Using the Kano Model for RPG Design

[Onix]

I was working on an to gauge player interest in a GM's games but RPG designers could really use this model to know what to focus on in a system. It would be pretty cool to have an open and free body of research that designers could reference instead of just guessing. It occurs to me that some things will depend on fads so things like popular dice mechanics could be tested for but they might change over time.

I'm going to try and put together a questionnaire that includes things like the following. This won't be the final form of the questions, I'm brainstorming.

Should a game include?
combat mechanics
social conflict mechanics
skill challenge mechanics
attributes
aspects
skills

Should a game's length be? (actually I'll probably ask things like "Are you impressed by a large (100+ pages) game book?")
short (1-30 pages)
medium(31-100 pages)
long (100+ pages)

How much is a good RPG worth to you?
All games should be free
can spare $1
$10 is fair
might pay $30
etc.

If an rpg is free, is is worth playing? (or questions like this, I remember it being brought up before)

Book art significantly improves my ability to play a game.

Settings
Fantasy
Modern
Sci-Fi
Anachronistic
Detailed
Outlined only, I want to flesh it out.

Dice, I like
Diceless
d4s
d6s
d8s
d10s
d20s
d100s
card decks
Dice Pools (small medium large)

Those are just the things that pop off the top of my head. What about you? Is there a game feature that you like but want to know if others are interested in? What about one you always hated? Let me know and I'll put it in the survey.

Once It's done, I'll post it up on my sites but it would be cool to get more exposure across more blogs. I want the results to be free and open. Would you be willing to help out with the research by linking to the survey?

We're really disorganized as a community, things like Rob's Guide for making RPGs is one great to start fixing that but it would be good to get some more tools available. I think this could be one. What do you say? Free tools for free RPGs?

[Chainsaw Aardvark]

[Onix]

Thank you for that CA, those are important considerations. In the end, the issue of conformity and sequels is oddly one the RPG ecosystem already has in my view.

I'm primarily interested in producing a reference work that can be used as a tool. At first this is what the GNS model was viewed as by the forge community but it was quickly hammered home that no discussion could go on without actively discussing things along the axis of the model. I seriously think thats where GNS went wrong. It was considered perfect from conception and could do no bad.

The same applied to a software troubleshooting solution that they had when I worked a Verizon. They insisted on it's use, but it's use was a hinderance 90% of the time because the techs could ask questions faster and more efficiently than what was in the software. The second mistake was that the tool took too long to update. Any suggestions or failures to find a solution took weeks to update.

I only bring that up to illustrate that a craftsman shouldn't be required to use a tool. It's only good to have a tool when you need one.

That said the question is, do we need this tool? I'd say yes, and as an example I'd offer the situation that's come up no less than four times (that I was there to witness) on these boards alone. Designers repeatedly want to make a universal system, except we keep saying that there's no need for one. That it's better to entice potential players with a setting. To be clear, I don't disagree with that thought but is it perception or is it fact? We could spend the next ten years saying it's good advice and then find out it's not.

The second thing that makes this useful is that it tries to identify the difference between a design features that plateau in their usefulness or that could kill a game's desirability if absent.

So no, this isn't a silver bullet and I'm pretty sure it will be misinterpreted and misused, but that hasn't stopped chainsaws from being useful tools to aardvarks.

[Onix]

Well I went and made a survey on survey monkey. I have one month to get 1000 responses.

If you're interested, . I'll make all the results and any analysis available at the end of the month. Please spread the word and let people know about this. If it's successful, I'll try doing more.

[Chainsaw Aardvark]

I started taking your survey and felt a need to respond to it in a second manner.

Its quite comprehensive, and while it may seem a little repetitive, that is a good thing from the point of view of a market research document.

However, 116 questions at once seems a bit much. Perhaps it should have been split into smaller chunks - ie "what do you like in an RPG combat system?", or at "what are preferred methods of character creation?"

We forgot to ask die-pool vs single die vs bell curve, etc.

I also think the layout of the answers is a little odd - most people are used to a 1-5 dislike/like scale. However, "I expect it to be that way" is not necessarily a 4 out of 5 answer - so you might have wanted to make what the responses mean a little more clear in the opening. To me, at least, "I can live with it that way" seems more committed/interested than "neutral" on many responses.

A few are worded funny or a little unclear such as 86: The game uses aspects. admittedly, its a little hard to explain a feat mechanic in an short question and ask if they like that.

As a final nit-pick, perhaps it should have been labeled "Table Top RPG" rather than simply RPG.

[Evil Scientist]

I'm taking a survey now, some bot said I might win a free iPad?

As Chainsaw Aardvark's already pointed out, some questions and answers suffer form unlucky wording. "I expect it to be this way" sounds like it is the strongest answer - like "I'm not playing this game if it doesn't have d6's"! Question 25 is not clear enough: "A character's background is determined by a game mechanic" = something like roll on a random table to get your occupation? I don't understand this question.


Otherwise,this is a very interesting article and topic you have here.

[Onix]

[Onix]

I'm sharing these early returns with rpg.net to try and get more involvement but I didn't want to leave you guys out of the loop.

The survey is already producing some really intriguing results. So what kind of results am I looking at?

For example.
The first question in the survey has knocked me on my rear end. So far 66% of respondents have said they do not like it when an RPG has a long list of equipment. The flipside of this question is one later in the list confirms that that that 66% like a short list of equipment. This points out that things that I was told by RPG companies about players liking more equipment to buy in a game is actually incorrect. I'm curious if it's just the sample size that's giving this result. RPG.net! I need your input to confirm or refute this!

The data is mixed on point buy character generation, some like it others don't. But random generation opinion is neutral to negative.

Also some ideas about where games should be going are so far being refuted by the survey. GMless and GM lite trends negative leaning towards more GM control, but players seem to want the rules to be adhered to instead of GM hand waving.

Use of miniatures and maps is all over the place. A few actively dislike miniatures but so far no one strongly dislikes playing without them.

History and alternate history based games are trending very strongly positive.



If you can post the link in different locations it would be appreciated!

[Onix]

I've been doing some analysis on the results I've gotten so far, here is a .

Some of the results are predictable, others are unusual. There's way too many lessons to be taken away from it. If you haven't taken the survey, please do. The more results we get, the more sure we can be sure of what I can give to the community.

[Onix]

Download the file and look at the results. The blog post explains how to interpret the analysis of the responses.

Thanks to the participants!