Raven Crowking
First Post
Great OP, Reynard.
RC
RC
When "fun" just isn't enough.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Blood Meridian: D20 would be hilarious.Reynard said:
Most people are shackled by their imaginations. The rest are artists, and look how happy they usually are.
I think it is. D&D, and RPG's in general, are sorta special not becuase they're interactive, but because their composition is inherently fluid. One minute they're a tactical wargame, the next they're a riddle contest, later still they're improv theater whose scenes runs from the ridiculous to the --occasionally-- sublime. They are many kinds of entertainment masquerading as one outwardly silly-seeming one.
The trick, of course, is engendering enough player investment in the game so as to make that kind of of higher-than-lowest-common-denominator play possible. I've done in the past, and sporadically in the present, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how outside of the personal chemistry between me and my players.
X
xnosipjpqmhd
Guest
I concur with the OP. It is a shame that the more emotive, thoughtful, or evocative moments of entertainment in DnD can be easily ruined by those who don't see the value in them.
Teflon Billy
Explorer
ironregime said:
By contrast, I've had plenty of games ruined by "Deep Immersion" types who came to the table hoping to win an Oscar when all we were doing was goofing around with friends.
Nothing worse than someone trying to explore why the Dark Lord "is the way he is" when all we are trying to do is get information out of him.
Worse yet is the endless conversations while gearing up "Good day to you sir, and what a fine backpack shop you have here..."
I mean emotive, thoughtful and evocative elements have their place...but let's not go putting them up on a pedestal
Last edited:
Jack7
First Post
Whereas I agree entirely with Reynard, and suspect that I understand pretty much exactly what he means (his intent and also what he is probably implying), I also agree with you here:
I think much of this depends on the adaptability of the group, the players, and the DM.
When a game is going seriously, and then the mood changes, for whatever reason, and some players insist it must remain morose or pedantic to the end, then that is not necessarily helpful to the game, or to the players. In real life, even in terrifically serious moments, funny things happen, and when that occurs, it should be exploited like any other event. And the reverse is true as well. Even in a very informal, relaxed, or comedic game serious things might occur and it would be silly not to exploit that potential just because everyone stubbornly clings to a preconceived notion of "nothing really matters, it's all goof off."
In other words, in my opinion, one should be free and flexible enough to take advantage of any opportunity, and one doesn't have to be always serious, always goofy, or always anything at all. Some days it's a bear hunt in a dark cave where nothing goes right, at other times a fishing trip on a sunny day when nothing can go wrong, and sometimes a whole variety of things happen over the course of just one game. That's living. One has to be flexible and adaptive and think not only of one's self, but also of how all are interacting.
I will add that I suspect (after all language does have limitations and it can sometimes be easy to misinterpret the intent of another) I agree with most everything said by both Reynard and the commentators here, because I don't see any of these things as being mutually exclusive. Merely mainly foci of personality differences in individual players.
As for me fun (and I am using the term very broadly), or the most fun, comes from any activity, be it real or imagined, in which I feel I can gain advantage, have gotten something useful from the activity, enjoyed myself, can relate the activity in a meaningful way to the real world and to real life, was tense, challenged or pushed, solved complex problems, laughed, and spent my time well. (Among other things of course.)
If all or most of those things are consistently absent then I personally won't waste my time engaging in that activity.
But I don't have a personal formula for how any particular element of fun is best exploited per se, or how much time must be devoted to each component of an activity.
By that I mean very serious and extremely useful things to me are a great deal of fun as far as I'm concerned and are very advantageous, and humorous and frivolous things are fun to me and also advantageous, but for very different reasons of course. One is fun because it will lead to an advantage which I can profitably exploit in the future in real life, the other is fun because of the enjoyment of the moment, and because of the social and psychological value of comradeship, friendship, and mutual interest in-game.
I think much of this depends on the adaptability of the group, the players, and the DM.
When a game is going seriously, and then the mood changes, for whatever reason, and some players insist it must remain morose or pedantic to the end, then that is not necessarily helpful to the game, or to the players. In real life, even in terrifically serious moments, funny things happen, and when that occurs, it should be exploited like any other event. And the reverse is true as well. Even in a very informal, relaxed, or comedic game serious things might occur and it would be silly not to exploit that potential just because everyone stubbornly clings to a preconceived notion of "nothing really matters, it's all goof off."
In other words, in my opinion, one should be free and flexible enough to take advantage of any opportunity, and one doesn't have to be always serious, always goofy, or always anything at all. Some days it's a bear hunt in a dark cave where nothing goes right, at other times a fishing trip on a sunny day when nothing can go wrong, and sometimes a whole variety of things happen over the course of just one game. That's living. One has to be flexible and adaptive and think not only of one's self, but also of how all are interacting.
I will add that I suspect (after all language does have limitations and it can sometimes be easy to misinterpret the intent of another) I agree with most everything said by both Reynard and the commentators here, because I don't see any of these things as being mutually exclusive. Merely mainly foci of personality differences in individual players.
As for me fun (and I am using the term very broadly), or the most fun, comes from any activity, be it real or imagined, in which I feel I can gain advantage, have gotten something useful from the activity, enjoyed myself, can relate the activity in a meaningful way to the real world and to real life, was tense, challenged or pushed, solved complex problems, laughed, and spent my time well. (Among other things of course.)
If all or most of those things are consistently absent then I personally won't waste my time engaging in that activity.
But I don't have a personal formula for how any particular element of fun is best exploited per se, or how much time must be devoted to each component of an activity.
By that I mean very serious and extremely useful things to me are a great deal of fun as far as I'm concerned and are very advantageous, and humorous and frivolous things are fun to me and also advantageous, but for very different reasons of course. One is fun because it will lead to an advantage which I can profitably exploit in the future in real life, the other is fun because of the enjoyment of the moment, and because of the social and psychological value of comradeship, friendship, and mutual interest in-game.
Last edited:
Teflon Billy said:I mean emotive, thoughtful and evocative elements have their place...but let's not go putting them up on a pedestal
I am merely making the contention that "entertainment" as it applies to D&D doesn't necessarily have to be "fun". Especially when using the definition of that term that has been dominating the discourse for the last few months.
Hussar
Legend
Well, if I'm not having fun for the four hours a week that I sit down to play, what the heck am I doing? While it may not be roller coaster fun, but, if it isn't fun, I don't want to waste my rather small amount of free time doing it.
So, yeah, for me, fun is more than enough. I suppose you could substitute the word, "enjoyment" for fun, but, it doesn't track as well. But, overpedantic examinations of the motivations of game designers doesn't appeal to me as either fun or enjoyable either.
So long as D&D is fun, I'll keep playing it.
So, yeah, for me, fun is more than enough. I suppose you could substitute the word, "enjoyment" for fun, but, it doesn't track as well. But, overpedantic examinations of the motivations of game designers doesn't appeal to me as either fun or enjoyable either.
So long as D&D is fun, I'll keep playing it.
Keefe the Thief
Hero
I admit, i always think other peoples´ perception of our hobby as "nerdy" comes from discussions like this. "I think, the type of fun depicted in current threads is not representative for what fun SHOULD be in D&D. Low-grade fun may be fun, but is not the only fun that should be fun when playing D&D."
