RPG System poll results

[rowyn]

I thought it'd be fun to compare the number of people who had played each game with the number who liked that game's mechanics. The breakdown for all the games was:

 

+Terrible Butterflies+: 4 / 4 (100%)
Champions: 5 / 10 (50%)
World Tree: 5 / 6 (83%)
Ars Magica: 5 / 8 (63%)
Savage Worlds: 4 / 6 (67%)
D&D 4e: 3 / 7 (43%)
D&D 3.5: 5 / 13 (38%)
GURPS: 6 / 13 (46%)
Legend: 1 / 0 (undefined)
Heroes Unlimited: 1 / 3 (33%)
Marvel Superheroes: 3 / 5 (60%)
Cyberpunk 2020: 3 / 7 (43%)
ElfQuest: 1 / 2 (50%)
Star Wars (West End Games 1st ed.): 3 / 8 (38%)
Vampire: the Masquerade: 5 / 13 (38%)

 

If I narrow down games to just those where the mechanics were liked by more than half those who'd played that game, it's a short list:

 

+Terrible Butterflies+: 4 / 4 (100%)
World Tree: 5 / 6 (83%)
Ars Magica: 5 / 8 (63%)
Savage Worlds: 4 / 6 (67%)
Marvel Superheroes: 3 / 5 (60%)

 

There wasn't a clear "favorite mechanics": four games got two votes each, three games got three votes each, and the rest got one or no votes.  The two and three vote games were:

 

Champions: 2
World Tree: 2
Savage Worlds: 2
D&D 3.5: 2
GURPS: 3
Marvel Superheroes: 3
Vampire: the Masquerade: 3

 

My conclusion from my totally unscientific poll: gamers' tastes vary wildly, and not just between a few different camps.  I don't think this is just about hack&slash vs roleplayer vs problem-solver, or realistic vs game-balanced, or simple vs complex.  Maybe about all of those at once, but I suspect there are a number of subtle factors at work which aren't easily quantified.

 

... the lesson probably isn't "+terrible butterflies+ is a great system and I should run a game of it".  Although it might be.  c.c

 

Comments

[sebkha.livejournal.com]

There's a tendency for familiarity to breed contempt in the case of useful tools. Everyone gripes about Windows and Photoshop for instance, but they do keep using them. I'm not sure how to measure that with a questionnaire, though. Perhaps comparing "what systems have you played?" with "what systems have you played more than once?"

[rowyn]

I think 'monopoly power breeds contempt' is perhaps more the case -- if the tool is useful *and* perceived as the only option for the task, people gripe about it but still use it because 'what else is there?' Which may well be a problem that the big-brand RPGs like D&D and Vampire have: yes, there are other options, but if everyone you know is already invested in X system, getting them all to switch to Y is an uphill battle. Even if most of the gripe about it.

But I think widespread griping often does indicate real shortcomings of the product, even if those shortcomings aren't enough to overcome inertia and get people to find/make an alternative.

Also not sure how to pick apart the question. Some people may play a game system they don't like intensively because they love the game they're in enough to ignore the system. Some people will play a game system once and be in love with it but never get the chance to play it again. Some people will play a system for years without ever feeling like they understand it. I'm not sure how I'd want to discount the different opinions and the reasons behind them.

[terrycloth.livejournal.com]

It isn't too hard to get people to try something new once if it doesn't cost them anything. PDF piracy is the most common solution among my friends. v.v

Personally, I think it would be REALLY STUPID to release an RPG without allowing people that buy it to give away copies of the player information to their players. And yet, everone does.

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

A system doesn't have to be great to run a game of it. Do you have a group of potential players, they are already familiar with game system X, and it has everything you need in order to run adventure/campaign Y? Then you might as well go with X, even if it's not the most popular or shiniest of systems.

While I would love to preach the wonders of Savage Worlds (they have a free pdf with the rules basics!) for every circumstance, simply because it works for me, I also realize that there's a great value in not having to learn a new game system.

I still sometimes get confused and muddled, applying some mechanism or penalty or bonus that I half-remember from a previous game system that I've played ... and then someone calls me on it, and only after vainly trying to look it up do I realize: Oh yeah, that isn't in these rules at all! That's from a game system I played some time ago! I'm GETTING THEM MIXED UP IN MY HEAD! ARGH!

For this reason, I'm kind of wary about learning too many new systems, because it just gives me the chance to get even more confused. ;)

In any case, I think that a major part of the equation when deciding what game system to run has to rely on WHO is going to RUN it. If a couple of the players are familiar with the system and the GM has to struggle along, there's a good chance those players are going to dominate the campaign -- because they are both players and "rules experts." If the GM is familiar with the rules, and some of the players aren't familiar with them, that's still fine as long as it's one of those games where the players can focus more on deciding "What would my character do now?" vs. "What obscure tactical maneuver do I need to pull out of the rules to give me the best statistical probability against this opponent, this round?"

Rather than looking at percentage points on your poll, I think the important thing would be to boil down to, "Which of the respondents to my poll are actually likely to play in my campaign?" If you can filter that out (which, sadly, is going to take my Savage Worlds vote out since I haven't been in your games in ages), you're likely to have a more definitive picture of what would work for your particular situation.