When "playing it wrong" is more fun

[definiteFreakyFishGuy]

2. If your rule changes significantly alter how the game plays, you're probably playing the wrong game

...or are you playing the right game, now that you've altered the game enough to suit your needs?

But seriously, you'd think with so many games out there, I would be able to find the game that suits my needs. But the truth is, it took me about a year of on-and-off searching before I went from "I want to play a solo TTRPG" to actually buying Starforged to play it.

For me, finding the right game is very difficult for the following reasons:

1. There are like, a lot of games out there. So many. Just reading through the descriptions would take so much of my time, let alone read and learn the rules.
2. I usually cannot tell if a game is right for me without engaging with the game, which I found difficult to do especially if it's not a single player game.
3. What I enjoy is different from what I think I want. I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but what I tell myself that I want turns out to be very different from what I actually enjoy. For example, I told myself for too long that I like SF and Tolkienesque fantasy because that's what geeks are "suppose to like," when I actually do not! (Yeah, therapy has been good for me.)

And there is also the sunk cost—I already invested $$$ and/or time to learn the rules of the game. I might as well make the best use of it...

Thank you for listening to my TED talk. Have a nice day.

 

[payn]

Is that a reference to a meme? FWIW, I used to be an anti pineapple pizza person, but now I actually love it. Same with anchovies. I guess getting old does things to your palette.

It's an EN World inside joke. You replace whatever edition or game element you dislike with "pineapple pizza." Instead of x edition is the worst edition, you'd say pineapple pizza edition is the worst pizza.

 

[Theory of Games]

The first is that, if a game is more fun when not played by the rules (or if interacting with the rules ruins fun) = then its a very poorly designed game (mechanically and possibly in other ways).

Well. If you're not having fun, there's also a chance your playstyle preferences don't match what the game or group delivers. It 'aint always the system.

...or are you playing the right game, now that you've altered the game enough to suit your needs?

But seriously, you'd think with so many games out there, I would be able to find the game that suits my needs. But the truth is, it took me about a year of on-and-off searching before I went from "I want to play a solo TTRPG" to actually buying Starforged to play it.

For me, finding the right game is very difficult for the following reasons:

1. There are like, a lot of games out there. So many. Just reading through the descriptions would take so much of my time, let alone read and learn the rules.
2. I usually cannot tell if a game is right for me without engaging with the game, which I found difficult to do especially if it's not a single player game.
3. What I enjoy is different from what I think I want. I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but what I tell myself that I want turns out to be very different from what I actually enjoy. For example, I told myself for too long that I like SF and Tolkienesque fantasy because that's what geeks are "suppose to like," when I actually do not! (Yeah, therapy has been good for me.)

And there is also the sunk cost—I already invested $$$ and/or time to learn the rules of the game. I might as well make the best use of it...

Thank you for listening to my TED talk. Have a nice day.

I've been there, especially regarding "sunk-cost" (PF ... M&M ... SR ...)

 

[RenleyRenfield]

Well. If you're not having fun, there's also a chance your playstyle preferences don't match what the game or group delivers. It 'aint always the system.

Not at all what I am addressing. The idea that someone is trying to impose a playstyle or mechanic need on a system that does not purport to have it = not at all my point.

imho, it goes without saying, that if you are trying to stuff a round peg in a square rpg hole, then expect it to be awkward.

 

[John Dallman]

This is why I prefer games that aren't very prescriptive about their play style.

 

[Jd Smith1]

This is why I prefer games that aren't very prescriptive about their play style.

My group could play Bunnies & Burrows and turn it into weapon-porn McLooting.

To be fair, they are not murder hoboes (which I detest), but best suited to a campaign with violent solutions.

 

[Retros_x]

I 100% agree with the statements of the rules being not the important part of RPGs. But with playing characters with bad stats on purpose, be sure that the rest of the table is ok with it. Nothing more annoying than a game where you want to experience a heroic story and than you have a barbarian with 8 STR and 10 CON in your team. That just doesn't fit the vibe. And it also feels weird - a character who is not athletic and never did some sort of training, but runs around with a battleaxe, raging? Or a wizard who never really studied and is thus pretty bad at spellcasting? In a novel these kind of characters usually end up being something completely different, but in a TTRPG you usually do not change your class. You will always stay that wizard with bad INT. I don't see how that makes a interesting character.

For me personal more interesting from a roleplaying perspective are characters with flaws in their behaviour and mindset and not in their stats, because as stated above: roleplaying is not about the rules. Playing badly doesn't automatically make roleplay better the same as playing optimally doesn't automatically make roleplaying bad. But this was discussed enough in the other thread.

From a DM perspective its obvious that playing not according to rules is part of the game. Rule zero is there for a reason.

 

[GMMichael]

A lot of interesting discussions there, but one recurring exchange is this idea that one doesn't enjoy a particular TTRPG because they are "playing it wrong."

"If you didn't enjoy this game, it's because you played it wrong"

But... what if "playing it wrong" is actually more fun?

Then the issue doesn't come up because it begins with a game that one doesn't enjoy.

Can playing it wrong be more fun? Oh yeah. I'd even recommend it, as long as the whole group is on board.

The first is that, if a game is more fun when not played by its intended rules and playloops (or if interacting with the rules as written ruins fun) = then its a very poorly designed game (mechanically and possibly in other ways). And I think it's important to acknowledge and talk about a game that has bad rules where most players need to fudge, ignore, or house rule it to make it work.

Erm, D&D is more fun when not played by its intended rules and playloops. I don't think it has a reputation as a very poorly designed game.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

Erm, D&D is more fun when not played by its intended rules and playloops. I don't think it has a reputation as a very poorly designed game.

I hear ya, so not aimed at you, but...
On a purely person level = IMHO.... I think D&D is very poorly designed. I have many reasons why D&D is more fun when you alter or ignore its rules - especially when engaging with it on its own terms. But I think that is a discussion for a different thread. There is almost no game I see players go out of their way to make it fun more than D&D. But then again, my self and most of my fellow players = very much no longer find D&D fun anymore... double so now that we have played other systems and gotten well versed in them.