So after a year and a half of my d20 Modern campaign called "The Mandate" it was time to bring down the curtains.

Briefly the campaign was about a group of disgraced/off the reservation operatives who had their faces surgically altered working for a very sinister off the record agency in an unnamed country investigating religious/spiritual incidents around the globe. There were no supernatural elements what so ever but rather occasions where the plot of the game paralled parables of most world religions.

The campaign had come to a fever pitch, with the past lives of the players and the current ones about to collide in a spectacular clusterfuck. They wanted out of the "Mandate" and save the lives of all they held dear. They were being hunted/investigated by an inquisitor from the head office and things were looking nicely bleak for them.

Then I decided to end the game with a little special effect of my own. I knew they had a "cunning plan" and so told the players that they would run the game instead of me and that I would "play" the game.

There were a couple of rules. Firstly, they could only use whatever resources they had accumalated in the game.Secondly, I had to play all the npcs - friend or foe. They were a bit sceptical, but I told - hey one way or another I was going to hear their plan, this way they could launch it in game and see how it plays out.

They wanted to know the tone of the kind of ending I wanted. Seeing how it was coming to the boiling point, I said, if it was up to me, I would run the game like the last few moments in Goodfellas before Ray Lioatta's character gets nabbed by the Feds - but that's just me.

So there I was, playing the hand of justice, (think Toshiro Mifune - in well, any of his early work) and his team of mooks, investigating the players.

And you know what ? They won. By that I mean they managed to get out alive, save their families/friends and get out of Dodge without the character I was playing any the wiser. In fact, me as the gm/player thought I had "won" untill the coda of the session where they explained what they had done. Sure there were hints - I was playing certain key npcs but on the whole they operated within the parameters I had set and they pulled off the perfect shell game.

I told them that this was just an experiment and we would all be going back to the "normal' way of running the game - but I have to tell you, it was a blast - I never had so much fun as a "player" and they really seemed to enjoy themselves.

How have you ended your campaigns ? Did you use any special effects ? What were the most memorable endings - the kind your players still talk about.

Regards,
David R

Interesting.  I'm not sure I fully follow you there, but it does sound like an intriguing ending.

As for endings -- I've only actually *ended* one campaign, because it only recently occured to me to try that idea.  Usually they just peter out, or end with some spectacular RL disaster.

QuoteCyberzombie=Interesting.  I'm not sure I fully follow you there, but it does sound like an intriguing ending.

Think of it this way. There were certain goals that the players needed to accomplish for them to "win" the game. This included amongst other things, concealing evidence, neutralizing witnesses, saving their families etc.

Now in a normal session they would tell me what they wanted to do, and we would play the game out with me(in the my role as the GM) throwing obstacles etc in their way.

I wanted to try something different, simply because they were going on about their "cunning" plan. They were so hyped up about it - I thought what the hell. Lets have a reverse game. I in my role as the Bigbad and his mooks would be the player and they collevtively would act as the GM. It was my goal to amongst other things find out what they were up to, find evidence that would lead to their sanctioning (which may include their families), interrogate witnesses etc.

Their role as GM was limited unlike mine in a couple of ways. Firstly they could not create new characters. They could only use the resources be it money, man power etc they had as players. The NPCs were still played by me.

Of course some of these npcs were on their side so I did get an inkling or what I assumed was an inkling of their plan but they mostly they kept it to themselves. They basically railroaded me to exactly where I wanted to go, and I (not to mention, my character) realized to late that we had been duped.

I hope this helps - but I suppose like most gaming stories, it's a "you had to be there" kind of thing

Regards,
David R

Okay, now I get it.  It sounds kind of like the 2e AD&D module "Reverse Dungeon".  Intriguing idea, really, though I imagine it was hard to do.  

Quote from: CyberzombieOkay, now I get it.  It sounds kind of like the 2e AD&D module "Reverse Dungeon".  Intriguing idea, really, though I imagine it was hard to do.  

It was an interesting experiment, though I would have really liked to have studied this "Reverse Dungeon" to better understand what I was getting into.

However it was mostly smooth sailing because the "adventure" was broken down into specific parts - each player gming certain parts dealing with important plot points. As far as playing their own characters, think of the gm playing his/her favourite npc - I'll leave it at that. (However, it should be noted, that one pc died, another was crippled, and  some loved ones  perished - and they won. Imagine if they "lost")

Regards,
David R

That's a very cool idea, that I've thought of myself but never managed to get a campaign into a situation where it was really worth while to pull it off.  I've tried to get them there but then usually RL gets in the way and they fall apart just before a point where the players hold enough of the cards to control an ending.

Very cool.

Quote from: kryystThat's a very cool idea, that I've thought of myself but never managed to get a campaign into a situation where it was really worth while to pull it off.  I've tried to get them there but then usually RL gets in the way and they fall apart just before a point where the players hold enough of the cards to control an ending.

Very cool.

Thanks. Your point about the players holding enough of the cards to control the ending, is an extremely accurate one.

I have only tried this once. My style of play is very improv in nature and I think it was mostly luck that I was in a position to carry out this experiment.

The thing that I found most condusive to the whole game, was that the pcs had specific goals they needed to carry out to accomplish their plans. This made the game easier for them to control (individually and collectively) and me to play. Without this I think we would have just gone around in circles untill out of frustration ended the whole thing in a hail of bullets

Luckily the tone of the game - Classic Mission Impossible - was preserved and although there was some intense gunplay it was more of a shell game...I never thought I would have so much fun being conned by the players

Regards,
David R

Yeah I was working the Warhammer campaign that I had to abruptly finish for such and ending.  The situation was supposed to be that a couple of them were going to stealth into a fort, a few more were leading a small army to keep the pressure on the outside while the rest were taking care of some other pieces of the puzzle.  The end result for the group was to toally cut the bad guy off from anything and capture/kill him.

It would have worked well for this since I was looking forward to being surprised by how they were going to execute it all.  Unfortunately things happened and it just couldn't be carried out.

Dave R,

I'm so using this.:heh:

Quote from: BolverkDave R,

I'm so using this.:heh:

Great. When you do use it, tell us how it went

Regards,
David R