What the heck is "Unfun"?

[Kae'Yoss]

Unfun: No longer funny but not naturally boring. Jokes that have literally be done to death, but which aren't buried as they should be, but are still used again and again and again - those are the Unfun.

Bards can Turn Unfun. Good bards do this by inventing and telling new jokes, Evil bards use their unholy charisma to make people laugh at the joke despite its overexposure, or alternately, they bolster the joke with dark humour (like adding themes of death, destruction, misery, or perversion).

 

[Glyfair]

Using new rules to drop the bookkeeping of arrows and coins and food and encumbrance is hardly a drop in the bucket.

I'm going to disagree with part of this. Arrows and coins, drops in the bucket. Encumbrance? A good elegant system here could cut a lot of bookkeeping. A great system could cut a huge amount of bookkeeping (mostly because it would probably extend past the encumbrance system).

Do I expect it? Not really. Maybe for 5th edition 8-10 years from now.

 

[gizmo33]

If you are simply stating that someone is wrong, and do not care whether they accept your statement or not, there is no burden of proof.

In the original situation, the post was talking about how he found a certain kind of gamer to be strange. I wouldn't think that proof that such a gamer exists (the 5 headed person in my analogy) would be necessary for the statement to stand on it's merits. If such a gamer doesn't exist, he would still find that type of gamer to be strange - the existence here doesn't seem to be a necessary part of the logic.

 

[Sundragon2012]

"It's totally true! On this other site, they're talking about an anime whose name I recognize! Some people say it's ridiculous!" What does that even have to do with your point that players don't want risk again?

This is a complete fabrication and I think you're smart enough to know that. If you're not being intentionally dishonest, produce one single link that expresses the spirit of "risk free adventuring". Just ONE. You've had all these conversations on these boards over the weeks since 4e was announced, so surely you can find ONE.

Post #144 below is the only link I am providing. I have a life outside of this. I am speaking from experience and discussion or reading and lurking. You expect me to prove that these kinds of gamers exist? Now who is being disingenuous? The link will demonstrate at the very least the player entitlement issues I am referring to and that is all the proof you need and certainly more than I have to give.

You haven't made one salient point toward the argument presented, unless I missed it amongst all your thread crapping about logic and proof. Do you disagree, agree, what?

Quit derailing the thread and offer an opinion of your own.



Sundragon

 

[Gallo22]

Yea, thanks. That pronunciation guide is so not pedantic.

pe·dan·tic Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[puh-dan-tik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. ostentatious in one's learning.
2. overly concerned with minute details or formalisms, esp. in teaching.


Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

 

[Cadfan]

If you are simply stating that someone is wrong, and do not care whether they accept your statement or not, there is no burden of proof.

Technically true, but a good term to describe that kind of behavior is "annoying."

 

[Grog]

Ok cool. I swear, I'm not cyber stalking you - I just swore the next time I saw someone say that I was going to chime in with my two nerdly copper pieces. Now that you say this, perhaps that's what everyone else has meant this whole time.

No, it's cool. I just hear so much about players who want risk-free games around here that just for once, I'd like to see some evidence that these players actually exist in any significant numbers. I'm starting to think that the mythical player who wants everything handed to him on a silver platter is the EN World equivalent of the bogeyman.

 

[KarinsDad]

Karin's Dad- I'm glad that this works for you, but I tend to think that the fact that you needed a full page to explain your house rules and game aids you use to speed up the resolution of door opening suggests that if a faster mechanic for trapped doors can be created, it should be implemented.

No, I'm just verbose by nature.

Your conclusion here is a logical fallacy. The length of the explanation is irrelevant to whether a rule needs changing or not. Speeding up games by doing reasonable things makes sense.

For example, we use 3x5 cards for initiative. That makes sense for a circular initiative system. Asking "Who rolled the 18?" after the first round of a circular initiative system does not make sense.

That doesn't mean that a better system for searching for traps cannot be added to 4E, it just means that handling traps in 3.5 is low on the priority list for some groups who do have an organized system for handling them. It's a no brainer compared to actually running the boring "Ok, I search for traps." at every single door.

 

[gizmo33]

Jokes that have literally be done to death,

I'm going to take my eye off of "strawman" for a second to point out that jokes can't be literally done to death. However, you are describing most of my posts on this board so I'll try to cut it back.

 

[GreatLemur]

My paraphrases are accurate enough in regards to some of the discussions I have had on this and other boards since 4e was announced. Not all the words are right, but the spirit certainly is.

I suspect you're using the word "paraphase" incorrectly. I wholly believe that you intend to convey the spirit of the things you've read (although you've colored it heavily to support your argument), but I don't think you're actually reproducing the information.

Well this should help you get over that. Its a thread called DM Power to Disallow and it is a perfect representation of egregious player entitlement. It was a fun thread to participate in but pissed me off to no end.

I am not exaggerating much about the Tiefling in Hyboria, just read and see.

Also, I find it interesting that you have the energy to write about how my argument doesn't quite meet your standards but so far no points of your own other than how bad mine is.

That's because I don't disagree with you. I certainly agree that there are people out there who don't care about the internal consistency of a campaign setting, and that theirs is a brand of RPG I don't want to play.

My point here is that exaggerating or misrepresenting someone else's position to support your own is a bad tactic, and the rate at which this thread devolved seems like pretty decent evidence of that. And even if there actually is a post in this 37-page horrorshow of Gleemax retardation that says "Why can't I play a tiefling paladin in Hyboria? That's unfun!", it still woulda been a good idea to quote it, and thus avoid the staw man accusations.

Other than the fact that I wish you'd use some more commas and apostrophes, that's about all I've got to say on the matter.