Thursday, February 19, 2009

Next Campaign Survey: the Numbers

A quick follow up to yesterday's post. D made a good point in his comments that a 1-5 scale might be more effective. I've decided to list out the original numbers I got on these games, mostly to show the diversity of reaction. I think it is interesting to see the range of opinions and interests in a fairly small group. Only one person actually put a 'veto' in, but I counted a '1' as an effective veto. I decided to set the threshold at 3-- anything at that number or below would be out. That was a very specific decision on my part; I could certainly have looked at averages, mean and medians, but I wanted a game that everyone would have at least a passing interest in-- and that if they decided they didn't want to play, they'd know I'd made an effort to bring them on board.

Romanus Infernus
7/6/1/3/4/7 (28 total, vetoed)

5/4/8/1/7/3 (28 total, vetoed)

Romance in the Three Kingdoms
7/7/9/8/8/2 (41 total, but p6 ranks it below threshold)

Bloodlines Supers
6/4/5/7/8/4 (34 total)

Vengeance of the Fallen Temple
8/7/3/6/10/8 (42 total, but p3 ranks it below threshold)

Masks of the Empire
9/8/9/5/1/6 (38 total, vetoed)

Burning Midnight
3/7/8/3/8/9 (38 total, but p1 and p4 rank it below threshold)

CSI: Arkham Harbor
10/5/10/1/9/6 (41 total, vetoed)

Mage: Sorcerers Crusade
6/8/3/7/8/7 (39 total, but p3 ranks it below threshold)

Maps of Decay and Destiny
3/6/7/8/10/8 (42 total, but p1 ranks it below threshold)

The Unending City
5/5/10/8/3/3 (34 total, but p5 and p6 rank it below threshold)

7/8/7/7/1/4 (33, vetoed)

Legend of the Five Rings
8/6/1/7/10/5 (37, vetoed)

Third Continent Fantasy
8/8/5/4/10/10 (45)

Notice the relatively low ranking of the more historically based games there. It might also be a worthwhile exercise at some point in the future to consider what makes a good campaign blurb.

I wonder if the reverse exercise would be interesting-- having the players come up with campaign descriptions for things they'd like to play in. Hmmm...note that I myself haven't scored the campaign list above-- assuming it were someone other than me running....hmmm...have to think on that.


  1. That's a very interesting spread.

    I think you'd also need to consider the individual players. Most of us have preferences for the type of games we play in. Don't take this wrong - but a group of your players going for fantasy, doesn't surprise me. You've done a good job cultivating that style of game.

    What would have the supers group I played in voted for?

    And the game system, we're far too opinionated about that, as well.

    The lack of historical interest doesn't overly surprise me. How many of them are also into miniatures or even historical miniatures?

    Thanks for sharing the data! I'm sure there's tons of other variables we could take into consideration.

  2. Just for fun I plugged it all into a spreadsheet. Obviously I'm a little bored with my real work....

    In order of average, high to low:
    3rdC Fantasy 7.5 (Med 8) Hi 10 Lo 4
    Vengeance 7 (Med 7.5) Hi 10 Lo 3
    Maps DD 7 (Med 7.5) Hi 10 Lo 3
    Romance TK 6.8 (Med 7.5) Hi 9 Lo 2
    CSI Arkham 6.8 (Med 7.5) Hi 10 Lo 1
    Mage SC 6.5 (Med 7) Hi 8 Lo 3
    Masks 6.3 (Med 7) Hi 9 Lo 1
    Burning 6.2 (Med 7.5) Hi 9 Lo 2
    Legend FR 6.2 (Med 6.5) Hi 10 Lo 1
    Redshirt 5.7 (Med 7) Hi 8 Lo 1
    Bloodline 5.7 (Med 5.5) Hi 8 Lo 4
    Unending 5.7 (Med 5) Hi 10 Lo 3
    Romanus 4.7 (Med 5) Hi 7 Lo 1
    Spyworld 4.7 (Med 4.5) Hi 8 Lo 1

    3rd Continent is a pretty clear cut winner. Two 10s, two 8s, and nobody hates it. Let's say four passionate, two cool. You'll get a lot more energy from the Players if 2/3 are excited about the game and no one is dragging it down.

    CSI Arkham has 3 passionate, two cool, one HATES it. It's fun playing baseball statistics with this.

  3. From my background encoding hospital patient satisfaction surveys for Press-Ganey: an even-numbered scale forces the respondants to choose either a positive or negative view. When reviewing something (especially a service involving interaction with other people), people tend to give positive reviews, and an even-numbered rating system essentially pushes that tendency. An odd-numbered scale allows for an indifferent or middle-ground opinion, i.e "3" on a scale of 1-5.

    Now, your players aren't technically reviewing an experience, but if they're experienced members of your group I think their opinions are going to be skewed some anyway from "I don't like that genre", for instance, to "that's not my kind of thing, but it might work in this group of ours".

    1-5 is also easier and faster to judge, for you and the players.