid of boring overland travel and exploration, and dumb stuff like that.

After all, it's boring to ask how long the corridor is, and stuff like that so it can be mapped. Secret doors are boring because the characters might not find them, so don't forget to outline all doors with permanent faerie fire. Looking at your map and looking for a large empty space is boring.

Actually, exploring the wilderness or the dungeon is boring, so have all the monsters line up outside of town, with their magic items explicitly labeled (because not knowing the powers of a magic item isn't any fun according to the DMG), along with resumes to give the PC's before they fight.

Sorry, but that little blurb posted on "badfun" is just one of many examples of the same kind of high handedness I've seen through the whole thing.

Don't get me wrong, the system is pretty cool, but the language, layout, art, bad binding, and attitude of the new edition turn me off it, and all the "this isn't fun because we say so..." attitude just makes it worse.

 

[keterys]

'You should eat whatever makes you happy, as long as you can also stay healthy'
'You should not eat 32 oz steaks, biggie milkshakes, banana splits, or deep fried twinkies.'

Are these statements contradictory? If I can make deep fried twinkies work for me and they make me happy, I should do it. By default, I shouldn't.

Most importantly, if _I_ like deep fried twinkies and can handle it, but my wife and kids can't, then I shouldn't necessarily load them up with them.

A lot of players don't necessarily enjoy certain things like that, or a lot of games are damaged by 'dragging' during certain moments like that, so general advice not to works.

Exception-based rule structure. If you're an exception, you trump the general rule.

 

[Reynard]

A lot of players don't necessarily enjoy certain things like that, or a lot of games are damaged by 'dragging' during certain moments like that, so general advice not to works.

Exception-based rule structure. If you're an exception, you trump the general rule.

No. Whoever wrote this paragraph is make an explicit statement about sertain parts of the game being not fun and telling the DM to avoid them. That is badwrongfunism. But more importantly, it contradicts a good portion of the introductory chapter and other places in the book where 4E expressly offers up options to the DM (something about which I was very concerned before 4E came out and was ecstatic to see a core element of the DMG design) to provide the most fun for his/her players. This paragraph is unnecessarily antagonstic toward "old school" gaming, AND it doesn't fit in with the rest of the DMG.

(Heck, it would have been much more appropriate in the PHB, as that seems to be the book of limited options revolving enterily around combat badassitude.)

 

[MerricB]

I really dislike the way the DMG hammers "badwrongfun" at you. I think the advice is good, but it's too absolutist.

Cheers!

 

[Cadfan]

From where I sit, the second quote is correct. The "guards" thing could be phrased better because, even though the intent is obvious, it leaves the DMG open to criticisms like those voiced by Warlord Ralts, but other than that it all makes sense to me.

In any case, if you want to play a game about supply and food storage, you should be here: boardgamegeek.com. If you need advice on navigating it, just ask. I can recommend many incredibly well designed games about supply and food storage, all of which are a delight to play. Marking off "X days of iron rations remaining" is not a delight. I'll do it for verisimilitude, and I'll make my Nature checks to forage, but by golly if the DM wants to dwell on it we'll have to have a talk after the game.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Instead, we've got badwrongfunism forever enshrined in the DMG, and thus, if goal are met, a whole generation of D&D players that don't waste time on unfun stuff like talking to guards, exploring dungeon coorridors or managing "real" resources.

It's not badwrongfun-ism. That's just a rule you need on internet messageboards to keep frothing nerds from tearing lumps off each other for enjoying the wrong rpg/edition/play style. It's a piece of general advice, intended to ameliorate the "20 minutes of fun packed into four hours" problem. I would guess* that most players don't enjoy roleplaying minor encounters in full, keeping track of rations, etc.

If a particular group does enjoy those things I'm sure they'll figure it out, no matter what mearls tells them to do.


*Here I'm foolishly assuming most people share my tastes. Personally I hate keeping track of money, xp, arrows and rations.

 

[Rechan]

A lot of players don't necessarily enjoy certain things like that, or a lot of games are damaged by 'dragging' during certain moments like that, so general advice not to works.

Exception-based rule structure. If you're an exception, you trump the general rule.

Aye.

I think this is a general tip that applies to the majority, of which the DMG is doing by talking to fledgeling DMs.

You like resource accounting? Congratulations, go have fun with that. Me? I don't even bother counting ammunition, because I hate micromanagement. We're different. Which do you think is more common? Simply put, if the following doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you.

Granted, it could've been worded differently. It could've said "Most", or it could've simply said "These are some things that often are not fun; if your players look bored during this, then move to the fun."