Quote from: JimBobOzOh! Cheers, mate.

...

Does that mean you'll run a game for me? Always the bridesmaid, and never the bride... er, I mean, always the GM and never the player. I am hanging out...

If you're ever in the States, I'll run a game for you...same goes if I find myself in Australia.  But then you'll owe me one!

Quote from: joewolzIf you're ever in the States, I'll run a game for you...same goes if I find myself in Australia.  But then you'll owe me one!

There's always online! PbP suxxorz, but irc, IM, are all good.

Quote from: BalbinusIf the point was that fun is not the be all and end all and that there are other satisfactions in gaming too, then he's right, though I think it hardly merits a rant.

If he thinks fun is a term with a defined jargonised meaning, he's wrong.

These two are pretty close to what I meant. I dislike the the use of word "fun" as the central reward of playing and I dislike it because it's misleading, at least the way I perceive the meaning of it. I don't think it has a defined jargonized meaning which is part of the problem. A lot of games and threads about playing implicate that the most important thing in playing is that you (the players and GM, if present) are having "fun".

Nobody bothers to explain what this "fun" is. Is it the same thing for everyone? Does it mean that players are enjoying themselves, having a nice trip-in-the-park -kind of time, hacking orcs to pieces? Does it cover the example that JimBobOz presented in the first message of this thread? I wouldn't consider the scene to be fun, but I can certainly understand how it's fullfilling and meaningful.

Which, then, is the distiction I thought I was making, but there you go.

I'm not hot on putting value judgements on different kind of rewards from playing. A game of gung-ho dungeon crawling with a comical sidenote can be and probably is as rewarding as any other game.

I think it's worth a rant, but then again, I'm filled with semantic hate for the word "fun".

I can't speak for anyone else, but the feeling of fulfillment is fun to me. The actual execution of the process of waxing my car might not be fun in and of itself, but the feeling I get when I'm done and can view the results is quite fun, in that I enjoy it. I'm not currently finding the specific details of the current episodes of Lost comfortable, but I'm enjoying the hell out of the show anyway. IMO, it's perfectly valid to say "Gaming is all about fun". It's in the details that tastes vary and individuals and their values determine who likes what.

As an example, I find games that force "moral" judgments and choices on me to be trite. The "moral" choices are not truely moral because it's still a game. In the previous example, although it might still have been a fun challenge to overcome, the choice between my character's npc daughter's respect and safety is not a true moral test. It's fictitious. No one's safety or respect were truely in jeopardy. Choosing one over the other has no real consquences. Only in real life can my moral values truely be challenged. I don't mind the fictitious morality of my characters to be defined/challenged through gaming as a way of challenging me to RP and overcome obstacles. I despise games that believe they can actually challenge my true moral values and make those challenges central to the game. What I want games to fulfill in my life is escape from RL by using imagination, allowing me an outlet for my creativity, and social contact with people who's company I enjoy. Therefore, I am fulfilled by some games, which is fun for me, and not fulfilled by others. Therefore I don't play games that aren't "fun" (fulfilling).

Quote from: MertenThese two are pretty close to what I meant. I dislike the the use of word "fun" as the central reward of playing

Yeah, we know, but its nice of one of you to come out and and admit it so bluntly.

Quoteand I dislike it because it's misleading, at least the way I perceive the meaning of it. I don't think it has a defined jargonized meaning which is part of the problem.

So you're clearing up your previous statements... by pointing out that in fact you don't think the term "fun" has been stratified and regulated ENOUGH??

:wtfsign:

QuoteA lot of games and threads about playing implicate that the most important thing in playing is that you (the players and GM, if present) are having "fun".
Nobody bothers to explain what this "fun" is.

Most normal human beings already KNOW what fun is, we don't need a pseudo-academic to come along and tell us.
I feel sorry for those of you who feel like you do.

QuoteWhich, then, is the distiction I thought I was making, but there you go.

I'm not hot on putting value judgements on different kind of rewards from playing. A game of gung-ho dungeon crawling with a comical sidenote can be and probably is as rewarding as any other game.

Oh yea, great, thanks. You just don't believe that our games are actually capable of doing anything other than "gung-ho dungeon crawling" in any competent kind of way, and you incidentaly don't think its "fun". Woo-fucking-hoo.

QuoteI think it's worth a rant, but then again, I'm filled with semantic hate for the word "fun".

No, you just hate the idea that RPGs could be fun in a way that normal people enjoy fun. You want RPGs to be above all that ghastly plebiean tomfoolery of "fun" and be dedicated to fulfillment by "artistic appreciation" or whatever.

We've got your number, buddy.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditYeah, we know, but its nice of one of you to come out and and admit it so bluntly.

Anything for you, honey.

Quote from: RPGPunditSo you're clearing up your previous statements... by pointing out that in fact you don't think the term "fun" has been stratified and regulated ENOUGH??

Most normal human beings already KNOW what fun is, we don't need a pseudo-academic to come along and tell us.

I don't know what your definition of fun is and I have no idea what you get out of roleplaying. Likewise, I'm quite certain that you don't have a clue what kind my fun is and what I get out of roleplaying. Might be similar things, might be roughly similar, might be whole different things.

I'm not really intrested in telling you what your fun is, but neither I'm intrested in being told what my fun is.

Quote from: RPGPunditOh yea, great, thanks. You just don't believe that our games are actually capable of doing anything other than "gung-ho dungeon crawling" in any competent kind of way, and you incidentaly don't think its "fun". Woo-fucking-hoo.

I don't think I said such thing, and I don't know where you got such impression. Furthermore, I have no idea what your games are like. Sorry.

Quote from: RPGPunditNo, you just hate the idea that RPGs could be fun in a way that normal people enjoy fun. You want RPGs to be above all that ghastly plebiean tomfoolery of "fun" and be dedicated to fulfillment by "artistic appreciation" or whatever.

Well, I've probably done my share of RPGs that are fun in a way that "normal people enjoy fun", though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that. I've done other kinds of playing as well. Can't really judge the experiences based on "fun" since they're rewarding in pretty different ways. I've enjoyed most of the gaming, though.

Let me aid the discussion real quick.

From the Compact Oxford English Dictionary:

fun

  • noun 1 light-hearted pleasure or amusement. 2 a source of this. 3 playfulness or good humour.

  • adjective informal enjoyable.

I would imagine that unless you haved enjoyed a game with a heavy heart, it would be safe to assume that, based on the official definition of the word, you have had fun playing any game that was enjoyable for you.

Quote from: Sigmundfun

  • noun 1 light-hearted pleasure or amusement. 2 a source of this. 3 playfulness or good humour.

  • adjective informal enjoyable.

I would imagine that unless you haved enjoyed a game with a heavy heart, it would be safe to assume that, based on the official definition of the word, you have had fun playing any game that was enjoyable for you.

Yes. But what if I have enjoyed a game with a heavy heart? If the game was such that did not have light-hearted pleasure or amusement, or playfulness or good humour? And if, during the gime, I did not find the scenes enjoyable but rather distressing? Even if, in the end, the game was meaningful and provided plenty of food for thought?

To twist the words a bit, the game could probably be considered enjoyable afterwards, when the experience is over. However, I wouldn't have considered it to be fun while I was playing it.

Then you basically need to put down the roleplaying books, and go find Mistress  Severa to spank you roughly, because you are in fact a masochist.  

I mean what the fuck, who the hell gets "enjoyment" out of playing games where they, as a player, are all disturbed or upset or have a "Heavy heart"??

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean what the fuck, who the hell gets "enjoyment" out of playing games where they, as a player, are all disturbed or upset or have a "Heavy heart"??

I've had a LARP run that way, once, and it was In-fucking-credible.

Never at the tabletop, though - but I have run games I wouldn't call "light-hearted", and enjoyed them.

I've enjoyed games that some might consider "distressing." If a dramatic portion of a game is strong / intense enough to burrow past my normal jaded nature and strike a chord I'm satisfied that I had fun.

Stanford Prison Experiment: The RPG

Quote from: Levi KornelsenI've had a LARP run that way, once, and it was In-fucking-credible.

Never at the tabletop, though - but I have run games I wouldn't call "light-hearted", and enjoyed them.

I've done it with tabletop, with similar results. There are similar effects with movies and literature; you're not actually enjoying yourself, but the movie glues you to the screen and the experience is very intense.

I dunno, you could probably say that you're enjoying the whole experience after it's over, though you're not enjoying yourself all the time during it. But I wouldn't call the experience fun.

Which then brings us back to the original question: I don't want to judge what people get out of their gaming; my perspective is far too narrow to say anything about that. I just dislike the use of word "fun" to describe what people get out of playing. It covers a lot, but it doesen't cover everything. And people tend to have all kinds of assumptions about the meaning of "fun".

Quote from: James McMurrayI've enjoyed games that some might consider "distressing." If a dramatic portion of a game is strong / intense enough to burrow past my normal jaded nature and strike a chord I'm satisfied that I had fun.

I can agree with this. If I feel anything from a game other than amusement about playing that game, I'm pretty god damned impressed with the sheer strength of the roleplaying involved and the fact I'm that immersed (despite likely being GM). If it's grief, or joy, or sorrow, or empathy, if the contents of the game have produced an impact on me, it is a good game.

That said, I don't by any means go out looking to explore deep psychological and emotional themes in my gaming, but if one can get through I'm impressed.

Quote from: MertenWhich then brings us back to the original question: I don't want to judge what people get out of their gaming; my perspective is far too narrow to say anything about that. I just dislike the use of word "fun" to describe what people get out of playing. It covers a lot, but it doesen't cover everything. And people tend to have all kinds of assumptions about the meaning of "fun".

Honestly, I think the bulk of RPG players out there - not on the internet, but actually playing games - really are playing for fun. They enjoy it the way they enjoy video games, or comics, or a pick-up game of sports, or whatever else they do with themselves as a group. Some people you like, an activity you enjoy, and something to snack on; let the kick-ass begin. Killing dragons with swords is pretty kick-ass, which is why D&D sells well.

My half-hearted theory about fun.