Hey folks,
When I sent a copy of the review to Lee Foster (one of the authors), we had an exchange that made me realize that there's something in my review that might not have come across as clear as I thought it was.
Concerning the XP awarded to players for formulating an hypothesis at the end of the adventure, I want to set some things straight. At its core, this is a mechanic I like a lot. It underlines the unique mood of Aletheia fairly well, and the players had a blast doing it when I did my playtest. It really lends a sense of resolution to the whole investigation process. Likewise, I understand that correcting the hypothesis is an essential aspect of it that ensures the campaign progresses.
What made me a bit uneasy about the mechanic was that a correction of the hypothesis OOC by the GM might harm suspension of disbelief or feel disempowering for the players. I think it's easily fixable by putting some thought into a page or two of advice, though.
Talking (figuratively) to the author made me realize that this part of the review might come across as if I disliked the mechanic. It's not the case - I like it a lot. Hence, I figured it was worth it to type this up and clarify my position.
That it's. Thanks for reading my review.
