I built a free tabletop RPG about AI pressure in academia. Would anyone actually play it?

I'm a full professor in a UK university and have spent the last year watching my colleagues navigate the same impossible position: use AI and risk losing the things that make your teaching yours, or refuse and drown in workload while the institution asks why you are not being more efficient.

I couldn't find a way to have that conversation productively in a department meeting. So I made a game about it instead (I also have a background in analogue game design).

Under Review is a free print-and-play tabletop RPG for 3 to 5 players. No GM needed. Takes about 60 to 90 minutes. You play as academics making decisions about AI adoption each round, spending action points on either AI actions (cheaper, more productive) or human actions (more costly, more reliable). The catch is that there is a hidden dependency threshold. Use too little AI and you drown. Use too much and you disappear. You don't find out where the sweet spot was until the game ends.

You can also publicly challenge other players on their AI use, which tends to produce exactly the kind of uncomfortable, honest conversation that doesn't happen in real meetings.

I built it because I think analogue games create a space where people can say things about institutional pressure that they cannot say in a corridor or a committee. The format is deliberate. A tabletop RPG about AI is a small act of friction.

It's free to download, use, and share and you just need paper, two dice, and some coins:

https://samillingworth.itch.io/under-review

Would this be something your department would actually sit down and play? Or that you would take to your gaming night?

Genuinely curious whether this lands outside my own context.