Quote from: estar;321428It hard to end a campaign because an ending implies there is a beginning, and middle. Which is the point of story gaming like the World of Darkness stuff.

That arc is presumably more pronounced in Promethean: The Created than in any other game published by WW, since by default the PCs are on a pilgrimage towards gaining humanity for themselves, which in this case isn't some possibly non-existent myth in the background (such as, say, Golconda in Vampire) but rather the expected in-play culmination of the campaign. Still, Changeling: The Lost too has its "endgame book", Equinox Road, which details various alternative outcomes, from mutating into a mad godling like the one that changed the characters in the first place, to storming the homeland of the said godlings for a bit of payback.

It's easy if you do it module-style. That is, there is something for the PCs to achieve or resolve, and once that's done, The End.

If you do something communist like let them set their own goals then naturally it'll be a mess, their goals will all clash and take them in different directions.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;321684If you do something communist like let them set their own goals then naturally it'll be a mess, their goals will all clash and take them in different directions.

Show us in this doll where the bad players did touch you. After that, do the same for the communists.

Quote from: RPGPundit;321422Would you agree with the statement that the endgame of a campaign, bringing it to a successful, exciting and fulfilling close, is probably the hardest part of the campaign and the one that the most GMs have difficulty doing with sufficient mastery?

Difficult and I am not really convinced its actually worth the effort of attempting.

It's difficult, but worth it if you can pull it off AND if the campaign is the sort that would be improved by such an addition (many are - some probably aren't).  Sometimes it's better to live things in limbo with a soft ending rather than a hard one.  But if the tone of the campaign has been escalating, then a solid ending can be incredibly memorable.


(*rambling begins*)
The last big campaign I ran involved the (modern-era) PCs starting out as normal humans who gained supernatural powers and ended up as gods.  I knew going in that the "apotheosis thing" was a very real possibility, and prepared for it story-wise as much as possible.  The only thing set in stone was the coming apocalypse; it was up to the PCs to decide how to participate in it (if at all).  The campaign pretty much broke itself down into 'seasons' like a TV show, and we called them that with minimal pretension.  Each 'season' had some overarching goals, but some where more meandering than others; and each touched on a different genre a little as the power levels escalated.

First season: normal humans gifted with minor supernatural powers, on the run from a vast conspiracy.
Second season: as they gain mastery of their powers, the PCs become involved with a revolution against the conspiracy (and run missions to that end).
Third season: the PCs command armies, have the chance to become 'new' gods (and in this case, they took it) and get involved in the apocalypse.

The game could have ended here fairly satisfactorily with the whole apocalypse thing, but we went on for a fourth season - kind of a "we won, what now?" story arc wherein these young deities had the chance to reshape the world, but also came to realize they now had more enemies than ever before.

The escalation deliberately paralleled BECMI.  At any rate, looking back on it, I think I would've been perfectly justified to end the whole thing after the apocalypse.  Would've been a larger sense of closure, anyhow.  But we ended up with a softer ending, and an allusion to more to follow instead.