Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Barastrondo" data-source="post: 4811636" data-attributes="member: 3820">As others have noted, the best way is to make it hinge somehow on either their choices or a legitimate failure. By &quot;legitimate,&quot; mind, I mean that they actually fail where they had a chance to succeed; if they had no chance to succeed, or if their success only delays the failure until a time that they can't do anything about it, then they didn't fail under their own power. Success was denied by a greater power, effectively you. And that's going to feel like a railroad. I would be wary of the so-called &quot;Xanatos Gambit,&quot; myself. If you include something like that, you have to play fair like Khur did and give them a chance to figure out that they're doing the wrong thing. It may be only a tiny clue that doesn't look like a clue here and there, but the players should have a fair shake at figuring out they're being manipulated. Note that I say &quot;fair,&quot; not &quot;easy&quot; — it can be tricky, and rigged so that the players have to be cunning and lucky to figure it out. I don't know if you can properly answer this question if you don't also ask &quot;What do the players like about my campaign as it is right now?&quot; Give them a chance to preserve some of that. Don't end the session when the ritual goes off, let them keep playing as the aftershocks play out and start to change some of the ritual's effects. If they love Country X or Patch of Wilderness Y, let them divert ritual power or throw up counter-rituals to protect those places. Maybe they can save swaths of the land by throwing them temporarily into other planes, creating further adventures to restore them or the like. Let them fight for their favorite things about the campaign as it is — if all their favorite things about it are taken away, after all, it might affect buy-in to the new post-apocalyptic campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Barastrondo, post: 4811636, member: 3820"] As others have noted, the best way is to make it hinge somehow on either their choices or a legitimate failure. By "legitimate," mind, I mean that they actually fail where they had a chance to succeed; if they had no chance to succeed, or if their success only delays the failure until a time that they can't do anything about it, then they didn't fail under their own power. Success was denied by a greater power, effectively you. And that's going to feel like a railroad. I would be wary of the so-called "Xanatos Gambit," myself. If you include something like that, you have to play fair like Khur did and give them a chance to figure out that they're doing the wrong thing. It may be only a tiny clue that doesn't look like a clue here and there, but the players should have a fair shake at figuring out they're being manipulated. Note that I say "fair," not "easy" — it can be tricky, and rigged so that the players have to be cunning and lucky to figure it out. I don't know if you can properly answer this question if you don't also ask "What do the players like about my campaign as it is right now?" Give them a chance to preserve some of that. Don't end the session when the ritual goes off, let them keep playing as the aftershocks play out and start to change some of the ritual's effects. If they love Country X or Patch of Wilderness Y, let them divert ritual power or throw up counter-rituals to protect those places. Maybe they can save swaths of the land by throwing them temporarily into other planes, creating further adventures to restore them or the like. Let them fight for their favorite things about the campaign as it is — if all their favorite things about it are taken away, after all, it might affect buy-in to the new post-apocalyptic campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification