Here's a fact:

All games have a reward for people playing them.  

That reward is often having fun -- enjoying the game. Sometimes it's money, like when you play the lottery.  Sometimes it's the absence of un-fun, like Russian Roulette or if you were actually a Gladiator in Ancient Rome.  Sometimes it's wanting to belong to the group of people that DO enjoy the game, or showing support for the person running the game (and possibly having designed it).  Maybe it's flirting with another player at the table.

The absolute truth is -- unless the reward for playing your game includes having FUN playing the game itself, it's not likely to have very broad appeal as a hobby game.  It's not a well designed game because the game itself has little to do with the reward the participants may be enjoying.

Quote from: StuartHere's a fact:

All games have a reward for people playing them.  

That reward is often having fun -- enjoying the game. Sometimes it's money, like when you play the lottery.  Sometimes it's the absence of un-fun, like Russian Roulette or if you were actually a Gladiator in Ancient Rome.  Sometimes it's wanting to belong to the group of people that DO enjoy the game, or showing support for the person running the game (and possibly having designed it). Maybe it's flirting with another player at the table.

The absolute truth is -- unless the reward for playing your game includes having FUN playing the game itself, it's not likely to have very broad appeal as a hobby game.  It's not a well designed game because the game itself has little to do with the reward the participants may be enjoying.

I agree with this 100%.

I bolded the part I think is important.

Quote from: TonyLBWhen someone says "Hey, our roleplaying game should be fun!", does that actually help you to have fun?

Yes, because that opens the door for me to ask, "Ok, what do you think would be fun for our next campaign?" Having "fun" can be considered a given, but it's still a useful term when someone in our group uses it because it opens the door to discussion about what we are feeling "fun" is at that time.

What.
The.
FUCK.







Seriously, how many threads can we make on one topic? Seriously, I have the vague notion it's going to hit seven at some point. Maybe not this topic, but...

Fun and whatever the fuck you find fun (Insert pretensious bullshit in quotation marks) are not mutually exclusory. The latter is a subcategory of the former. You want to "explore themes?" That's 'cause that's what you find fun. If you are "exploring themes" or whatever and not having fun... WHY?!?

Furthermore, fun is vague... but as it is the goal of any game, it needs to be discussed (and needs to retain its vagueness). X is fun because it explores themes or whatever the fuck you like. Y is fun because it creates conflict if you're into that kind of thing.

Combat is fun on many many levels. There's a conflict, a risk, a chance to show off my kewl powerz... oh, and I get to kick the shit out of a couple kobolds. (IS THAT SO WRONG?!)

"Oh, I don't just want fun! I want something that goes above and beyond fun!" Uh... no.

"Oh, fun is such a vague term anyway..." Damned skippy. It's supposed to be. It covers a broad field. And anything else, be it conflict, theme, characters, GMing advice, illustrations, wierdness, vanilla, powerz, grit, or historical accuracy can go fuck itself it doesn't hold my/your/SOMEBODY's interest.

Fun can be divided up however you want, but never diminished.

Quote from: beejazzSeriously, how many threads can we make on one topic?

An infinite number, and from my experience, all quite useless.

How can ya'll type so accurately with one hand?

I'll say one thing: 'fun' seems to have a lot of use as a rhetorical tool.

Quote from: Abyssal MawI'm saying that I don't believe that they actually enjoy it.

Okay.  That's what you think.  Honestly, why bring it up here?  I thought I was pretty specific:  This thread isn't about what is fun and what isn't fun.  It's not about who's having fun and who isn't.  That's been covered in excruciating detail elsewhere.

This thread is about whether the term "fun" is a useful tool.

If you and I were to play (which, y'know, would probably be a bad idea but this is a hypothetical) and you said "Okay, let's go have fun!" then I would immediately start thinking "Cool.  We'll set up some characters with internal tensions and conflicted relationships, give a situation that lights a fire under all of that, and see what sort of wierd, human, scary, genuine emotional stuff happens.  Because that's fun, and after all he said we were supposed to have fun!"

Which is to say (I think) that the word "fun" would have completely failed us.  Agree?  Disagree?

Quote from: TonyLBThis thread is about whether the term "fun" is a useful tool.

It's not. It's just a word, and has as much meaning as "hello" or "goodbye." It's a greeting more than anything else. But when we meet up with someone, unless we're nerdy fatbeards, we say "hello", because greetings and courtesy grease the machinery of society. Likewise, talking about "fun."

I guess you could have a long look at the word "hello" and try to examine its meaning and divide it into different kinds of "hello", but... you'd be a fuckwit.

Quote from: TonyLBIf you and I were to play (which, y'know, would probably be a bad idea but this is a hypothetical) and you said "Okay, let's go have fun!" then I would immediately start thinking "Cool.  We'll set up some characters with internal tensions and conflicted relationships, give a situation that lights a fire under all of that, and see what sort of wierd, human, scary, genuine emotional stuff happens.  Because that's fun, and after all he said we were supposed to have fun!"

And this is why you're not a Cheetoist. You didn't ask him what's fun for him.

The basic thing of Cheetoism is that "we game for fun." When you say, "but what is fun?" well, that's the whole point. You ask the people involved what's fun for them, and then you try to make a game session where everyone gets a good bit of what they like.

Quote from: TonyLBWhich is to say (I think) that the word "fun" would have completely failed us.  Agree?  Disagree?

No. You would have failed. You failed to ask.

It reminds me of when in a restaurant a waiter asks for an order, and the customer says, "what's good?" This guy is a fuckwit. The waiter doesn't tell him that, though, cos, you know - customer service and all. The waiter says, "what is to your taste, sir?"

So if some gamer says they want a fun game, ask 'em what's fun for them. Yes, "fun" contains no information in and of itself. Neither does "hello" or "please" and "thankyou". But people use those words in a civilised society, they don't stand around debating their meaning.

Become a Cheetoist. It gives you less people to apologise for than the Forge does.

Quote from: AosHow can ya'll type so accurately with one hand?

I use my tongue, why do you ask?

Quote from: JimBobOzAnd this is why you're not a Cheetoist. You didn't ask him what's fun for him.

Uh ... you're vehemently agreeing with me here, and calling me a fuckwit while doing so.  Great :rolleyes:

What I'm saying is that when someone says "Let's go have fun!" that's not enough to communicate the things I need to know.  So yeah, asking for more information would be my next step.  Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Does this mean I'm a Cheetoist?

Quote from: TonyLBWhen someone says "Hey, our roleplaying game should be fun!", does that actually help you to have fun?  Did you need reminding?

No. People who do that are shitheads.

QuoteIf you wanted to do something (say, get into an illicit affair with the Queen) and another player said "Hey, no, you can't do that.  It wouldn't be fun," is that a legitimate appeal to fun as a source of authority?  Do you buy that argument?  Do you back off of what you wanted to do, because it wouldn't be fun?

It's not a legitamate appeal to anything, really.

QuoteIf you're upset about something in the game, and somebody says "Hey, cool down, we're just here to have fun," does that help you cool down?

No, it pisses me off. I'd baloney their car if they had one.

QuoteBasically:  I think RPGs should be fun.  I play them in order to have fun.  I think that the actual fact of fun is very important.  But I have my doubts about whether the word "fun" does more good than harm.  What do you think?

WTF is fun?

Quote from: TonyLBUh ... you're vehemently agreeing with me here, and calling me a fuckwit while doing so.  Great :rolleyes:

Welcome to therpgsite!

Anyway, I was disagreeing with what you said. Maybe I was agreeing with what you secretly think in your heart of hearts... how the fuck would I know? I only know what you write.

Quote from: TonyLBWhat I'm saying is that when someone says "Let's go have fun!" that's not enough to communicate the things I need to know.  So yeah, asking for more information would be my next step.  Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Yeah, it was unclear in that you didn't say it at all. We is not psychic, mate.

Quote from: TonyLBDoes this mean I'm a Cheetoist?

A Cheetoist believes the following about running a game session:

• People first, everything else second.
• We roleplay for fun.
• To have fun, we ask the other players what they find fun, then try to accomodate everyone as best we can.
• 80% fun for 5 people is better than 100% fun for 4, and 0% for 1. Compromise.
• Eat lots of snacks
• Laugh a lot
• People first, everything else second.

And that's how a Cheetoist runs their game session.

Notice what it doesn't say. It doesn't say that there can't be serious and deep and meaningful moments. It doesn't say that any game is better than another. It doesn't say that "game" or "story" is more important than anything else. It doesn't say there can't be other reasons to game - just that people come first, and their fun. It expects compromise, and human imperfection.

Decide for yourself. From your various posts, I doubt you're a Cheetoist. You seem to think that the game itself, and the various meanings of various in-game stuff, are more important than the people involved. Otherwise there'd be less talk of "is "fun" a useful term" and more talk of, "what's a good soundtrack to use for a gonzo postapocalyptic game?" and shit like that.

Quote from: Jack Spencer JrWTF is fun?

I think this tells us a lot about why you've been unhappy with your roleplaying game experiences.

Quote from: JimBobOzI think this tells us a lot about why you've been unhappy with your roleplaying game experiences.

Go fuck yourself.

Quote from: JimBobOzDecide for yourself.

Thanks, I will.  By your definitions I'm a Cheetoist.  And since your definitions are, y'know, definitional ... I guess that means it's true.  In fact, pretty much every theory wonk I've ever met is a Cheetoist.  Cool :-)

Quote from: JimBobOzFrom your various posts, I doubt you're a Cheetoist. You seem to think that the game itself, and the various meanings of various in-game stuff, are more important than the people involved.

Is that really something you get from things I've said?  Or is it just a handy accusation that you like to throw at anyone who thinks deeply about their gaming?

Quote from: JimBobOzOtherwise there'd be less talk of "is "fun" a useful term" and more talk of, "what's a good soundtrack to use for a gonzo postapocalyptic game?" and shit like that.

But ... I thought the whole question of asking what people find fun was part of the Cheetoist credo.  I don't really see how you can have it both ways.  Either clear communication is important, or it's not.  If it is then thinking about how to make communications clearer ... that's a good, Cheetoist endeavour, isn't it?