It might help to have a brief description of what a success and fail might mean for the various options. Nothing too detailed, don't want to spoil the surprise :P Think it might help to know the style points for the options as well since the percentage range obfuscates what actually is the riskier venture? Overall not too sure how i feel about the percentage range it seems to kind of mess with the style point part of the game.

Yeeeeeeah, fair, heh. x3 Also I keep forgetting about the style points! But nothing's been close enough for it to matter. x3 For reference, there's still 5 of those floating around, heh.

I think I wanna keep the outcomes secret, still, but if people need more clarification on what an action will do, folks can always ask. Also, the obfuscation is sort of the point, to be fair. I want to shake up a bit of the "always going for riskiest option" behavior. But I think it might work better to have those as an occasional option, not something that's showing up all the time. x3

When the percentage ranges are that wide, they reach a point where they kind of lack meaning. If the idea is "you don't have a clear idea on how risky the option is", then you might as well just have ??%, as it'll functionally mean the same thing to the viewer. For an example on this page 15-95% is functionally completely meaningless when it comes to making a decision, as it might as well be 0-100% in terms of understanding how risky it is. I'd say either use clear percentages, or use more vague terminology that implies a percentage range but only deal with those precise RNG numbers on your end.

If feels like you're trying to engineer this CYOA into being treated a specific way, and I hate to say it, but I just don't think you're going to get a majority of "take the narrative seriously" players here on FA, especially on a vore centric CYOA.

I don't really know if I'm wanting this to go a certain way or not, to be fair. x3 Still figuring that out. But that's all this stuff is, is figuring out what works and what doesn't work like I'd want. x3 I suppose part of it is wanting people not to just default to the risky option, but at the same time, maybe I should just lean into that instead of making it more difficult to figure out what the risky option is and leading people other ways? I could always just take percentages away entirely, but I want the RNG element, and not saying what the percentage is feels like a cop-out. But then again, I could just decide which options fail or succeed, but then that relies on people following my logic, which isn't always correct. x3 Like how in this one I thought I knew fighting game theories but probably wasn't on the mark at all, ha. x3 Dunno! It's fun to succeed but also fun to fail. Things'll probably just get clearer in time or by doing more of them. x3

"I suppose part of it is wanting people not to just default to the risky option"

That there is where I feel you're running into potential problems with this whole idea, and what I meant by engineering; the percentage ranges seem to be being used as a way to dissuade a certain approach to decision making, equally preventing "choose the risky option to see what happens" and "choose the safer option to increase success likelihood". If every option is effectively "it's a crapshoot" from the viewers POV, displaying the percentages don't really mean anything. I like the idea of there being a percentage RNG so that there is no single "right choice", but what I'm proposing is, if you don't want people to make decisions based on number crunching (going either for the clearly most risky or most safe options because there's a clear percentage displayed), the better approach might be to look for a display that doesn't give a percentage while still telling viewers that there is a random element to every decision.

And even if you keep percentages behind the curtain, I suspect you'll still get a number of people who will still choose the riskier sounding option for the same reason. And if vore is an option, I'm sure that's going to get the votes regardless of how risky you say or imply it is. Maybe I'm being a cynic, but I feel that's sort of the audience you're working with here.

That's not being a cynic. The point of this is to lead to vore or some kind of bad end. x3 I wouldn't blame people for jumping to that, that's the whole point I'm doing this. At any rate, I probably shouldn't worry so much about funneling folks. I'm just gonna make the risky options riskier and we can see what happens if people still go for em, maybe. :D

Anyway, I appreciate the feedback, but I think I'm already thinking too much about this. Probably gonna walk the range stuff down and bring it in occasionally, and then maybe play around with other stuff. But moreso than that, not gonna worry too much about people doing risky stuff. x3

Okay, so he didn't cheat?

need the elephants huge hands on those hips