Board Game Review: Questionable Fun—Aptly Named
Questionable Fun is a game of rudeness geared toward mature players. Of course, in this case maturity means you are old enough to see an R-Rated movie — it certainly does not mean mentally mature. No, this is a game that requires your immaturity to blossom and be on full display. Graphic references to bodily functions and genitalia are ubiquitous with every play of Questionable Fun.
The Basics. Essentially, Questionable Fun is a simplified amalgam of Apples to Apples and Say Anything. Each round, one player reads off a card. The questions are rarely explicit but often provide a lot of innuendo or leave things open for filthy responses. One question might be, “The person to my right just got arrested. What was his crime?” Played with the right group, you’ll tend to see a lot of indecent exposure.
From there, each player (other than the card reader) writes down an answer. The answers are then read to the card reader and he picks his favorite. The person who wrote that gets a point. You play until one player has a certain number of points.
The Feel. Even though the game purports to be irreverent, most of the cards are (relatively) innocuous. This means the level of profanity and/or sexual content is highly dependent on the group. Unlike, say, Cards Against Humanity where the text is very explicit, Questionable Fun relies on innuendo. That, and some of the cards are really just strange questions. But, one of the unique things that makes it fun is that many of the questions relate to the asker or another player. So you can get some very personal (and hilarious) answers.
For example, one question was something along the lines of: Cross a celebrity with an animal. What’s its name? That doesn’t particularly lend itself to dirty answers. In fact, the winning answer for our group was a seal crossed with Seal. It’s name: Seal Squared.
The flexibility of the game is also is its undoing. If no one thinks of anything particularly clever, the round is dull and it stops being fun. Plus, it is difficult to play if one player is more or less sensitive to NSFW material. One person providing foul answers can sour the group, and one person who avoids it can feel very uncomfortable.
Questionable Fun is highly group dependent; for that reason, I think the name is apt. In my particular group, the game did not go over well. With a different group, though, it was much better received. Questionable Fun will certainly work with the right group, but ultimately there are enough variables that fun is not guaranteed.
Components: NA. My copy was a prototype. So it had the cards and the notepads, but I assume that the fully kickstarted version will be superior components-wise.
Strategy/Luck Balance: NA. There really isn’t much in the way of strategy. Questionable Fun is a party game through and through. It’s not as though one question helps or harms another player.
Mechanics: 2.5 of 5. Questionable Fun has very simple mechanics. It’s just question, answer, choose. That’s it. Rinse repeat. On the one hand, this makes it very easy to teach new players and get into the game quickly. On the other hand, it also results in the game wearing out its welcome fairly quickly. There just isn’t enough to it to make longer plays worth it. I could see Questionable Fun being played in a party situation, but it is likely to be played once – not all night long.
Replayability: 4 of 5. Assuming this is the kind of game that you would enjoy, there is a lot of replay value here. Not only are there a ton of cards to randomize the questions, but you also have unique answers. Since the answer can be anything a player thinks of, it allows very unique results even from the same question.
Spite: 0 of 5. There is no spite in the game. I suppose the card reader could try not to pick someone’s answer. But that not only goes against the spirit of the game, but also can be very difficult. The answers are read anonymously, so the card reader might end up picking the one he didn’t want anyway.
Overall: 2 of 5. Questionable Fun will certainly provide entertainment for some groups, but it didn’t for me. So, the score doesn’t really reflect a flaw in the game or otherwise that it is “bad.” Instead, it serves as a notice that the game did not work for my group. Will it work for yours? That’s for you to decide. But, it’s worth noting that Questionable Fun works best among a certain sensibility; one that is largely absent from my personal gaming circle.
(A special thanks to Robots and Red Tape for providing a review prototype of Questionable Fun)