// STORY CRAFT

How to Write Comedy With a Repeatable Formula: Six Dimensions of Funny

Primary question: Can comedy be broken into repeatable ingredients writers can use?

By · Source essay published 2025-06-05 · Reference version updated 2026-08-07

Quick definition

Dilbert creator Scott Adams' Six Dimensions of Comedy argues a joke needs at least two of six elements — Clever, Bizarre, Naughty, Cruel, Cute, Recognizable — combined like flavors, not one alone. The formula built one of the most widely syndicated comic strips in history, and it works as a diagnostic for any comedic beat: if a joke isn't landing, the fix is often simply that it's only running on one dimension instead of two.

In one line: A joke needs at least two flavors combined to actually land.

Why a single "funny idea" often falls flat

One comedic element in isolation — just weird, or just mean, or just clever — rarely produces a real laugh on its own. The formula's core claim is that humor is a combination effect: two dimensions stacked together create a reaction neither one produces alone, the same way flavor pairing works in cooking. A joke that isn't landing is often missing its second ingredient, not fundamentally broken.

The six dimensions at a glance

DimensionWhat it isExample
CleverA smart twist or unexpected problem-solving.Timing an excuse to a coincidental thunderclap.
BizarreThe strange colliding with the everyday.A 7-foot-9 herdsman fishing an iPod out of someone's stomach.
NaughtySafe-for-work mischief that still feels rebellious.A joke built on implied censorship.
CruelSchadenfreude — laughing at deserved misfortune.The boss's house burns down and nobody blinks.
CuteWhimsy that walks right up to ridiculous.An intern with a dog snout.
RecognizableCringeworthy familiarity.A failed morale-boosting meeting.

Four techniques that punch up any combination

Juxtaposition sets something profound next to something petty — comparing digestion to resurrection, or an engineer outsmarting a clueless boss. Funny words exploit the fact that some words are inherently funnier than their synonyms — "shish kabob" carries more comic weight than "skewered meat." Near logic builds an idea that seems plausible right up until it's examined closely. Exaggeration blows a premise wildly out of proportion — a mole opening a Starbucks underground. Any of these four can supply the second dimension a one-note joke is missing.

Inappropriate transparency: comedy's riskiest tool

Letting a character say what most people are too polite to admit produces a genuine sting of recognition — it's often the single most effective comedic technique precisely because it's the most dangerous one. The same honesty that makes a joke land in fiction can, deployed carelessly in real life, produce the opposite effect entirely: recognizable and cruel without clever or bizarre to balance them, which reads as simply mean rather than funny.

Testing a joke against the formula

When a joke or comedic beat isn't landing, name which of the six dimensions are actually present. A joke running on only one dimension — purely cruel, or purely bizarre, with nothing else — is usually the fix: adding a second dimension (clever framing, a recognizable setup) tends to do more work than rewriting the joke from scratch.

Six-dimensions checklist

  1. Which of the six dimensions is this joke actually running on?
  2. Is there a second dimension I could add — juxtaposition, exaggeration, a funnier word choice?
  3. If this joke leans on "cruel" or "naughty," is there a "clever" or "recognizable" element balancing it?
  4. Would this land as mean rather than funny without more context or setup?

See it in a real page

REIGN OF BLOOD · SPEC PILOT · THE DRESS SHOP

SZERET: Mushroom. (beat) Tomato. (beat) Lettuce. / ROZITO: I didn’t know you ate vegetables.
Read the full annotation →

A vampire princess dress-shopping like a bored teenager — the full scene runs four of the six dimensions in two pages, including one beat that gets right up to the edge of landing as simply cruel instead of funny, and survives it.

Source note

This maintained reference page develops ideas first published in “Formula for Funny?” in Scribbler’s Toolbox on June 5, 2025. The original essay remains part of the editorial archive; this version is structured as a durable craft reference.

Related pages

About the author

is a screenwriter, showrunner, and narrative designer whose work spans film, television, games, and transmedia storytelling. Scribbler’s Toolbox collects practical frameworks developed from professional story development and production.