First, sorry for taking so long to replies. I’ve been reading, but haven’t had a chance to reply until now.
Second, I’ve pulled my wife into to this discussion. She is a player, but is willing to put blinders on and play dumb later, to help me make the right choices now. If Janta posts, then she’ll have in-game insight.
Just to clarify, the PCs are not trapped between the golem and the shadowmen, but rather in the wilderness. The shadowmen can track the PCs magically locate object. I am perhaps playing the “Locate Object” rules sort of seat of the pants, assuming it will work. I'll review those rules and be sure to run that correctly. I haven’t given a lot of thought to running this “correctly” but now perhaps I should.
Thanks for everyone's post and considered thoughts, especial HeapThaumaturgist's direct critical review. I really do value this game and my players—they smart and funny. Tone-wise, this is a beer and pretzels game in short sessions of a Thursday, so a grim TPK is not really want I want.
HeapThaumaturgist’s view was exactly what I needed. I particularly love the suggestion about leaving the engineering notes--I'd wished I'd have though of that at the correct time, and I know where I can retrofit it in. (A diary I've been looking for a chance to drop, with a bunch of back story.)
I am also considering Percivellian’s suggesting about bring the Inquisition to the rescue. I’d envisioned a show-down between an out-of-control Inquisition and the PCs, which both particular PCs and Inquisitors build up with minor snipings. Perhaps this is better, since my PCs view of this “Church of Ao” is overwhelming negative.
And I like Wadash’s variant, with the inquisition as unsure agents first against and later for the PCs. It could work. And the horns Ideal would work, especially since I’d already established that the Sidhe use trumpets to communicate.
What I am really struggling to avoid is a sense of helpless or uselessness in my players. This has been alluded to in the ‘do over’ vs. suspension of disbelief discussion by GenShou. Obviously, killing them in an overwhelming fight will give them a feeling of helplessness. But at the same time, if I continually adjust every fight to be just challenging enough, do I not over time teach my players that no matter what they choose, I’ll take make a fair, winnable fight? Choose the moral high ground or don’t, you get a safe enough encounter.
Assuming I take Percivellian’s advice, the PCs can’t really make an unsafe choice. Either they rebuke the Queen and the Inquisition saves their bacon, or they ally themselves with the Queen and she saves them. I like the idea of awarding the “good” choice, but then shouldn’t there be a price to pay for it? I suppose if the PCs take the moral low ground, then the Inquisition sees it, and then the PCs will have to contend with them later, to some degree.
I am thinking I'll shift the fey queen's attitude a bit, so perhaps she'll be a little easier to persuade, something between the absolutes she’s pursuing now. If the PCs could get her only to stand aside, they’d stand a fair chance.
I do not want a total party kill. I am not trying to punish my PCs for not thinking of my solution to the golem problem. And to be fair, I unintentionally set my players up for failure by consistently having a boss-monster at the end of each adventure, just to know they’re done. I’d thought I’d been careful to describe this creature is particularly big, but that could easily be read as just simple tension-building.
Once again, thanks one and all, even the one-liners.
.
