The one thing I will point out that is entirely hilarious about your model airplane comparison is that, yes, by their own standards, there are people that should be screaming at you just for suggesting that if someone wants to build model airplanes as "their D&D" that they are, in fact, playing D&D because that is how D&D is "fun" for them. It is such a cognitive dissonance I can't wrap my head around it. Slippery slopes and all...
You are actually making a straw man argument through another logical fallacy, in this case affirming the consequent (If dungeons and dragons is meant for fun, then people having fun must be playing dungeons and dragons). The "slippery slope" is another famous logical fallacy (an informal version of failure to distribute the middle terms of an argument). You also (ironically) misuse the term cognitive dissonance.
Games exist as entertainment. You can argue that not all entertainment is "fun" (I doubt anyone has "fun" reading Tess of the D'Urbervilles), but any extraneous social products of entertainment (gambling, professionalism, etc) are built upon the basic premise that people are meant to enjoy the base activity. If you'd care to argue about the dangers of Marxist commodification versus Rawlsian distributive justice I would be more than happy to do so over PM, but in my experience those whose view of "entertaining" the PCs is significantly divorced from them having fun suffer from what I like to call "unpublished fantasy author syndrome".
I will agree that “to have fun” is not what the point of D&D is through and through. It is also a can be a form of blocking where the user of the statement is using it to avoid discussing a viewpoint and stubbornly sticks to their own. However, as we’ve both agreed upon in the past if approached for the “Why am I doing something, over something else, or anything at all?” angle it becomes that sort of obvious underlying truth that follows “People do what they like to do.” Logic. After all if you don’t like doing something, and you aren’t required to do it for some other reason, then why are you doing it? This is one of those universal truths that people go back to because it’s right, but unfortunately it does not further an argumentative point when looked at from a lower level of abstraction.
I won’t dwell on your examples, because while examples are useful for understanding a point, they are by nature in-perfect to what they’re being compared to. As a result it’s easy to pick apart an example for the flaws that don’t make it fit within context to the original subject. Just pretend I did so for each of the three in a “choose your own adventure sort of way” and admit that there will always be holes to poke through examples.
So let’s address the real argument that you’re putting forth. Because D&D is a game that we assume it to have rules, goals and challenges that a players overcome to reap rewards and as a result of those rewards the players derive some form of emotional response. This emotional response is usually defined by the being fun, and is purely subjective in nature of the individual as it is an emotional in nature and subjective by the definition of emotions.
Here is where I will challenge that thinking, playing devil’s advocate if you will.
If we look at the definition of a game as provided below by dictionary.com. In none of the definitions of game do we find that there is required that a goal is needed, there is an assumption that there needs to be a goal.
1. an amusement or pastime: children's games. 2. the material or equipment used in playing certain games: a store selling toys and games. 3. a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators. 4. a single occasion of such an activity, or a definite portion of one: the final game of the season; a rubber of three games at bridge. 5. the number of points required to win a game.
So let’s take a look at the definition of goal. Our friend dictionary.com once again provides us with at least 5 examples, but for our purposes only the first really applies.
1. the result or achievement toward which effort is directed; aim; end. 2. the terminal point in a race. 3. a pole, line, or other marker by which such a point is indicated. 4. an area, basket, cage, or other object or structure toward or into which players of various games attempt to throw, carry, kick, hit, or drive a ball, puck, etc., to score a point or points. 5. the act of throwing, carrying, kicking, driving, etc., a ball or puck into such an area or object.
So where does this leave us? We’re really arguing about what is the goal of D&D based on the effort we’re putting in. This still doesn’t change your argument it just reframes them based on the fact that we’re arguing about what the goal is rather than if the game has goals.
The question what is the result or achievement that we’re directing effort towards? On a lower level of abstraction we might say that it’s to slay the beast, to save the world, ect… On a higher level of abstraction we might say it’s to have fun. Does it mean anyone is wrong? Yes, but only so far as if their definition of what is being said is used as the baseline.
The bottom line is, until you can get the people you are arguing with to accept the same definition about what you are arguing about then there is little hope to come to a definite conclusion about what is being discussed. I think you’ll find that people will generally agree with you when you present the framework and level of abstraction you view the argument, but then we run into the challenge of which level of abstraction is the view better from.
I appreciate the reply, ShaddyLogic. And yes you are right in many regards.
Your conclusion is just a bit off...I am not arguing against someone's definition. I am merely saying they are applying it to the wrong "thing" and that it makes for a very poor way of looking at D&D. It is choking the life out of discussion of it and the evolution of it.
Never have I, at any point, said that people do not play D&D because they have fun doing so. If people want to say THEY PLAY D&D because they have fun playing it, that is fine...however, that explaination does not translate over to "What is the point of D&D?"
Imagine watching someone play World of Warcraft...and you are totally unfamiliar with it. You say "That's a weird looking game. What is the point of it?" Honestly what would your reaction be if they answered "To have fun". Is there any way you wouldn't think the person was a dullard?
Now, what if they had said "Oh basically you fight monsters or get tasks to do...which sometimes involve fighting monsters. When you do that you get XP and your guy gets stronger...which lets you fight harder stuff and take on harder tasks. Also sometimes you find really nice items that you can use to make your guy even stronger"
THAT is a conversation starter. That is a basis for understanding. "It is fun" being given as an answer is...I can't even describe it without being moderated.
To wrap it up: You are right in pretty much everything your posted...except in regard to the distinction I'm drawing. But, again, that is not to say I am some mysterious sage...it is just not standard-concept stuff. It requires stepping back and realizing a game is a game.
As I've mentioned before it depends on the level of abstraction we're viewing the situation. If I asked someone playing any game what the point of it is I would be a bit surprised if the answer wasn't to have fun, since it's the obvious if not implied answer. Afterward the question would be, ok I know that you're doing it to have fun, but what do you do in the game? Why might I want to play that game? What makes it fun? Now that's what I feel you're trying to ask, but I think you're focusing too much on the what people are saying, based on their abstraction level of looking at the game, rather than drilling down to the concepts of how the game produces those feelings.
Additionally I might ask what sorts of arguements are stifled by the view from this particular level of abstraction? What exactly are we trying to accomplish by telling people to view the game from a different level of abstraction? Are we the only people to ever have these discussion about the game, or have these discussion occured in the past? If there were, what were the conclusions to those discussions and what makes us better equipped then with previous anaylsis of the topic?
Kerapalli, you are missing the point. I find it incredible how quickly this community, so quick to say there is no wrong way to play, is also so quick to attack how other people dm and usually do so as fast as possible to try and dismiss them.
If you would like to say I am that sort of dm then come right out and say it. You'll be wrong, but at least you'll be speaking directly.
As to the topic at hand, I will reiterate that I have NOT ONCE stated that d&d should not be fun...or that people should not play it to have fun.
I have also NOT ONCE said the point of someone sitting down to play d&d shouldn't be to have fun.
I am merely saying that the point of the game, not the act of playing it, is not nor has it ever been "to have fun" as that does not describe the conceit of any game ever designed.
A NOTE TO ALL: read what I am saying and debate that. Not what you want to believe I am saying. That or be classically funny about it and ask me things like "when did you stop beating your wife?"
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
Shaddy: the issue created is that no one is going to come to a forum like this and ask a question that can be answered with the "to have fun" in a meaningful way.
As you pointed out, it is the "obvious" answer...really it is closer to being the dumb/smartass answer.
It is so obvious that it becomes disingenuous...no one would actually be satisfied by it as a reply. So why bother with it?
And that leads to the second problem....because the answer is "because it is easy, it 'feels' good, it makes us look good. oh and it keeps us all from having to really talk about anything or think hard." its crap.
As for what we will do when it is out of the way? We will speak clearly with each other and others...and we will actually elevate the understanding of the game. Because we can...because its possible. Because its worth doing...because the game IS fun and its a shame more people don't know or experience that.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
Kerapalli, you are missing the point. I find it incredible how quickly this community, so quick to say there is no wrong way to play, is also so quick to attack how other people dm and usually do so as fast as possible to try and dismiss them. If you would like to say I am that sort of dm then come right out and say it. You'll be wrong, but at least you'll be speaking directly. As to the topic at hand, I will reiterate that I have NOT ONCE stated that d&d should not be fun...or that people should not play it to have fun. I have also NOT ONCE said the point of someone sitting down to play d&d shouldn't be to have fun. I am merely saying that the point of the game, not the act of playing it, is not nor has it ever been "to have fun" as that does not describe the conceit of any game ever designed. A NOTE TO ALL: read what I am saying and debate that. Not what you want to believe I am saying. That or be classically funny about it and ask me things like "when did you stop beating your wife?"
You're getting the responses the way they are because the presentation at the begining was by and large a bit hostile to the way people interpret some words or phrases. There is assumptions made by all parties involved what was meant with certain word choices.
This post spells out to your audience in clear language that you're drawing a distinction between the point of players sitting down and playing, and what are the players try to do while playing it.
Unfortunately this is still a very subjective idea, as the game system is base off the game make believe. The only hard fast rule in make believe is to stay in character. After that things can take many twists and turns. As you've mentioned before you can say it's to level up, but that's about as far as we can go with it without possibly running into conflicting expectations of what people should imagine.
As for what we will do when it is out of the way? We will speak clearly with each other and others...and we will actually elevate the understanding of the game. Because we can...because its possible. Because its worth doing...because the game IS fun and its a shame more people don't know or experience that.
Speaking clearly with others is not entirely dependant on understanding how the game works. It's more dependant on whomever is speaking to frame their statements with definitions that frame the context of their arguement.
Additionally does understanding the game more actually make the game mean anything more to the individual?
Just because we can do something and it is possible does not mean we should. Feel free to insert here any example that inflicts bodily harm to yourself or others here.
Worth doing? Define worth and why it's worthy. Anyone can make a statement that says it's worth doing, and as for the fun part, while it is fun and is an acceptable viewpoint it, there are many other things that are fun that someone could be doing as well.
I'll admit to not having read this thread as carefully as I should have to justify wading into the debate. If I state something incorrect, just let me know and I'll reconsider.
From what I can tell, you are drawing a distinction between the point of the game, and your reason for playing the game. You need a very sharp knife to cut bread this thin, but I guess I understand this point.
If I play basketball, I'm going to be awful at it. But my friends want to play basketball with me, so maybe we'll modify the rules slightly (I score twice as many points as I normally should). Our goal was to have fun, and towards that end we modified the rules of the game. Someone would be justified in saying we are no longer playing basketball, but rather a variant of basketball.
However, Dungeons and Dragons (and most pen and paper RPGs for that matter) are made to be tweaked. Very few groups play exactly RAW, and most make modifications towards the goal of "more fun". Since the game rules specifically allow for this contingency in a way that few other activities do, one could make the argument that, indeed, the point of D&D IS to have fun.
Shaddy: honestly the people that want to read and genuinely discuss it will...those that don't, won't.
In response to your point however, I think for practical purposes (and yes this is me speaking of a judgment I've made so I'll prepare my defenses) the point of the game could quite usefully be booked down solely to "to gain xp". At least in our own jargon. It should be presented more thoroughly to a layman.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
Shaddy: honestly the people that want to read and genuinely discuss it will...those that don't, won't. In response to your point however, I think for practical purposes (and yes this is me speaking of a judgment I've made so I'll prepare my defenses) the point of the game could quite usefully be booked down solely to "to gain xp". At least in our own jargon. It should be presented more thoroughly to a layman.
Point taken, I guess I'm just trying to get at while it's thought proking to discuss it doesn't necissarily make it any easier to bring new people into the game. Although I do think it might open the eyes to some on the board and that in of itself is some benefit.
I suppose in the strictest sense it would be to gain xp, but given that the goal of gaining xp is to level, I just cut to the chase.
I do agree that it's a pretty obvious answer and would perferably be skipped, but it doesn't make the answer invalid.
An answer that is both obvious and would be better to be skipped is useless to the discussion. It invalidates itself with its lack of purpose.
Speaking clearly with others is not entirely dependant on understanding how the game works. It's more dependant on whomever is speaking to frame their statements with definitions that frame the context of their arguement.
If people have a reasonable basis for understanding, a common language, it makes it much easier. A speaker then does not have to constantly put their words into context (especially when that context is likely to be twisted to attack the speaker) and simplifies the conversation. It cuts the fat off the steak. I think brevity can contribute quite a bit to clarity. That is a personal preference, of course, but I think it is generally accurate as well.
Additionally does understanding the game more actually make the game mean anything more to the individual?
Yes, absolutely. As you already know, I am a fighting game player...and that community has embraced this concept a long time ago. The expert understands and appreciates the game on a far different level from the novice. That, by the way (because I can hear the attacks from elsewhere coming), is not an attack on the novice...it is a compliment to the expert. Seeking perfection in something loved is probably as close to nirvana as one can get...especially when one realizes it will never be achieved but is still worth doing.
Just because we can do something and it is possible does not mean we should. Feel free to insert here any example that inflicts bodily harm to yourself or others here.
I agree. However, anything worth doing is worth doing well...that applies equally to playing Dungeons & Dragons as well as discussing Dungeons & Dragons.
Worth doing? Define worth and why it's worthy. Anyone can make a statement that says it's worth doing, and as for the fun part, while it is fun and is an acceptable viewpoint it, there are many other things that are fun that someone could be doing as well.
Funny how my last response flows straight into your next question. Fancy that.
Anyway, if you are refering to why improving the discourse and understanding is worth doing, my only answer can be that I love Dungeons & Dragons. I want to see it be better. I want to see it understood and enjoyed by more people. And then when that happens I will want it all to be better still. And then better. And better. Why? Because it's worth it. Might others not find it worth it? Sure...but it would be strange indeed if someone loved something and did not want to see it improve and be embraced by others.
Point taken, I guess I'm just trying to get at while it's thought proking to discuss it doesn't necissarily make it any easier to bring new people into the game. Although I do think it might open the eyes to some on the board and that in of itself is some benefit.
Opening eyes is entirely worth it all then. That is a benefit worth striving for. Also, this is all a work in progress...so if the initial benefit is opening some eyes, then great...we can move forward from there. Rome wasn't blahblahblah
I suppose in the strictest sense it would be to gain xp, but given that the goal of gaining xp is to level, I just cut to the chase.
I see leveling more as a consequence...sort of like how one can win a game by scoring the most points. That is to say, that is how I was thinking of it when I posted it. In the abstract, the team is seeking to win, but the technical goal would be scoring the points. I can see either way being arguable so I won't argue it with you because my own mind is not made up on that sleight a division. I'd have to argue with myself before taking it up with you! Since one is a consequence of the other they could probably be near-interchangeable.
Also, I think I know why I like you, Shoddy...Ihsan's Shade is one of my all-time favorite pieces of Magic art.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
