rfc-review

name: rfc-review description: "Structured review of game design RFCs with quantitative scoring across 6 dimensions: core loop, progression, economy, player motivation, risk, cross-consistency. Use when reviewing docs/rfcs/ documents, evaluating game design decisions, or checking design health before implementation. Not for code review (use @implementation-review), not for balance numbers (use balance-review later)." category: 00-meta layer: governance related_skills: - "@rfc-orchestrator" - "@context-discovery"

/rfc-review: Game Design RFC Review

Interactive RFC review with quantitative scoring. Every recommendation includes WHY + concrete alternative. No vague praise.

Inspired by gstack-game's /game-review, adapted for RFC-driven development.

Phase 0: Read & Orient

Read the target RFC from docs/rfcs/. Extract 5 context anchors:

For ❌ items, provide best-guess with [inferred] tag.

Confirm context before proceeding. For missing anchors, ask ONE question with options and a RECOMMENDATION.

Mode Selection

Select review mode based on game type:

Mode Weight Table (PC/Console RPG default)

Review Pacing

After EACH section, present:

• Section score: Section {N} — {name}: {score}/10
• 1-sentence biggest finding
• Options: A) Continue, B) Dig deeper, C) Fast-forward, D) Stop here

STOP and wait after each section.

Section 1: Core Loop

Evaluate the nested loop model:

• Micro loop (moment-to-moment): Is the core action satisfying? What's the verb?
• Meso loop (session): What's the session goal? How long is a session?
• Macro loop (progression): What keeps the player coming back?
• Meta loop (mastery): What's the long-term aspiration?

Check:

• Loop clarity — can you describe each loop in one sentence?
• Loop depth — does the micro loop have meaningful decisions?
• Loop uniqueness — what differentiates from competitors?
• MDA alignment — do Mechanics produce intended Dynamics and Aesthetics?

Score: ___/10

Section 2: Progression & Retention

Evaluate at each retention tier:

Check:

• Flow state design — is difficulty curve shaped for flow?
• Skill gates vs content gates vs time gates — which are used and are they appropriate?
• Churn points — where will players most likely quit?

Score: ___/10

Section 3: Economy & Monetization

Evaluate currency and reward systems:

• Currencies — how many? Are they clear?
• Sinks & Faucets — is there a sink for every faucet?
• Reward schedules — variable ratio? Fixed interval?
• Spending tiers — does economy serve different player types?

Red flags:

• Economy with no sinks (hyperinflation)
• Pay-gated core progression
• Probabilistic rewards with no pity system

Score: ___/10

Section 4: Player Motivation & Emotion

Evaluate using Self-Determination Theory (SDT):

Check:

• Bartle type coverage — which player types are served?
• Emotional arc — does the design create tension/release cycles?
• Ludonarrative consonance — do mechanics support the story?

Score: ___/10

Section 5: Risk Assessment

Evaluate across 5 categories:

Score: ___/10

Section 6: Cross-RFC Consistency

Cross-validate findings across sections AND across related RFCs:

• Does the combat RFC's difficulty curve match the progression RFC's pacing?
• Does the party RFC's character growth match the dungeon RFC's challenge scaling?
• Does the overworld RFC's exploration match the state machine RFC's transitions?
• Does the UI RFC support all the information needs of combat, dungeon, and overworld?

Flag contradictions invisible within any single RFC.

Score: ___/10

Forcing Questions

Minimum 2, routed by RFC maturity:

Fix-then-Rescore

When user updates the RFC during review:

1. Re-read updated section
2. Re-score ONLY that section
3. Update running total
4. If final < baseline: WARN — fix introduced new problem

Game Design Vocabulary

Use these terms consistently:

• Core loop, session loop, meta loop — loop hierarchy
• FTUE — First Time User Experience
• Aha moment — when the player "gets it"
• Churn point — where players quit
• Sink/faucet — currency consumption/generation
• Skill gate — requires player skill to pass
• Content gate — requires content consumption to pass
• Time gate — requires real time to pass
• Flow state — optimal challenge/skill balance

Completion Summary

RFC Review: {RFC name}
═══════════════════════════════════════════════
  Mode: PC/Console RPG

  Section 1 — Core Loop:         _/10  (30%)  → weighted: _.__
  Section 2 — Progression:       _/10  (20%)  → weighted: _.__
  Section 3 — Economy:           _/10  (10%)  → weighted: _.__
  Section 4 — Player Motivation: _/10  (15%)  → weighted: _.__
  Section 5 — Risk Assessment:   _/10  (10%)  → weighted: _.__
  Section 6 — Cross-Consistency: _/10  (15%)  → weighted: _.__
  ─────────────────────────────────────────────
  WEIGHTED TOTAL:                _._/10

Top 3 Deductions:
  1. [Section] [Issue]: -N because [specific reason]
  2.
  3.

  STATUS: DONE / DONE_WITH_CONCERNS / BLOCKED / NEEDS_CONTEXT

Important Rules

• ONE question at a time. Never batch forcing questions.
• Section transitions mandatory. Score + pacing options after every section.
• Push twice max. Vague answer → push for specifics → still vague → flag, move on.
• Escape hatch: "skip ahead" → AUTO-only remaining sections.
• No code suggestions. Design review only. Technical → note for @implementation-review.
• Anti-sycophancy: Score honestly. A 5/10 with specific deductions is more useful than a polite 8/10.