How much camp do you like in your games?

[Mallus]

When the setting itself is inherently humorous, it undercuts the possibility of it being taken as seriously in the future.

You mean like Terry Pratchett's Discworld?

 

[pawsplay]

My fairly successful Torg game was extremely campy. Yet the story itself wasn't done in a silly fashion. We just had a lot of fun with cliches, deconstruction, and the particularly weird incongruences.

 

[Hjorimir]

Very little to none. I'm a dark fantasy fan and I like serious tones in my campaigns as a general rule.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

Especially for comedic, and especially OOTS-esque campaigns, camp is useful in moderation. However, if it becomes law over your campaign, it is very likely to wreck the campaign's plot to the point of insupportability.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You mean like Terry Pratchett's Discworld?

Since Terry Pratchett only has to reign in Terry Pratchett to tell a serious story, it's a lot less of a problem than it would be around the gaming table. And as good of a writer as he is, I'd say Scrubs more closely approximates a work that can shift between humorous and extremely dramatic at the drop of a hat.

 

[Mallus]

My fairly successful Torg game was extremely campy. Yet the story itself wasn't done in a silly fashion. We just had a lot of fun with cliches, deconstruction, and the particularly weird incongruences.

That sounds a lot like my current D&D game.

I don't understand the notion that you can't hard-wire a little humor (or camp, or lightheartedness, or whatever you want to call it) into a game without completely destroying player investment. Because that's what we're talking about when we talk about 'seriousness', isn't it? A measure of how invested the players are with the in-game action/storyline.

If players buy into a setting with silly elements, then it's as serious as it needs be. Conversely, if players don't buy into a sombre, serious, dignified setting, then it's no better than pure camp, which is what they'll reduce it to the minute play begins.

 

[Mallus]

Since Terry Pratchett only has to reign in Terry Pratchett to tell a serious story, it's a lot less of a problem than it would be around the gaming table.

My group does okay . It's all in the Story Hour, well, except for the language we can't print here.

 

[sirwmholder]

Let me put it this way...

I opened my last campaign by running X3, Castle Amber. I figured it would give the PCs a good idea of things to come.

I love that module... then again I liked the two Alice modules as well... is that campy?

William Holder

 

[Desdichado]

I like very little camp, but due to our extremely poor economic conditions locally, we've had a bit of upheaval in our gaming group, and we do have one or two camp-lovers in our group now.

Honestly, that makes gaming slightly less fun; I can really enjoy the aspect of sitting around BSing with the other players and having a good time, but outright silliness gets old fast, IMO. I'd rather pull back to a more "serious" "dark" game and leave the BSing for OOG discussions. Even if they happen in the middle of the game, I want it to be something going on between the players, not the characters.

However, if everyone's on board with a certain level of campiness from the get-go, I don't mind it too much.

 

[punkorange]

Basically none. There are enough laughs inherent in just hanging out with friends without tossing silly crap into the fiction of the game. Camp is fun, but my game ain't the place for it.

This is my take on it as well. When we get together and game, we are all laughing and joking as friends anyway. The group's characters however are not. A common quote at our table is "by the way, my character's not laughing while he says this," while laughing.