What are your RPG fun factors?

I was discussing roleplaying and the pro and cons of various systems at the weekend and I came out with a statement that my friends found rather surprising. To me it seemed undeniable. What I said was:-

“I have never player an RPG system that was bad enough to actually stop the session being fun. Playing a bad game is still more fun than not playing at all.”

I then went on to say that whilst I had experienced roleplaying sessions that weren’t fun they were always due to the behaviour of either the players (mostly) or occasionally the GM.

Being engineers this statement was dissected and eventually turned into a formula for RPG fun.

The opening premise is that roleplaying is fun. It must be otherwise we would not do it. So let us arbitrarily assign value of fun to a standard game session.

We need a unit of RPG Fun to make the calculations. That unit will be the Gygax.

100 Gygax = Fun of an average RPG session, with an average system, average players and an average GM. This is the basic value for sitting around, telling bad jokes, creating a story, rolling dice and laughing at each other.

This standard value would then be adjusted by a series of subjective factors (which may become hard to read because this forum doesn't support Subscripts)

Fsys = System Factor. A value of 1.1 suggests that using this system increases fun at the table by 10%. A value less than 1.0 suggest this system actually hinders fun. ( My Fsys values for example could be, say, 1.2 for 3rd Edition WFRP, 1.1 for 2nd Edition WFRP, 1.0 for Pathfinder, 1.1 for Savage Worlds, 0.9 for BRP, 0.8 for Traveller, 1.1 for Word Play, 1.3 for Atomic Highway, 0.7 for A Song of Ice and Fire RGP and so on).

Fsett = Setting Factor. A rich setting that encourages immersion could = 1.2, a cookie cutter “everything and the kitchen sink” type world could = 0.9. (I’d give Warhammer a 1.1 as its rich and tasty but with all of the Elves, Orcs, Dwarfs and Halflings it can be a bit too Tolkien like for its own good)

Fadv = Adventure Factor. A flowing adventure where character’s choices influence the story whilst the action comes thick, fast and funny might = 1.3. A railroading or predictable adventure may be 0.9 – 0.5 depending on how well crafted the encounters along that railroad are.

Fpc = Player commitment factor. Developed and expressed personality, accents, acting in character etc = 1.1, playing on a mobile phone between ‘your turns’ = 0.7.

Fgmp = GM Preparation Factor. GM who knows the setting and what’s happening = 1.2, GM looking in a book all of the time = 0.8.

Fyesno = GM’s favourite word is ‘yes’ = 1.3 , GM’s favourite word ‘No’ = 0.7.

To calculate your RPG fun you feed you factors into the following equation:-

RPG Fun = 100 x Fsys x Fsett x Fadv x Fpc x Fgmp x Fyesno

So using this formula I can calculate that playing 3rd Edition (1.2), using the Old World Setting(1.1), running a freeform but occasionally a little directionless adventure (say 1.1), with two committed players and two phone fiddlers (1.1 x 1.1 x 0.7 x 0.7 = 0.59) and a GM who knows his stuff (1.2) and likes to say yes (1.3) gives me:-

100 x 1.2 x 1.1 x 0.59 x 1.2 x 1.3 = 121 Gygax of fun

This new value is then modified by additional Variables. These are positive or negative Gygax values added straight to the final score. Eg.

Vpdisp = Disruptive Player Variable. Depending on the nature of the player this could be a value of -10 to -50 Gygax.

Vgodgm = GM with God Complex Variable. Typical value of -10 to -200 Gygax.

Venv = Gaming environment variable. A good friends house = +20, a welcoming club = +10, a room in the back of a shop that smells of body ordure = -30.

The final equation becomes:-

RPG Fun = (100 x Fsys x Fsett x Fadv x Fpc x Fgmp x Fyesno) + Vpdisp + Vgodgm + Venv

Luckily I am playing in a welcoming club with no disruptive players giving me a bonus of 10 Gygax and a total score of 131.

What can be seen from this wholly scientific (if somewhat subjective) analysis is that if I switched from 3rd Edition to 2nd Edition for the same session I would only drop from 131 Gygax to 121 Gygax. However if I could stop two of the players looking at their phones rather than playing the game my Gygax total would increase to a huge 215 Gygax.

It also suggests / confirms that the people you are playing the game with are far more important than the game you are playing (no great shock I suppose).

So what do you think? What are the factors that determine if you have fun or not when role playing?

Mine have to be practical-fun:

* In print

* Able to attract and retain new players by simply advertising on Meet-Up

* Regular supplement offerings

* Lots of scenarios (this is a MAJOR factor for me)

* Pre-gen characters must be availalble so my players don't have to somehow figure out how to make a character by borrowing my books while learning the game at the same time (hence why I made all those pre-gens and stuck them in Liber Fanatica #7)

* There has to be discussion online about it

* It has to be a system that I can write/create stuff for (unofficially)

Other things:
* It has to be convention friendly

* Ideally has convention -potential

* It has to allow the GM to be the GM (not a game that can't be run without him or worse, force him to do things)

* It has to have fanboys. There's nothing worse than a game system that nobody cares about.

Here's what I don't want:

* Can't be trying to imitate an MMO (I don't give two wholly mammoth craps about resource management, mining and item creation..or worse so **** many modifiers that you need to be a human calculator)

* It has to be able to be house ruled without causing a rift in the space time continuum

* It can't be so wrapped up in it's own rule system as to forget that it's about the PLAY

* The company can't be full of jerks

* It has to have novels or comics that I can draw resources from

* It shouldn't be a chore to make a character

jh

I would have to say that the most important bit are the other players. Good players can make any game fun, and bad players just take away from your fun. Note that I am not saying that any player that does not play the way I do is bad at roleplaying, but he is bad for any group that also includes me. It's like friendships, you have to have common points of reference, even if we may disagree we are able to discuss said disagreement like adults. Since we are men we should also be able to tell each other to "shut the f*** up" without too much hard feelings, this includes the girls as well...

As to what makes a good Game, as in setting+system, that's less complicated. A good game has a setting that is supported by the rules, and vice versa. If the ability to teleport 10' iseasily available then all defensive walls are at least 11' thick. If mages can create gold with the snap of a finger then gold is worthless. If the players spend most of their time dragging huge piles of precious metals from dungeons they should either a)crash the local economy, or b) realize that gold is actually worthless since every adventurer drags out huge piles of it and nobody wants it cluttering up their yard. The setting should also make sense, you don't put large expansionist empires with silly stuff like having 10% of it's population in arms, next to a smaller country with a population 1/20th the size of the empires and then claim that they have been able to hold back the invaders for 5 years. If there are huge superpredatory monsters then there need to be something for them to eat. If the average orc warrior is much, much harder than the heroes (the PCs) how is it that the militia hasn't been overrun years ago and the players are playing orcs?

If the system (the rules of the world) results in the setting described then the world is understandable and more fun. At least to me and the people I play with...of course most of them are academics and the "understanding the world" bit is sort of why they spent all those years at university.

copious amounts of cake, cigarrettes, alcohol and weed usually does the trick with any rpg game system ,, on a side note,, our dm doesn't smoke or drink so he's usually the one reigning us in with a few fast roll of his dice when everything gets a bit too silly and descends into ridiculous metagaming ..

I like:

- When players enjoy the setting and the interaction with the world.

- When players try to immerse themselves in the world. This doesn't mean hour long monologues or dialogues, but just a bit of an effort to help create the illusion that we're in the old world together.

- When players do well and are excited about it or when they do something that has interresting consequences for the story.

- When players don't metagame too much, but also don't become too elitist about role playing. A happy medium, that captures both the Role Playing and the Gaming.

- When we don't argue about rules or other crap. When we all just adapt to the situation and play on.

- When players accept that they are not all the same in terms of the balance between role playing and gaming.

- When I manage to create encounters that put the players right on the edge without killing them. I know I am often pushing it and players may very well die. But it's important for me that players trust me and know I am not trying to kill them, but that such a challenge is what makes the game exciting. When the players are on the edge of death, I cheer for them inside and hope they survive... but I don't cheat. If they die they die - but I never kill a player on purpose and I always try to play it fair, because death should never be a surprise. For me it's a BIG rush when players manage to defeat a hard challenge. Even though I control the NPCs, and try to make them act in a way that makes sense... I always hope for all the players to live. It's my Jeckyll and Hyde of GMing, one part of me tries to kill them, while the other cheers for their success Hard to explain, but it's the way I have always run it and it's the reason for much of my enjoyment. It's not just in combat of course, also in investigation, social interaction and everything else. I think the Jeckyll and Hyde approach to GMing is a very defining trait for me. When I manage to balance J&H perfectly, it's great.

I don't like:

- Stupid rules discussions in the middle of games or discussions about whatever strikes someone as odd. If there are rules that need to be fixed or something needs to be debated i like to save it for a break in the gaming or after the session. Nothing breaks my concentration and immersion in the world more than rules discussions or something else I have to break out of the immersion in the world to ponder. When I GM I am very much immersed in the setting.

I like my gaming group. Top notch roleplayers. (6 players)

Because of the sie of the group, we use a couple of rules to make sure the game doesn't get bogged down or watered down.

1) We play in 75 min. bouts, chrono in hand. During that time : no going to the loo, no going out to smoke, no personal discussions. Keep that for the 10 min. break. This made a humongous improvement in the fun factor of our game. When we play, we play, when we don't, we don't. The breaks are essential though.

2) One conversation at a time. We are telling a story and when you are not playing your role you have a responsibility as the audience of the game. Even when the party splits up, people not active must stay and listen, as you would a movie. This puts a stronger spotlight on the ones that are roleplaying and motivates them to be entertaining and roleplay better.

3) Seek to entertain as much as you can. Roleplaying must be lively and brisk, descriptions inventive and fun. This way, sessions become memorable and very entertaining for all, and that is the ultimate goal of the game.

Because everyone agrees on these rules and goes for it, our fun factor has increased by a factor of 2, I would say.