List books that you think have more than 1 successful ending
May 5, 2022 16:12:02 GMT
kieran, stevendoig, and 1 more like this
Post by Gabe Fandango on May 5, 2022 16:12:02 GMT
Those who participated in or read the Unique Answers game thread would be aware of a discussion that spawned from one of the questions posed in the latest round, which asks for players to name a book that contains more than 1 successful ending. I felt that there was a lot of rules for argument with regards to what counts as a successful ending. Obviously, in a quiz game, the quiz master has every right to define the boundaries of what qualifies as valid answers by his own judgement. But as a standalone topic outside the game, I think it's an interesting subject worth its own thread.
So, to begin with, I think there are a few books that are complete no-brainers: books where there are literally multiple endings where the PC gets to accomplish whatever he set out to do and also lives to enjoy the fruits of his success:
Scorpion Swamp
The Rings of Kether
Demons of the Deep
Robot Commando
US Steve Jackson stands out here as the one author who makes a point of providing multiple ways to victory for all of his books.
Interestingly, in the game thread, there's also a unique case which apparently Freeway Fighter counted as a valid answer, even though technically there was only a single section (380) that contains the 100% victory ending, because there were a few extra words in the text that differentiate a generic win from a special win with the extra condition of having rescued a certain NPC. If we count that, then there're 5 books in total that satisfy the strict 100% win condition. If we don't then this book belongs to the list with the below added caveat...
Next, there's the argument to be made that even if the PC does not get to survive to personally witness the result of his success, the fact that his mission was accomplished should be sufficient for him to claim a victory (an argument which I personally took advantage of for my own submitted answer). With that caveat taken into account we can add several more books to the list:
Freeway Fighter - PC succumbs to rat plague, but it's strongly implied that his mission was accomplished in delivering the petrol: the book states that a statue of him was constructed in his honour.
Caverns of the Snow Witch - this one is weird, since the latter 50% of the book is a separate quest on the PC trying to survive, so may not seem right to consider it a win if he doesn't survive...but the original quest was to kill the witch and save the world, so surely, you can make the argument that it he accomplished what he set out to do.
Crypt of the Sorcerer - Again, PC slays the evil and saves the world, but succumbs at the last step and perished before he could escape. Another noble sacrifice ending.
Chasms of Malice - The PC falls to the traitor at the end...but the main villain was defeated, and the world (well, the kingdom) saved. The traitor is surely exposed after he killed the hero in front of 4 other people, even if the PC doesn't live to see it. You can argue that the kingdom lost the last heir of Tancred...but the Lord Ridermark has been ruling the place perfectly well before that, so I'm not sure it would necessarily have been better to replace him with an heir who spent all his early life working as assistant rabbit skinner.
Dead of Night - Similar deal. Evil defeated, hostages saved, but hero doesn't survive.
Curse of the Mummy - Very similar to Crypts, Hero defeats villain but dies before he can escape.
Next, the question of whether the PC's final alignment should be a consideration for success. Interestingly, from the PM exchanges between myself and the quizmaster, he revealed that while he accepts certain endings where the PC may not end up as a good guy as valid answers for the game, he personally does not consider those to be really successful. Although he used Scorpion Swamp as an example, and SS would have been a valid answer either way, since even if you discard the Grimslade ending there are still 2 other endings involving good and neutral quests.
With that said, what happens when we throw out restriction that the ending doesn't have to be good for everyone, it just has to be good for the PC and the player?
These 2 were accepted as valid answers submitted by players:
Creature of Havoc - PC becomes Zharradan Marr's new lieutenant
Black Vein Prophecy - PC becomes the new dark tyrant ruler of the Isles after defeating his brother
Other books which were not named, but may end with similar premises include:
Citadel of Chaos - PC accepts Balthus Dire's recruit offer and submit to him.
Master of Chaos - PC recruited by Shanzikuul
I'm not even counting books like Vault of the Vampire, Howl of the Werewolf or Forest of Doom, where the PC can also end up serving evil, though in these cases they're less convincing because they all end with the PC under some form of mind-control (charmed by a vampiress, sorceress, or trapped by the demon crown...even though it's still kinda cool to be the ruler of a kingdom of clones). But you can make an argument even for those.
But I guess what makes CoH and BVP stand out is the fact that, because the PC awakes with no memory or identity, the book never actually started with a well-defined purpose, and therefore, you can make stronger arguments that the PC did not fail what he set out to do. The Creature of Havoc was just struggling to find a purpose and he found it by finding a master to serve. Maior fulfilled the prophecy that gave the book its title and became what his father set him up to be, so they both "accomplished their purposes".
And then, there are books where there are multiple conditions to fulfil, but where the PC only accomplishes some of them, not all. "Partial success" was acceptable as answers to the game, and I think this is one of the conditions that really sets a lot of grey areas in what qualifies as partial success...or rather, how much of it is considered enough to be seen as an overall win.
Vault of the Vampire was accepted as an answer, although as I post this there was no explanation yet, and I suspect it was because the PC can successfully rescue the kidnapped victim without managing to kill the villain. Evil still threatens the region, so this is a less glorious end compared to the heroic sacrifice, but again, you can argue that he accomplished part of what he set out to do.
Then there was Magehunter, in which case the villain was actually defeated, but the hero was forced into an inglorious retirement because he was stuck in an aged, weakened body that was not his own. There are also alternative endings where he defeated the villain but failed to save the person he set out to save, although as I understand it, those weren't submitted by the player who named the book as his justifications.
With the above examples, what other books are there where you may argue to have accomplished partial victory?
Warlock of Firetop Mountain - Sure, the image of the hero sitting on the chest weeping over the treasure that he failed to unlock hardly looks like a picture of victory. But the warlock is slain, and surely that means something, right?
Sword of the Samurai - again, villain defeated, but the PC failed to recover the quest item he set out to do.
Slaved of the Abyss - PC frees the slaves, send them home, becomes powerful ruler of his own (if lonely) realm. Ok, so those released slaves went back to a city ruled by another tyrant, but that's still partial success for the PC!
Tower of Destruction - The Tower is destroyed, the archdemon controlling it was defeated, so the PC has some bragging rights even if he ends up killed by Zeverin because he failed to pick up the Ice Sword. Ok, so the villain is still alive and he can build another Tower in the future, but since when is any FF book ending concerned about future threats? I mean, Return to Firetop Mountain can be considered an automatic fail in that case since Zagor obviously came back to life to wreak more havoc later even in the best ending.
There are probably other books that I missed, but the point is that with a loosely-defined condition for what winning is, it's possible to argue the case for probably more than half the books in the series.
One final, unique example I'll named is Crimson Tide. Basically, from my PM queries with the quizmaster, he revealed that this book would have qualified as a valid answer simply because the author himself had explicitly said that he considers all endings where the PC survive by giving up on his quest to lead a peaceful life to also be successful endings. After all, who are we to argue about the objective of he book against the one who wrote it himself?
Crimson Tide is also unique in the sense that, while there seemed to be an apparent objective (kill mercenary leader and avenge father) from the start, the PC doesn't actually do that even in the "best ending". So you can't exactly argue that "no those aren't successful endings because he didn't fulfil his objectives!" He doesn't fulfil all his objectives in ANY ending, so to make such an argument implies that there are no successful endings at all.
In a way, I do sort of appreciate the presentation that overcoming your rage and thirst for vengeance to stop seeking revenge and blood to be a fulfilment in itself that justifies as success. HOWEVER, I still find it hard to accept all the various "give up your quest" endings as "successful". If anything, I think too much was emphasized on the vengeance part. The author seems to have neglected the fact that, by giving up your quest, you essentially abandon your own mother to slavery for the rest of her life. To me, that can in no way be justifiable as a win. Therefore, I personally still consider the one ending where she's actually saved to be the only successful end.
Ok, enough from me for now. What are your thoughts on this?
So, to begin with, I think there are a few books that are complete no-brainers: books where there are literally multiple endings where the PC gets to accomplish whatever he set out to do and also lives to enjoy the fruits of his success:
Scorpion Swamp
The Rings of Kether
Demons of the Deep
Robot Commando
US Steve Jackson stands out here as the one author who makes a point of providing multiple ways to victory for all of his books.
Interestingly, in the game thread, there's also a unique case which apparently Freeway Fighter counted as a valid answer, even though technically there was only a single section (380) that contains the 100% victory ending, because there were a few extra words in the text that differentiate a generic win from a special win with the extra condition of having rescued a certain NPC. If we count that, then there're 5 books in total that satisfy the strict 100% win condition. If we don't then this book belongs to the list with the below added caveat...
Next, there's the argument to be made that even if the PC does not get to survive to personally witness the result of his success, the fact that his mission was accomplished should be sufficient for him to claim a victory (an argument which I personally took advantage of for my own submitted answer). With that caveat taken into account we can add several more books to the list:
Freeway Fighter - PC succumbs to rat plague, but it's strongly implied that his mission was accomplished in delivering the petrol: the book states that a statue of him was constructed in his honour.
Caverns of the Snow Witch - this one is weird, since the latter 50% of the book is a separate quest on the PC trying to survive, so may not seem right to consider it a win if he doesn't survive...but the original quest was to kill the witch and save the world, so surely, you can make the argument that it he accomplished what he set out to do.
Crypt of the Sorcerer - Again, PC slays the evil and saves the world, but succumbs at the last step and perished before he could escape. Another noble sacrifice ending.
Chasms of Malice - The PC falls to the traitor at the end...but the main villain was defeated, and the world (well, the kingdom) saved. The traitor is surely exposed after he killed the hero in front of 4 other people, even if the PC doesn't live to see it. You can argue that the kingdom lost the last heir of Tancred...but the Lord Ridermark has been ruling the place perfectly well before that, so I'm not sure it would necessarily have been better to replace him with an heir who spent all his early life working as assistant rabbit skinner.
Dead of Night - Similar deal. Evil defeated, hostages saved, but hero doesn't survive.
Curse of the Mummy - Very similar to Crypts, Hero defeats villain but dies before he can escape.
Next, the question of whether the PC's final alignment should be a consideration for success. Interestingly, from the PM exchanges between myself and the quizmaster, he revealed that while he accepts certain endings where the PC may not end up as a good guy as valid answers for the game, he personally does not consider those to be really successful. Although he used Scorpion Swamp as an example, and SS would have been a valid answer either way, since even if you discard the Grimslade ending there are still 2 other endings involving good and neutral quests.
With that said, what happens when we throw out restriction that the ending doesn't have to be good for everyone, it just has to be good for the PC and the player?
These 2 were accepted as valid answers submitted by players:
Creature of Havoc - PC becomes Zharradan Marr's new lieutenant
Black Vein Prophecy - PC becomes the new dark tyrant ruler of the Isles after defeating his brother
Other books which were not named, but may end with similar premises include:
Citadel of Chaos - PC accepts Balthus Dire's recruit offer and submit to him.
Master of Chaos - PC recruited by Shanzikuul
I'm not even counting books like Vault of the Vampire, Howl of the Werewolf or Forest of Doom, where the PC can also end up serving evil, though in these cases they're less convincing because they all end with the PC under some form of mind-control (charmed by a vampiress, sorceress, or trapped by the demon crown...even though it's still kinda cool to be the ruler of a kingdom of clones). But you can make an argument even for those.
But I guess what makes CoH and BVP stand out is the fact that, because the PC awakes with no memory or identity, the book never actually started with a well-defined purpose, and therefore, you can make stronger arguments that the PC did not fail what he set out to do. The Creature of Havoc was just struggling to find a purpose and he found it by finding a master to serve. Maior fulfilled the prophecy that gave the book its title and became what his father set him up to be, so they both "accomplished their purposes".
And then, there are books where there are multiple conditions to fulfil, but where the PC only accomplishes some of them, not all. "Partial success" was acceptable as answers to the game, and I think this is one of the conditions that really sets a lot of grey areas in what qualifies as partial success...or rather, how much of it is considered enough to be seen as an overall win.
Vault of the Vampire was accepted as an answer, although as I post this there was no explanation yet, and I suspect it was because the PC can successfully rescue the kidnapped victim without managing to kill the villain. Evil still threatens the region, so this is a less glorious end compared to the heroic sacrifice, but again, you can argue that he accomplished part of what he set out to do.
Then there was Magehunter, in which case the villain was actually defeated, but the hero was forced into an inglorious retirement because he was stuck in an aged, weakened body that was not his own. There are also alternative endings where he defeated the villain but failed to save the person he set out to save, although as I understand it, those weren't submitted by the player who named the book as his justifications.
With the above examples, what other books are there where you may argue to have accomplished partial victory?
Warlock of Firetop Mountain - Sure, the image of the hero sitting on the chest weeping over the treasure that he failed to unlock hardly looks like a picture of victory. But the warlock is slain, and surely that means something, right?
Sword of the Samurai - again, villain defeated, but the PC failed to recover the quest item he set out to do.
Slaved of the Abyss - PC frees the slaves, send them home, becomes powerful ruler of his own (if lonely) realm. Ok, so those released slaves went back to a city ruled by another tyrant, but that's still partial success for the PC!
Tower of Destruction - The Tower is destroyed, the archdemon controlling it was defeated, so the PC has some bragging rights even if he ends up killed by Zeverin because he failed to pick up the Ice Sword. Ok, so the villain is still alive and he can build another Tower in the future, but since when is any FF book ending concerned about future threats? I mean, Return to Firetop Mountain can be considered an automatic fail in that case since Zagor obviously came back to life to wreak more havoc later even in the best ending.
There are probably other books that I missed, but the point is that with a loosely-defined condition for what winning is, it's possible to argue the case for probably more than half the books in the series.
One final, unique example I'll named is Crimson Tide. Basically, from my PM queries with the quizmaster, he revealed that this book would have qualified as a valid answer simply because the author himself had explicitly said that he considers all endings where the PC survive by giving up on his quest to lead a peaceful life to also be successful endings. After all, who are we to argue about the objective of he book against the one who wrote it himself?
Crimson Tide is also unique in the sense that, while there seemed to be an apparent objective (kill mercenary leader and avenge father) from the start, the PC doesn't actually do that even in the "best ending". So you can't exactly argue that "no those aren't successful endings because he didn't fulfil his objectives!" He doesn't fulfil all his objectives in ANY ending, so to make such an argument implies that there are no successful endings at all.
In a way, I do sort of appreciate the presentation that overcoming your rage and thirst for vengeance to stop seeking revenge and blood to be a fulfilment in itself that justifies as success. HOWEVER, I still find it hard to accept all the various "give up your quest" endings as "successful". If anything, I think too much was emphasized on the vengeance part. The author seems to have neglected the fact that, by giving up your quest, you essentially abandon your own mother to slavery for the rest of her life. To me, that can in no way be justifiable as a win. Therefore, I personally still consider the one ending where she's actually saved to be the only successful end.
Ok, enough from me for now. What are your thoughts on this?