Go to the game's main page
Review
Adapted from a SpringThing26 Review
Played: 4/16/26, 4/22/26
Playtime: 40min (4 iterations, 3x0 plot fails, a week later 1 dastardly success)
Before I start my review, let me just finish this tea you thoughtfully provided me. ya-aw-awn Oh Spring Thing, I know it’s time to review another entry, but today was sooo long. I’m just going to close my eyes for bit, I’ll get to… it.. soooooooon.. SZRXNNN…
This work gets HUUUGE points from me for its unabashed commitment to its bit. Its inspiration is a tongue-in-cheek deconstruction of Gothic pulp literature. Its central systems are based on a hilariously reductive analysis of the genre’s villain, protagonist and setting tropes. Even as a non-fan of the source, the IMPULSE to clown on its straight-faced conceits is so something I would do. To then gamify it? I am aligned with everything about this, author!
The parodic playfulness is doing a lot of lifting here. As a player, how do I choose between Withering Gaze and Overconfident Monologuing??? They are both so DELICIOUS!!! In the end though, I didn’t find the elements beyond its central conceit to be as weight-bearing.
For one, for a work so committed to the MOOD of its inspiration, portraying it in bland, default Twine formatting felt like a missed opportunity. A presentation more steeped in browns and greys (black was well covered), perhaps with evocative location backgrounds and Gothic fonts… back it with a portentous parlor music soundtrack… such flourishes would have really elevated the goals of the piece, I think.
Aesthetics aside, there was a bigger issue with my playthroughs - I question whether the game systems are ‘fair.’ This is a conclusion I jump to all too often, as the alternative is “well, reviewer, you are just BAD at this.” Certainly it is ONE of those two things, and in the end, does it even matter which? My experience was the same - baffling failure after baffling failure. The work provides some measure of ‘rules’ for you: that some (randomized) weather and locations will confound your randomized antagonists while others will buttress them. Intimidate them to ‘0’ and win; if failure leaches your ‘plot’ to 0 or your timer expires, lose. This suggests a pretty specific play style: confront your opponents where weakest, defer engagement where strong. This strategy was laughingly ineffective. I routinely failed (and lost Gaze capability!) where those thrice-damned heroes were weakest and occasionally succeeded where they were strong? In EVERY case, my plot points drained to zero much faster than any headway against my foes.
I do not know the mechanisms at play, but it FEELS like unconstrained randomness. Randomness in opponents whose FIBER scores combine to make your GAZE goal: on repeat plays I experienced some goal totals that were TWICE previous ones! If I can’t Wither “12” before my plot runs out, how will I EVER Wither “24”??? (This might be a bug? On repeat plays I ALSO got to see the previous randomized Heroes, making me wonder if I was getting harder goal scores due to non-reset, compounding game state. Or are some heroes just WAAAY more resilient?). To set scale, the path to success was 3-6 TIMES longer than the path to failure.
Further, there was cuing text that seemed to occur before and after an implicit “die roll.” Ie I might get a message "You are well prepared." That conveyed, 'ok, strategically on the right track! ’ To be immediately followed by (para) "The heroes laugh at your efforts. (Your Gaze score has decreased.)" How do I parse THAT combination? I tried the right thing, and failed anyway? The work strongly implied your GAZE score was the basis for randomization, but also seemed to modify your score based on results? This is a really punishing mechanic, if true. It reinforces results, making it MORE likely to succeed or fail next time based on the current roll of the die. Statistically, this means if you ever dip below 50%, you are increasingly likely to be on a resolute path to 0 plot. Which was my experience EVERY SINGLE TIME.
(SZNrr.. just a little more, donwannagetup…)
In addition to seemingly deceptive strategy guidance, some commands implied stat improvement by “practice.” Trying that (many times) did not seem to yield impactful improvements, and were just advancing my timer to the lose threshold. The gameplay was conveyed both too clearly (this is the strategy that SHOULD help) and inadequately (WHY DIDN’T IT???). Certainly, I did not tumble onto any cues that refined my understanding of dynamics under my control. Just one baffling failure after another.
Ultimately, it felt unbalanced? Randomization in games is a specific type of mitigation challenge - deduce how to optimize your chances of success against capricious fate, trusting probability and big numbers to not create unwinnable scenarios. This requires balancing the math in your randomization to not create a ‘failure drain’ and communicating action effects clearly enough for players to deduce mitigation strategies. My play experience was that neither of these things were accomplished? Since it is MY choice whether I call this “Game Design” or “Player Incompetence” you might guess which way I am leaning.
Despite those conclusions, I still carry a warm feeling about Perilous Plot. The scampish impulse to poke fun at something you love, then commit to it so HARD… I can’t stay mad.
SZZrxxXX, huhWhosat…? yawn Did I nod off? I just had the weirdest dream. Yeah, I was playing Perilous Plot, but it was different somehow. The hero-based faint targets were lower. Also my powers were more effective, in ways the game helped me anticipate? And I started with no items instead of two… Weird thing to dream about, yeah? It’s almost like I dreamed about a different game. Or am I dreaming now, and the randomization led to a circumstance where positive feedback launched me to success with the same inevitability as the prior failures? Has the game been altered, or has Dame Fortune trapped me in a dream within a dream? I DON’T KNOW!
CURSE YOU PERILOUS PLOT! DID YOU DRUG MY TEA??? BY MY HEAVING BOSOM YOU SHALL NOT GET AWAY WITH THIS GASLIGHTING SKULLDUGGERY!!!
Spaceship: Heart of Gold
Vibe: “Before I Kill You, Mr. Bond…”
Polish: Smooth
Gimme the Wheel! : If this were my project, I’d really have to dig into the math. DO I have a fun drain? If so, what is the math that mitigates it, and how do I cue players towards these mitigations? I’d prioritize that over the graphical presentation, at least initially. OR DID I ALREADY DO THAT???
Polish scale: Gleaming, Smooth, Textured, Rough, Distressed
Gimme the Wheel: What I would do next, if it were my project.
