Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

So in my current campaign. My players are new to Gurps as am I!

We've been having a blast already, Slaying the monsters I've created, Talking with NPCs.. You know, The usual.

But there has something that has been on my mind lately in reguards to my attitude of "Fun vs rules" For some context, I make my players track ammunition, Gear, Supplies etc.. But I've been thinking more about detailed stuff, Like First aid and medical gear. Do I may them track the individual tools? Or just give them "Charges" As a stereotypical game item?

I'm torn here, and would like to know other people's opinions. For more context, I am running my sessions as a GAME with serious roleplay elements.

I'm slightly unsure about what I want to get out of this post, But I'd like to just hear what other GMs say!

Thank you in advance.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I'm afraid there simply isn't going to be a "one size fits all" answer here - some groups like precise resource tracking, some don't. I'd examine your group's previous responses to tracking resources: did they grumble, or just accept it? And later, when things ran short, was there a feeling of tension created? Or did people just feel it was irritating?

Personally, I don't tend to track resources all that precisely, unless I'm specifically running a campaign where resources are important: zombie survival horror or old-school dungeon crawling, for instance. And even if I was tracking pretty precisely, I probably wouldn't track every bandage in a medkit, I'd just give it, as you suggested, a number of uses after which things are expended. Tracking things in that much detail just tends to bog down the game in my experience, and it usually makes for a lot of extra work, since most kits and such in GURPS don't actually specify exactly how much of a given item are in them, so you'll have to decide that for yourself.

One approach you could take would be to give things like medkits and such a number of automatic uses and then, after those are used up, have the character make an appropriate skill roll when they go to the kit, at a penalty equal to the number of times they've done so, to see if what they're looking for is still there. For example, with the medkit, you could give a crash kit 10 "free" uses where anyone can just pull anything that would reasonably in a big first aid kit out, and then, after that, when the medic goes to dig up some bandages, she has to roll against First Aid to see if she's been frugal enough to have some stashed away, with no penalty the first time she rolls, -1 the second time, and so on. Once she fails, there are no more of that particular item in the kit, but others might still be available.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Well, the point of a game is to have fun, so 'too much fun' is never per se a bad thing. The risk, though, is pursuing immediate gratification at the cost of long term payoff; the PCs should sometimes have to work at things.

However, on your question about tracking, groups vary extensively in how much bookkeeping they tolerate or enjoy. "You didn't prepare properly" is a reasonable cause for a setback or failure, but the required amount of prep should be appropriate to the group.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Too much fun being a bad thing is unlikely unless you torture the definition of fun pretty hard.

But if you've set up 'fun' as in opposition to rules, either you've already done that or you're on the brink of discovering that you actually want to do freeform RP rather than rules-bound RPG play.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

No such thing as 'too much fun'.

I'd say talk to your Players, see what they think. If they enjoy tracking the nitty and gritty, then go with individual items.

I personally go with 'uses' and give them cost divided by 5 uses (but that's for things where there is a clear 'usage') and then let them 'top-up' for free in town (in DF it costs $150 to live in town, I allow that to cover repair and regular maintenance of gear).

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

One thing I have considered, but never actually used, was every time you use a med kit, you make a roll*. If it fails, you've used up enough of the supplies to reduce the effectiveness. Change the modifier for using the kit by -1, each time it fails. Use it enough and it will be reduced to no better than improvised equipment. I think tracking down to the individual bandage and antiseptic wipe is drastically overdoing it.

* Haven't decided what number the roll should be against.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

This is definitely a question of style. Most players at my tables haven't enjoyed too much resource tracking. They're focused on the unfolding story and more dramatic challenges. So I go light on that stuff. Currently, in my DF games, I lean toward simply charging a fee in town that covers cost of living plus supplies needed for the next journey. (Some PCs adjust this depending on disadvantages and whatnot.) We usually just presume that most expendables got used up, so they just pay for a new quiver of arrows, new rations, etc. (Not so for big ticket items like potions.)

I've run different styles at different times and this might be adjusted if I want to emphasize a particularly long, dangerous journey, but mostly we just ignore the details.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I don't think that "fun vs. rules" is a valid opposition. In my experience, it's simply not the case that every added rule makes things less fun, or every deleted one makes them more fun. As many RPGs have pointed out, saying, "Bang! I shot you, you're dead!" and "No I'm not, you missed me" and arguing over it is less fun than rolling dice and accepting the result. My take is that fun and rules are independent variables; there are rules that increase fun, and rules that decrease it, and even fun-neutral rules.

I'd also say that fun isn't the only desideratum in playing RPGs.

A long time ago, I ran a campaign set in an alternate DC universe. At one point in it, the PCs mostly got trapped by a mysterious circus with surreal powers. I had taken this from a World of Darkness supplement (it converted really easily to the DC Heroes RPG), which said that the circus had a Veil of Delirium. So after the PCs were all freed, they started wondering about the thing that had clouded their minds. One of them took advantage of a connection built into his origin story to ask the advice of Dream of the Endless, and Dream called on his sister Delirium. Well, that was too much to pass up. So I described Delirium coming back with the PC, and taking a look, and saying to the assembled PCs, "You found it! I didn't even know I lost it!" and reaching out—and then her eyes were the same color, and once again she was Delight. And the players just sat there in utter silence for a full minute. I don't think I'll ever achieve anything as a GM to equal that.

Now, you could call that a lot of things. But I don't think "fun" is the right label.

Which is not to say there's anything wrong with gaming for fun. I do that too. I'm just saying that there's more than one sort of reward to be pursued.

I don't think of rules as an end in themself. But I rather suspect that gaming with no rules would be, as Robert Frost said about writing verse that didn't rhyme or scan, "playing tennis with the net down."

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

As for tracking, in my current historical fantasy campaign, the player characters are engaged in a series of long-distance trading voyages in a Bronze Age world. On the first voyage, we kept track of exactly how much they spent on each item of cargo, how much space it took up, and so on. After that, they figured they had the general idea, and we went over to a much more handwavy approach. Basically, I had them end up with 10x their original investment in cargo, ±1x for each point by which they succeeded or failed in a merchant roll.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

When it's "badwrongfun."

But, really, the answer is nevar. There is no wrong way to play any game (so long as everyone consents). The goal is to have fun. And if you're having fun, then you're doing it right.

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I think that "fun" is too narrow a definition.

Let me compare. Many people would say that one goes to the movies for fun, and they're considered to be part of the entertainment industry. But there are other sorts of pleasure to be had from a movie. I've watched movies that were emotionally harrowing, from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (the Swedish version, not the American one) to the latest Avengers film, the one about Thanos; I took pleasure in them, but it wasn't what I'd call "fun." Similarly movies like La Belle et la Bête or Let the Right One In, which were emotionally touching and beautifully filmed but not "fun."

Now, my feeling is that it's posslble to gain a similar range of emotional rewards from RPGs. I'm doing all those sorts of things for pleasure, but not so much for "fun" in many cases.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Actually, based on your movie discussion, I think you're defining 'fun' too narrowly.

I loved Låt den rätte komma* in and Män som hatar kvinnor† and had as much 'fun' watching them as I did the Marvel movies. More fun in many cases as, well, some of the Marvel movies were a bit terrible, whereas those two Swedish films were damned excellent.




* Let the Right One In (2008), in Swedish.
† The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009), in Swedish (the title is "Men Who Hate Women").

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I think you're defining "fun" too broadly. Aesthetic delight can be intensely pleasurable, but I don't think it counts as "fun." Fun does not go through one like a spear.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I don't think there is such a thing as too much fun, but there's definitely such a thing as the wrong type of fun in a given situation. If your fun breaks the rules of the game or takes fun away from other players or the GM, then it's the wrong type of fun.

For instance, I sometimes run GURPS After the End when I have time. I make players keep track of all of their resources, since survival is an important part of the game. Handwaving stuff like the weight of your food or ammo may be more fun to some people, but it breaks the rules and is the wrong kind of fun for this particular game.

Another example would be the first game I've eve run (still AtE). I didn't know as much about the system as I do now, so I made the mistake of not making one of the players use a template (there was a few hours before everyone else showed up so we had time). He made the classic 100 Points in Guns Man. Everyone else used templates, so aside from the character being pointless at anything other than combat, he pretty much carried everyone through combat. This may be fun for the combat monster who does nothing but shoot things, but not for everyone else.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

We're not going to agree there mate. Not ever.


If tossing the rules out the window makes the game more enjoyable for me and my group, then that's exactly what we'll do.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Fortunately for GURPS groups, one of the rules is that "rules are guidelines" and "as long as the GM is fair and consistent, he can change any number, any cost, any rule" (B486). So you don't have to worry about breaking the rules of the game by adding, changing, or ignoring any rules.

Sounds like a good game, but I disagree with the premise that another group would be doing it "wrong" if they ignore some of the rules that your group takes seriously. The game style would be different, granted, but not better or worse in any objective sense.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

The only problem case would be where some are having fun at the expense of others. If everybody wants a high-resolution game, you can wind up in the situation where fudging and abstraction - rather than strict rules accounting - run counter to fun.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Yep. This is important...for some of us anyway.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

I meant wrong for my particular game. As in the specific sessions I'm running. I don't think anyone is wrong for playing their game their way. Sorry about the miscommunication.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

So it seems I've miscommunicated a bit. The "rules of the game" to me are the rules the GM sets up, not the RAW of the book. "The game" that i was referring to is any individual session or campaign, not the system itself. So if the GM rules that you can't have a particular trait and you take it anyway, then you're going against the rules of the game. If the GM says you're using bleeding rules and the player ignores bleeding entirely, that player is going against the rules of the game.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Ah, yes, I am with you now. No argument here. If everyone has agreed on the rules, then people should not break those rules unilaterally or arbitrarily.

I also agree with RyanW and Ulzgoroth that different play styles can be incompatible and that some players (including the GM), in pursuit of their own sense of fun, can make the game less fun for others. I've certainly suffered through games where some were having fun at the expense of others (this is true beyond RPGs, of course).

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

Due to the attitudes of my current group, we usually handwave equipment on that level. Generally, we allot a few points for "adventuring gear" and assume that people have what they need.

If I am running something where resupply is going to be a problem, then I'll start tracking in more detail.

I would consider something like:
Each time a first aid kit is used, roll to see if it is being depleted. On an 8 or less, it is somewhat depleted and now operates at a -1. These depletion negatives can accumulate.
New Equipment: First Aid supplies. For $5 and .5 lbs, a First Aid Kit can be restocked enough to recover one point of penalty. It may be a good idea to bring a few of these on extended field trips.

This would add an extra roll, so I'd only use it if there's enough enjoyment from the players to make up for the time and bookkeeping.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

This is why I use prospectuses. I define settings, allowed characters, possible missions, play styles, and so on for several possible campaigns and invite players to rate them. Then I run a campaign that all of the players rated average or better. Having done so, I apply my own sense of "fun"—but the players have agreed in advance that they share that sense of fun.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

This is a great idea, at the very least have a conversation beforehand. It's much easier for everyone to have fun if we all know the kind of fun we're all trying to have!

I'm lucky enough to have regular group for decades now so a lot of the above is already built in for us, but I would recommend doing this kind of stuff for groups who are new to each other (and even the addition of one new member makes a new group where this would be a worthwhile exercise).

I also agree with an earlier point you made, it's not rules vs. fun, Or at least it shouldn't be, and if it is it might be a sign you are playing with the wrong rules or even the wrong system. For me it's working out which rules are most fun and using them!

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

For a large part of my gaming career, roughly from 1992 to 2016, I had a mostly established group of players in San Diego, which was familiar with my overall style. But it was larger than I could fit into one campaign. My practice was to run two or three campaigns in parallel. When I was ready for a change, I would hand around a list of possible next campaigns—from half a dozen to fifty, and described in anything from a sentence to half a page, at different times—and ask players to bid points for the ones they wanted, with a budget where 2 points was an "average" bid. I guaranteed not to put a player in a campaign where they bid 0, and I don't recall ever having to put one in a campaign where they bid 1; most players ended up in campaigns where they bid 3 or more.

I could always pick out campaigns that were widely enough favored to make this possible, so one payoff was letting me choose campaigns to run that people liked, at least prospectively. Another was that players had bought into the basic idea; I wasn't trying to push them into something I liked and they didn't much like.

I realize that this situation isn't usual for GMs, and I adopted a somewhat different approach after moving to Riverside. But the basic technique of looking for a campaign idea that players are disposed to like, rather than choosing the idea and then trying to sell the players on it, seems to me a productive one. And it can be a useful exercise to try to come up with several different ideas for campaigns and think about how you might handle each of them.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

It definitely isn't for me. Each campaign I've run has been a "passion project". And while I might get sparks for other campaigns while running one, if I start investing time in those ideas, I find myself abandoning the current one. So for me, it's best I invest in one idea and run with it.

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

It's a clever idea I like it!

My group has been generally speaking between 4-7 in total so I've always managed to keep it to one campaign at a time. And apart from the late 80's ad very early 90's I've pretty much been the GM.

Most discussion on what we've wanted to do next after a campaign has wound up is basically done at the level of the pub conversation.

(but like i say our particular set up kind allows for this)

Re: Fun vs Rules - When is too much fun a bad thing?
 

For kit, boxes, etc. with expandable gear in it (e.g., medical kit, bycicle tyre repair box) I let them roll against the HT of the kit or box. If the roll is a success, you can use the kit to help a victim or mend a tyre and the HT drops by 1.

To replace items separately, a +1 to HT costs 10% of the original price of the kit or box.

Or when a kit has only a few charges (e.g. a bacta pistol with 5 ampoules of bacta), it's easier just to subtract an ampoule after usage.