Here's a survey I just sent out to members of my gaming group. After hanging out here at the Forge for the last week and reading Ron Edward's essays on role-playing, I decided my group needs to better understand one another. This survey is a first step. I've no doubt that it's full of misunderstandings of GNS and stances, but I decided I've got to start somewhere to make our role-playing more enjoyable. Also, keep in mind that some of the bits in the survey relate more specifically to issues in our particular group.

Maybe some of you will offer some advice based on your experience or understanding of GNS. Heck, maybe even some of you will get some use out of the survey. I dunno. Feel free to use it in any way you wish, short of toilet paper of course! :wink:

--Matt

SURVEY:

This is a survey aimed at better understanding why our group enjoys roleplaying. It IS NOT a judgment of any kind on how anyone role-plays and why. Instead, it is an attempt to better identify everyone's interests so we can make changes that make our gaming more enjoyable.

BESIDES the social aspects of being with friends, etc. what do you specifically look forward to when you play? What most excites you about playing? Be as specific as possible.To think about that question in another way, what rewards do you look forward to the most after play?

• I like advancing my character's abilities, with interesting items, experience, etc.


• I like "role-playing," i.e. getting into my character and seeing how I react to conflict.


• Promoting the campaign story along is the greatest reward.


• Other (please explain):

Do you enjoy combat when playing?

• Yes, it's my favorite aspect of playing.


• Somewhat. It's fun, but I like other aspects of the game just as much.


• Not particularly. Other aspects of playing are just as important, if not more so.


• Other (please explain):

Do you think combat occupies sufficient time when you play?

• Yes, I think we generally spend the right amount of time resolving combat when we play.


• No, combat is too rushed sometimes. I'd like more time to experience more dramatic fights.


• No, combat is sometimes to slow and bogs down play time.


• Other (please explain):

Think about how you make decisions during play for you character. Do you:

• Make decisions based on the best strategy for you character's survival and advancement?


• Make descisions based on "what your character would do," even if the group sometimes might not like it?


• Make decisions based on what's best for everyone involved in terms of excitement and drama?


• Other (please explain):

Keep thinking in that mode. When you make decisions about you character, do you:

• Completely ignore "out of character" knowledge (like a map showing a secret door, for example) to keep play more realistic?


• Stay "in character" as much as possible, but sometimes use outside information to direct your character's actions?


• Frequently use "out of character" knowledge and rules not only to use the best strategies, but also to promote the best "story."


• Other (please explain):

How much freedom do you like your player character to have?

• I don't mind "finding the plot-line." It's usually fun and rewarding.


• I prefer to be able to do anything, and let the GM handle our decisions as players.


• I wish I had a lot of power, even to the point where I could add details outside of my character.


• Other (please explain):

What do you like about the worlds in which you play (regardless of genre)?

• I like very fleshed-out and rich settings. The more "believeable," the better, especially.


• I don’t need a lot of world-wide setting details, but it's nice to have a rich environment for my character to explore.


• I'd rather focus on the here-and-now of my character and interesting NPCs than get caught up in the details of the setting.


• Other (please explain):

Which settings do you seem to enjoy the most?

• Published settings seem to work better in play (e.g., Warhammer)


• I like exploring new settings that are a bit different from the norm (e.g. Tribe :cool:.


• I think its best to play in the "real world," so everyone already knows the setting and can concentrate on game play. (e.g. Call of Cthulhu)


• I prefer to contribute to the creation of a "homebrew" setting by playing in it


• Other (please explain):

Describe the best single session you've played in, and specify as best you can why it was:Describe the best single session you've played in during the last two years, and specify why it was:

Describe the best campaign you've participated in, and explain why it was best for you. (Don't just says "Because I played my favorite character." Explain very specifically why it was your favorite character.):

If your favorite campaign was more than a year or two ago, how do you think you've changed as a role-player? Have your "needs" as a role-player changed? Would such a campaign be satisfactory again, or do you think you need something different in approach now?

What are your three favorite games? Please explain as specifically as possible why they are your favorites.

What are your three favorite settings? Please explain as specifically as possible why they are your favorites.

Would you like to participate more in creating a setting (even a published setting), even if you're "only" a player?

Lastly, please provide some comments on what changes you think would make for a much better time role-playing. No one can be 100% happy, so please think hard and share what you think would help you have a better time, whether it be rules changes, GMing style, game system, rewards (XP and others, for example), playing "in-character", or something else entirely.

Not bad. Someone (was it MJ Young, or Gentry or somebody?) put together a GNS survey a while back. It generated a lot of controversey, but had some of the same ideas in it. I, too, have given out a similar survey. I hope yours stands you in good stead. Beware, however. Some players seem to not want to reveal their actual likes and dislikes. This may lead to the survey providing a bad analysis. It would be better if you discussed your players answers with them to see why they put what they put. For example, some players may indicate that they don't like a particular style solely because of one bad incident in that style. This might not mean that they wouldn't like it if you ran it. See what I mean?

Good luck,
Mike

good points about the bad points of surveys; I think that a survey is a good starting point for discussion, though (wherein you can hopefully clarify those kind of issues)

I'll try and russle up a survey our GM gave us in my first long-term campaign; personally, I found it useful in terms of getting me thinking about the game rather than just pitching up to play every week (and there it began...)

has anyone else used surveys? to what purpose? in any type of game I think that seeing what the players forsee/hope for in the future is incredibly useful

Mike --

I will absolutely discuss with my players all of this and more when we meet soon. The reason I sent 'em a survey is that we're now a far-flung bunch, so it saves some time. But I have little fear, nay none, in them being not-completely-honest with me or themselves. I know them VERY well. One's my brother, and the other two are best friends (as in best-man-in-each-other's-weddings kind of best friends)

David --

On 2001-11-05 18:29, kwill wrote:
good points about the bad points of surveys; I think that a survey is a good starting point for discussion, though (wherein you can hopefully clarify those kind of issues)

has anyone else used surveys? to what purpose? in any type of game I think that seeing what the players forsee/hope for in the future is incredibly useful

You know, I kinda figured a survey like this might stir up some muck (as that earlier survey apparently did). To put the kibosh on that straight away, please understand this survey was meant for my group. I posted it with some reluctance, sensing that I'm probably straying from the GNS path proper. My reasoning was to see if people had some guidance for me in terms of improving my groups role-playing. It is not meant as any kind of widly applicable or comprehensive assessment for role-players and the GNS model.

Matt,

I getcha on the "survey" concept, and I'm a big fan of feedback and ongoing talk of this sort within a single role-playing group. As everyone else is carefully not saying, I am a Horrible Troll regarding generalized GNS "classify yourself" surveys, as I consider them wrongheaded from the git-go. Your group letter does not fall into this category and stays focused, mainly, on accessible and concrete elements of play.

Here's what I want to know. How many people? What games have the pack of you played in the past? Why, exactly, those games? How often do you intend or want to play? What game or range of games is up for the candidate? Why those, specifically? Most importantly, WHY do you, personally, want to play at all?

Best,
Ron

Here's what I want to know. How many people? What games have the pack of you played in the past? Why, exactly, those games? How often do you intend or want to play? What game or range of games is up for the candidate? Why those, specifically? Most importantly, WHY do you, personally, want to play at all?

Hey,

Well, as long as we're getting GNS-y about stuff ...

I suggest that you consider the distinction between (1) Simulationism with a strong Setting/Situation emphasis and (2) Narrativism with a Premise arising from Setting. People are ALWAYS getting these mixed up. Both of them rely heavily on "world-building," and then the baggage of the original Threefold discussion comes into it as people identify "world" with Simulationism (which is NOT the case in my construction).

When you say "mythology," the thing that strikes me is that myths have POINTS. Usually, real myths are a lot more "point-y" than childish bowdlerized myths. For instance, Loki's hate-filled rant at the other gods just before Ragnarok carries much more than a villainous mustache-twirl; I, for one, feel a great deal of outsider-based sympathy for him when reading it, and I don't think that's a modern or postmodern reading, but that it has probably been accessible to nearly anyone in all the centuries that the myth has existed. (Whereas the watered-down versions of the Greek myths, or the African ones retold for children, often have a kind of dishonest, "So that's why the mosquito buzzes," feel to them; the pointiness is missing. In the few cases for which I tracked down original tellings, the pointiness was really there.)

If that's the mythic quality that you're after, then I might be smelling a bit of Narrativism. Of course, as you say, classifying yourself isn't the issue here. I do think that the distinction I'm drawing between two things that superficially LOOK alike might be interesting to you.

Best,
Ron

I'm happy to say that the survey has gone over quite well with my fellow players. The results have been quite insightful on the part of my players. By and large, there's aren't any huge surprises regarding the role-playing preferences. However, there are some eye-openers -- just things I had taken for granted because we all know each other so well.

Tonight we'll be discussing the results before our regular session, and the one person I haven't heard from yet will bring his survey back then. I can already see the kinds of changes my group (including myself) wants to see in our regular gaming. this is going to be a big help.

Hey Matt,

I just realized that we never got a look at the RESULTS of this survey in your group. Any chance you could post them? (Maybe asking permission first ...)

Best,
Ron