In This thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10410), David R wrote:
Quote from: David RMost of my sessions have cliffhanger endings, so we pick up where we left off.
Some of the GMs in my group used this technique and, personally, I hate it. Why? Because I find it difficult to recapture the emotional context of the previous session from the cold start at the beginning of a session, even if there is a recap before we start. Basically, I find it difficult to recapture the same feel that I left the previous session with when we start up a new session a week or more later, so I prefer sessions to end with some closure or on a lull.
What do other people think?
It basically sucks.
We alternate games/GMs, and so only play consecutive sessions of the same campaign rarely. It's not very compelling gaming two weeks or a month, waiting for the denouement of a cliffhanger.
Not to mention, no GM worth his or her salt is going to kill a PC in the opening seconds of a new-begun session--- well, barring a bad dice-roll. So cliffhangers are generally pointless hereabouts, generating little tension unless we playing a multi-session segment in a campaign.
I occasionally use a cliffhanger ending, but its pretty rare. Usually I do this more from time constraints (because the adventure is too long) than from any desire to create dramatic intensity.
RPGPundit
My games have loose ends from one session to another, but I always try to get to a good stopping point. I don't really do many main-focus cliffhangers.
I pretty much feel the same. About the only time I'll use a cliffhanger is to set up an encounter that serves as the climax of an adventure arc, and that's rare. Like Zachary said, I try to find a good stopping point, like just after a combat or something.
Quote from: RPGPunditI occasionally use a cliffhanger ending, but its pretty rare. Usually I do this more from time constraints (because the adventure is too long) than from any desire to create dramatic intensity.
What he said, only even less often.
I never liked cliffhanger endings. A climactic ending should be resolved before play stops. Leaving a little bit of intrigue at the end is fine, but no big cliffhangers for me.
Someone else already mentioned it, and I agree that it's difficult to re-capture a mood, especially when you play every two weeks like my group.
Quote from: RPGPunditI occasionally use a cliffhanger ending, but its pretty rare. Usually I do this more from time constraints (because the adventure is too long) than from any desire to create dramatic intensity.
RPGPundit
Same here really and I think cliffhangers do not add as much to a RPG session as they do to TV series. First of all, the players come back anyway, so no need to leave them in suspension. Second, usually you do a quick recap before the session anyway and afterwards all suspension is usually build up for the session anyway, cliffhangers are not needed for that.
I like them, as long as they're not overused. If the evening is getting late and there's a major event coming up, I'll try to steer it towards a cliffhanger; but I don't go out of my way to force one.
For our group, cliffhangers keep us talking more about the game during the week. I also like that they give the players more of a chance to decide what their character's would do. Especially in high powered games whose characters have a lot of abilities, it's sometimes hard to grab the most appropriate response from your laundry list of options when you've just got a few minutes and also have to divide your attention with what's happening in the scene. If you've got 7 days to ponder it you're more likely to think "oh yeah! I've got that Yggdrasil bark that makes me tougher, I should probably chew on some before we fight this gigantic beast."
On the flip side, it also gives the GM more of a chance to modify the encounter to reflect things that have changed. My players rarely arrive at a scene exactly as I suspected them to. Having a week to mull it over lets me better decide what the antagonists would have done to react to the PCs' actions.
Johnn Four over at roleplayingtips.com (http://www.roleplayingtips.com) has a pretty good article (http://www.roleplayingtips.com/readissue.php?number=353) about cliffhangers.
Quote from: RPGPunditI occasionally use a cliffhanger ending, but its pretty rare. Usually I do this more from time constraints (because the adventure is too long) than from any desire to create dramatic intensity.
That's pretty much the only reason I do it.
I ended the session before last on a cliffhanger, with the PCs charging across a clearing while recieving crossbow fire from unseen assailants.
I ended it there not because it was dramatic, but because it was 11:48, we were already 45 minutes past game end, and Eric had to be up for work at 6 the next morning, and he still had to get a ride home, and I knew that this next combat was going to be pretty long.
Good thing to, because when we picked it up last Tuesday, it ended up going pretty much as I expected, with the one fight spilling over into two other fights, and the whole deal turning into a massive clusterfuck of an hour long combat.
I thought I'd just expand on the cliffhangers that happen in my campaigns. Two most recent examples :
- In Six Guns , the session ended with the pcs meeting a preacher* who they discover is a former agent they betrayed and left for dead in the first session of the campaign.
- In Aces, the PCs who had crashed their bomber and were debating about what to do with a German prisoner when hear the familiar sounds of dogs barking - near them - which informs them that a German retrival unit** is nearby.
IME cliffhangers are a good way to end a session because it gives the players something to focus on in the next one. There doesn't seem to be any emotional disconnect for my players. In fact they eagerly await the next session and the build up to what they hope to be surprising/suspenceful/shocking ending in the session they are currently playing.
I don't normally end sessions just before a major fight although I do when the pcs have the element of surprise....only rarely ending when they don't. Although I admit in the latter they do formulate a strategy before the game, which does not really bother me.
Also with regards to major battles, I end immediately after a pc(s) have delivered the killing blow. My players like taking their time tying up lose ends. I've also found that adventures flow more gracefully into one another when the players are given time to settle whatever issues of the preivous adventure.
*the preacher/former agent is possesed by enigmatic nature spirits and poses no threat - at least at first - to the pcs. But they don't know this.
**the retrival unit is actually a group of French farmers. Actually they are a group of collaboraters. But they don't know this.
Regards,
David R
Cliffhangers piss me off. DH has mostly stopped, since I pester him all week about what's going to happen.
Loose ends happen. That's no problem, but if we stop with a knife in the air flying towards the back of the unsuspecting noble that came from behind ME... well, I'm irked.
I think there are different kinds of cliffhangers.
There are unresolved actions and unresolved scenes.
Unresolved actions are like shewolf said, "do you hit the guy? Wait till next week to find out!" Few people like this in an rpg.
Unresolved scenes are like those David R described, where something is dramatically changing and we'd be going to a new scene. These I think are a bit more popular than the other one.
I try to never leave actions unresolved. But scenes? I do it from time to time. Usually not on purpose - it's just, you know, you hear the clock ticking and the session's going to end some time in the next half hour, how will it end? So you push things along to make them resolved, or not...
Yeah, unresolved scenes is what I do. It probably works because of my serial type campaigns.
Regards,
David R
Typically, I will use a cliffhanger before the Big Fight, just because it is late and the BF will take a while. My players tend to like it and it seems to bring an air of excitement to the combat the next week. I have also used cliffhangers when the PCs were in the midst of some sort of deadly trap, or seemingly untenable situation... again, if it is late. In these cases, the cliffhangers allows everyone time to think on the situation and discuss so that next game, they come back with the clever solution that movie heroes seem to have at the ready.
What Kyle said.
It really depends on the game as to whether I leave the session on a cliff-hanger. Games like Deadlands and 7th Sea thrive on cliff-hangers whereas a more sombre game doesnt, e.g. Legend of the Five Rings.
Sometimes I will end the session on a semi-unplanned cliff-hanger and then surprise myself by adding an extra element I hadnt thought of just to keep me, the GM on my toes.
I agree with Kyle.
Generally, the sort of cliffhanger I like is what I like to call a Big Reveal, as opposed to a sudden outbreak of violence or immediate dangers to the PCs (after all, as someone pointed out upthread it sucks to kill off a PC in the opening minutes of a session). A sudden revelation of important information is a cool way to end a session - the players can froth and speculate about the consequences and implications between sessions, which builds up the anticipation for the next session.
Good in moderation.
In the D&D game I'm playing in now, we just had a major battle, everyone is exhausted and nearly dead, and the most powerful member of our group has been captured and dominated by a vampire and is coming to finish us off. The GM smiled and then left on a week-long trip to Japan the next day.
No one really knows how we're going to get out of the situation, but we're all eager to see what happens, and so the cliffhanger definitely works.
Unfortunately, what almost always happens in our game is the GM sits down at the beginning of the session and says "okay, well, we're at the same place we left off, what do you want to do?" No recap, no introduction, we're just expected to hit the pause button on our imaginations. This really doesn't work for me, and is my primary gripe with the execution (not the principle) of cliffhangers.
I tend to do cliffhangers based purely on gmae time limits.
I don't tend to run more than 3-4 hours, I'll try to finish a combat if it's started, but if one is about to start near the end of playing, I'll end the game and begin the next one with "roll for initiative!". That's about as close to a cliffhanger as I get.
:D
I use them all the time.