Which does set up an interesting conflict. On the one hand, the PCs have to be doing things that matter (at least as much as a typical RPG plot matters), but they also have to have outcomes that are fairly benign. This is the place to discuss slapstick violence.
I also think that it's amusing that RPG systems support slapstick better than you might think. Once a #dnd character gets high enough level to take a fireball without flinching, they can also survive a fall just like Wile E. Coyote.
Thinking about slapstick violence versus realistic/gritty violence and the possibility of character death is reminding me about the idea of failure in general. Especially since incompetence is a popular sort of character "joke."
I think in both cases, the important thing is to avoid finality. In a scene where the player is rolling against their skill that they decided to be incompetent in, the failed roll shouldn't the end. It should provoke a response that moves the scene forward.
And once you've covered benign violations, then it's time to talk about non-benign violations, or really, just violations.
Horror and comedy, in this view, are two sides of the same coin. Both involve violating our sense of normality, but humor is benign while horror is decidedly not.
It also explains why they work so well together.
Dark or "black" comedy comes about when the violations have become accepted and normalized. This can come when, say, a character accepts their pending death.
In terms of actual jokes to implement, there are two major categories, which I call Ironies and Absurdities.
Ironies are situations that revolve around characters missing information.
This could be a scene where the characters are reporting for their new job but don't know what their boss looks like, and are likely to address the wrong person.
Absurdities are situations that are simply funny on their own.
This can be as simple as giving an NPC a funny name.
In an ironic scene, while the characters may start out missing information, they shouldn't be kept in the dark for too long. This is for 2 reasons.
1) trying too hard to keep them from getting information is going to be frustrating and un-fun.
2) your players are the audience for the joke, so they need to be able to get the joke in order to appreciate it.
While the easiest situation to explain is one where the PCs are the ones missing information, that's not the only option.
You can also create scenes where the PCs have information, but some NPC doesn't.
Golden Age #superman was fairly infamous for using elaborate and ridiculous ruses to protect his secret identity. #SupermanIsADick #SuperDickery
#Seinfeld did similar on his sitcom, building up an in-joke among the cast, then springing it on an outsider.
Traditional narrative gives us the concept of dramatic #irony. This is a case where the audience has information that the characters in the scene do not.
For example, the audience has seen who the killer is in a murder mystery. Seeing the killer in a scene with a character that doesn't know creates tension in the audience.
In a #ttrpg , the players are both the characters and the audience. To use this to best effect, make sure to get buy-in from your players.
One major type of Absurdity is the Reveal. There's a lot of overlap here with Irony, but generally speaking, an Ironic reveal is one where information that could have been known or guessed is concretely established. This is when the villain reveals themselves (or is revealed) after leaving clues at their crime scenes.
The Absurd reveal is one where something is revealed that no one had a reason to know, suspect, or even care about. The villain relating their obscure relationship to the hero.
Another useful type of Absurdity is the Reference.
References are things that are inserted whole cloth into the game that refer to other media. They are not necessarily funny on their own, but do fit in the category of "benign violations" of our expectations.
At the gaming table, references can simply be part of the table talk. A player bringing in a line from a movie they've recently seen. But that's not to say that the GM can't use references as well.
Next up after References is the #parody .
The main difference between the two is that a Reference comes from its source largely unchanged and is usually just a quick hit, while the parody is transformative.
For example, an NPC who re-enacts the #MontyPython parrot sketch with another NPC is a reference.
Allowing the PCs to debate the NPC on the vitality of the parrot, reusing original lines or creating their own zingers could qualify as parody. Or adding a twist like an undead parrot.
Closely related to #parody is #satire . The difference here is that parody is specific, while satire is broad.
In a comedic #superhero #ttrpg , making a superteam making fun of the Avengers or the Justice League is parody. Taking comic book story tropes and dialing them up to 11 is satire, as it comments on the superhero genre as a whole.
I do want to say something about messing with #genre #tropes as a source of comedy, but I'm not sure exactly what.
There are genre satires, like Scary Movie or The Last Action Hero that play with tropes, and also comedies that invert tropes, like Tucker & Dale vs. Evil.
But making it relevant to your table is the tough part.