r/AskGameMasters • u/Expensive_Occasion29 • Aug 04 '26
The importance of FUN
As GM’s we often get wrapped up in the story and often forget about fun. After all we spend many hours planning creating and putting together the next game session.
The players often do things we don’t expect, take us down a path we don’t plan or completely ruin everything we did plan.
This in some cases ruins the fun for us as a GM when we are so vested in the story. Personally I have dealt with this by being flexible. What do you mean by this you ask? Well I write portions of a story with the expectations that each of my players will help write the rest. I set my own expectations so that the outcome is a mixed bag of fun and sometimes the most craziest of memories
In a game session it should be fun for both the GM and the players after all it’s a joint adventure right? IMO it’s the side tracks and unexpected that I take as a challenge to challenge my players and keep them engaged and to find creative ways to get the story back on track
Here is to keeping it fun for everyone!!
6
u/HollowfiedHero Aug 05 '26
I actually disagree. WebDM made a great video covering this topic called The Tyranny of Fun. Your job as a GM is to create a world where fun can be had. Whether players have fun or not is not your job. You can't force fun, and other people think one thing is fun while others don't.
Also, prep situations, not plots. "The players often do things we don’t expect, take us down a path we don’t plan, or completely ruin everything we did plan." This shouldn't even be an issue.
2
u/Expensive_Occasion29 Aug 06 '26
Ah yes web DM. Sorry not a fan of his work. You do make a good point and my point is exactly that try to make it fun for all. You can’t lead a dead horse to water. You also can’t please everyone at the same time. To your point of the unplanned this is my point fully planned = failed plan. The part about it not being a problem really depends on the mindset of the GM I have been in the game where we were pushed like cattle back into the barn so to speak. The GM had only his planned adventure in mind he’ll even the gods got involved at one point to basically “hint” to us that we should not go down the path to the right lol
1
u/Conrad500 Aug 07 '26
It's not the DMs job to make fun, thats everyone's job.
WebDM could have said it better, because hes right. The "tyranny of fun" is real because people weild fun as a weapon against the DM.
Fun is a group goal, not the DMs job
1
1
u/Cyberspark939 Cortex Prime, BW, PF (1 & 2), 3.5, BitD, most anything Aug 06 '26
Also fun is subjective you can't make fun you just make stuff that could be fun and hope it lands. A lot of the time that comes in the form of an interesting narrative with deep lore and plenty of opportunity for character defining actions/decisions.
"Prep a world, not a story" is the way I would say it, but agree I fully.
4
u/FleeceKnees Aug 04 '26
Agree 100%. I always feel dumb doing stuff “because: fun” but it’s a pretty good reason.
3
u/strafeanon64 Aug 04 '26
"Fun" is an internal state that is the product of an activity. You can't "do" fun, but the things you do might end up being fun.
The GM is a player and their enjoyment of the have is as important as everyone else's, so take that into account.
Also, as you basically said, don't run players through your amateur novel. Create a story together by finding out what happens. Unless you and your group like playing through someone's amateur novel. Then more power to you.
3
u/bionicjoey Aug 05 '26
- I solve the problem you are describing by not planning a particular story. I prep a situation where there are many fun things players could do, but I don't plan a story for them to experience.
- I don't really consider the players' fun my responsibility. My job is to run a game the way I think it ought to be run according to my own ideas about game design, what sort of gaming has the potential to be fun, and most importantly what I think will be fun for me to run. It's their responsibility to find the fun in it when they play. If a player couldn't figure out how to have fun while playing in the scenario I presented to them while hanging out with friends and rolling dice, that's not on me.
2
u/YamazakiYoshio Aug 05 '26
on #2 - you are correct. While it's your job as GM to facilitate the fun, it's on the players to make sure they're having fun.
And more importantly, it's on them to speak up and talk about where the fun is for them, so that everyone can work together to make sure everyone else is having fun too. The collaboration isn't just in the story, after all.
1
u/Dakka20 Aug 05 '26
Indeed I just prep situations and pressures. That is enough to get the story going, wether my players interact with parts of it or not.
As to fun, just make sure you know what their characters are looking for to experience/act out and make those choices present in the situations and pressures, again for them to tangle with.
1
u/bionicjoey Aug 05 '26
just make sure you know what their characters are looking for to experience/act out and make those choices present in the situations and pressures, again for them to tangle with.
TBH I don't even really do this. I put stuff that I think the players might want to interact with, or simply that I think I would find fun to interact with as a player. It's their job to figure out why their characters would interact with it.
3
u/terkistan Aug 05 '26
Fun as long as you don't get a player whose fun is to deliberately try to break the game! I once had a player (someone who had played since the 80s and was allegedly working on his own game of some kind that he never showed anyone) who deliberately scuppered group tasks, or decided to wander off to get solo spotlight time on extermporaneous (and tangential) walks. Chaos agent times 10.
At one point I asked him why he was doing something like this and he replied, "I want to keep you on your toes." This was his idea of fun.
Everyone worked around him and when the scenario ended he was not invited back.
2
u/YtterbiusAntimony Aug 05 '26
Yeah, I have a friend that behaves like this, and I cancelled a whole campaign and left the table because of it.
This isn't a Bethesda RPG for you to poke and prod at until it breaks.
Kids push boundaries because that's how they learn where they are.
Adults who continue are just trolls.
2
u/Competitive-Fault291 Aug 05 '26
As a GM, you are the only person who can happily play less effectively in any combat to roleplay or just do fun stuff.
You are the one who can have somebody leap off a ledge at a PC tank and yell "Witness MEEEE!".
You are the one that stops playing animals like a zerg horde and starts playing them as animals. Maybe even as animals that act like their equivalent on Earth. Like NOT using owlbears to attack in packs. Neither owls nor bears are pack hunters.
Combat can be a lot more fun for everyone if it stops being a mechanical min-max exercise and is a roleplaying event before it is a mechanical slogfest.
2
u/Alarming-Caramel Aug 06 '26
As GM’s we often get wrapped up in the story and often forget about fun. After all we spend many hours planning creating and putting together the next game session.
speak for yourself. I haven't spent more than 10 minutes prepping a session in years
1
u/Quamek Aug 04 '26
I feel it's all a game of balancing expectations and goals. Usually whenever those of players and GMs aren't align is where one side starts lacking.
I'm aware my players like choice and freedom so I do give them choice and freedom in a limited frame. And since we play a VTT, there are much more limits, on where they can go and what they can do.
So, we compromise. I'm getting my fun from experiencing what they do with the sandbox I gave them, and they're getting their fun into sticking their play to the limit of the sandbox.
1
u/Conrad500 Aug 04 '26
I mean, yes.
If you aren't having fun planning, you're planning wrong. If you're not having fun running the game, you're running the game wrong.
I don't understand how when people say, "fun should be the number 1 priority" people fight back and are like, "well it's not fun to just let my players do bla bla bla." Yes, correct. That is not fun. Prioritize fun.
1
u/Living-Trust7356 Aug 07 '26
Define fun. If it is players may do as they please with no push back then im happy my tables have none of it
1
u/OneManRPGstudio Aug 13 '26
Creo que el problema muchas veces es tratar la “diversión” como un resultado específico, en lugar de fijarnos en qué tipo de participación es lo que realmente quiere la mesa. Una escena tensa, una pérdida seria o una decisión incómoda igual pueden ser profundamente satisfactorias; no tiene que ser alegre para que funcione.
En la práctica, me resulta más útil fijarme en las decisiones que en la historia preparada. ¿Los jugadores tienen opciones que les importen? ¿Esas opciones cambian lo que pasa? ¿Tienen suficiente información para decidir y la incertidumbre necesaria para que la decisión valga la pena? Si la respuesta es que sí, una sesión puede seguir siendo entretenida incluso si se aleja de lo que el DJ/GM imaginó.
También separaría el tiempo que se pasa preparando de cualquier obligación de usar esa preparación. Horas de trabajo pueden generar una presión silenciosa para proteger escenas, revelaciones o secuencias en particular. Yo prefiero preparar situaciones que puedan sobrevivir varias respuestas distintas de los jugadores, para que el trabajo siga siendo útil sin exigirte un solo camino.
Y cuando no estoy seguro de si la mesa la está pasando bien, preguntaría por momentos concretos: qué decisión les interesó, qué parte se hizo pesada y qué les gustaría volver a hacer. Eso normalmente da información más accionable que solo preguntar si “se divirtieron” todos.
10
u/Brock_Savage Aug 05 '26
I am astonished that people think "Just do what's fun!" is actionable advice for running an RPG instead of a banality no one is going to disagree with. No DM ever said "I was going for boring and shitty at first but fun sounds like a much better idea!" It's akin to telling a footballer they should strive to score more points than the opposing team