Great game last night, John. I enjoyed the first session a couple weeks ago, and
I have to say this second half was even better. You were definitely on top of
your game last night. Thank you very much for running it, I really appreciate
getting to see one of my favorite systems from the other side of the table.

You'd asked for feedback you could put in your playtest report to the module
writers, and I've thought of several things I think the module could use. Very
little of my feedback is plot-related (just #2 on the list, really). Most of my
advice is all about notation and mechanics, little organizational things they
could do to make the experience run more smoothly.


1.) They should have included stats on the Pregen Characters. I feel that
providing backstory and personality, but no stats, was kind of a backwards way
for the authors to do things. While there are certainly players who feel the fun
of making a character is in assigning stats, not in creating a persona, those
players will be better satisfied with a crunchier system. GUMSHOE is too light
to satisfy their cravings. It'd also be really easy for a bunch of new players
to miss putting points into some critical investigative skill. If they're going
to go to the trouble of giving the players a specific role to play, they might
as well finish it off with a completed character sheet.

2.) The part on the boat could have used an additional interesting encounter, or
even a red herring. The German radio message isn't very interactive, which left
us nothing to focus on but the lying geologist and his debauched wife. I think
the first "chapter" of the module could have benefitted from a minor clue
pointing in a different direction, especially if it was creepy or supernatural.
Something bizarre floating in the water, or a strange sighting as the boat
approaches the island, could have given us more to work with. Instead, we felt
like the only avenue to pursue early on was the crazy couple with the dynamite,
and I think we focused on them so much we inadvertently hindered your ability to
move the plot along.

3.) A simple map of the village would have been helpful. We experienced a little
confusion about how many buildings there were, whether it was the shed or the
workshop that was safe from the fire, where the PCs were when they got out of
the burning buildings, and who was at point-blank range. A basic visual aid here
would have sorted out all the confusion.

4.) On the other hand, the map of the island probably wasn't as helpful as the
scenario designer imagined it to be. It was a very confusing map, with lots of
extraneous lines that weren't relevant to the scenario. Everytime I looked at
it, I had to reorient myself, and figure out all over again whether the dark
parts were water or mountains. The map really could have used better labeling,
too. While it was a flavorful visual aide showing what an actual period
navigational chart of the island would have looked like, it did a poor job of
conveying essential information to the players.

5.) They should probably go through the module, and think of all the likely
points where a stability test may come up, and call them out with a difficulty
and level.

5a.) In particular, 3 points didn't seem drastic enough for the house fire. I
realize the 3-pt level is for "a human opponent attacks you with evident intent
to kill", which is technically what happened, but this seemed more severe. "Your
hosts are burning down their own homes to kill you in your sleep, and waiting in
ambush outside in case you wake up" seems more harrowing than the later
situation where some people we'd never interacted with fired guns at us. The
former scene is a lot more visceral, and should be weighted differently.

5b.) The default "pregen" characters really aren't the sort to offer themselves
up as willing sacrifices, and if used for an on-going campaign, that's unlikely
as well, but for a one-shot it's certainly a possibility. Frankly, though I'm
the one who took that action, I feel it was too easy on me. I'd argue for it
being at least a difficulty 5, 8-point stability test once the player voices
they intend to offer themselves up, and if they end up shaken as a result, they
should have to chicken out. In my case it wouldn't have stopped me, I'd have
just spent the 4 points to automatically succeed on the roll, but such a hurdle
would keep someone who'd been previously traumatized (or just started with less
stability) from getting away with it.

5c.) The final temple scene needed to explicitly state how much stability is on
the line, not just the modifier for big nasty being present. A GM new to the
system shouldn't have had to reverse engineer the difficulty and impact on the
fly. Depending on how you interpret it, one could argue the temple sacrifice,
after the Black God's modifier, at being anywhere between a 4-pt and 11-pt
stability hit, and it'd be nice if the module's authors offered some advice to
the GM.

6.) The same treatment I'm suggesting for the stability tests, should probably
be given for the likely Sense Trouble rolls. Felt like we kept getting in to
ambushes, and then backing up to get out of them when someone would ask
"Shouldn't I get a Sense Trouble roll?" These rolls should probably be called
out in the text, or put into sidebars (with difficulty numbers) so they're hard
to miss when the GM scans the page.

7.) The fight amidst the burning village seems almost certain to involve a
struggle over the guns, as ours did. The game has really brutal rules for such
situations, in the sidebar on page 65, and the module could benefit by either
summarizing those rules, or providing a page reference.

8.) As you said, the module needed page numbers and bookmarks to make it easier
on the GM. Looked like the lack of those made your job a lot harder than it
needed to be.



Thanks again for GMing. Sarah and I had a lot of fun.

=Rolfe=