Dungeon Fantasy 7: Attack of the Healbots

[Steven Marsh]

Speaking as someone with "behind the scenes" lore, I can probably say that the level of humor has been toned down a bit. This is for a number of reasons; here are a few picked out of a hat:

1) Writers will hardly ever be rejected for not having a sense of humor. Given a choice between "humorous author who has other writing problems" versus "straightforward author who writes flawlessly," we'll go with the latter every time.

2) Our style guide specifically cautions against "bad" humor. Our "common errors" list has two related "don't do this" items:

Inappropriate attempts at humor. Game writing should be clear and entertaining. This does not mean it should contain jokes, inside references, cute comments, and the like. It is perfectly all right to set up a humorous, even slapstick, situation – but let the readers see the humor; don't try to rub their noses in it.

Colloquial writing and slang. This problem is often tied to the misusage of humor. Slang is appropriate in vignettes and character dialog, and maybe in cases where a slang word is a term for a setting-specific item. Even then, be cautious -- you can easily confuse a reader with a term which you think is known, but is in fact regional. Explain, and always check your dictionary when you are unsure.

And later on we list under humor:

Use it sparingly. There is a fine line between wit and self-indulgence. When in doubt, take it out. Cute, clever remarks will be edited out with prejudice.

3) Related to the above, editors and playtesters might be inclined to scrub humor in the interest of clarity, "pre-errata," and brevity. For example, consider this (slight) bit of humor from the Basic Set, under Pyromania (p. 152):

You like fires! You like to set fires, too.

This (light) example has stretched back in the Basic Set for decades. However, as an editor, I might be inclined to rephrase those sentences to something like:

You have a compulsion to set fires.

Not only is that 22% shorter, but it also avoids the pre-errata of, "Can I take Pyromania if I don't actually like fires, but merely have a compulsion to set them? I could hate and fear fire, but (say) feel a need to release it from flammable materials."

This is a trivial example, but it hopefully sheds some light on the issues that writers and editors face. We place a high value on readable and interesting text, but "clarity" and "brevity" usually trump "funny."

I have a bit more I could say, but I'll leave it at that for now. :-)