The Grand Pharaoh's Tomb

Let’s begin with a disclaimer: I’m not a professional writer nor a seasoned reviewer, so take everything with a grain of salt. As for readers, this review will contain spoilers, so I highly suggest reading the storygame first.

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

There’s a brief description that outlines the protagonist’s motivation and goals. The stakes are introduced, given the character’s commitment to their goal, and readers also get a sense of the setting. As this is a branching storygame, we know the answer to the rhetorical question would be ‘both’, depending on the paths we choose.

Unless you’re submitting more than one entry within this storygame, there’s a typo in the description: “This is my submissions for End Master’s Prompt Contest 3”.

Onto the story itself. It begins with text in a small font size and italics. That’s an interesting formatting choice, though I’m not sure what it means yet.

Then, there’s some backstory describing the situation that the protagonist is in. Good use of interspersing the protagonist’s thoughts throughout the narrative. This adds personal stakes, allowing the reader to empathize with the character and care about what happens to them in the story. I like the sentence where ‘alone’ is separated by a comma, drawing emphasis to this, as if visually ensuring the word alone is…well, alone. It’s even more thematic considering the first choice readers get in the story is between solitude and companionship. The metaphor of snakes is good too, seeing as it’s egypt-related.

The outburst of emotions following a description of the location is a nice way to pace the story. It almost seems like the protagonist is attempting to distract themself from the situation by observing their surroundings, but at the end, they cannot escape their thoughts. A slight error: I’m not sure ‘over delivered’ is the right term here. If the protagonist over delivered to their benefactor, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Speaking of proofreading errors, there were a few on the first page: “suppose” is supposed to be “supposed”, it’s “it’s” not “its”, and “peek” not “peak”.

There were good descriptions which added to the immersion. And just as the protagonist was about to accept defeat, believing it was all over, they accidentally pressed against a part of the pyramid that revealed a secret entrance. This inciting incident leads to the first choice.

The page starts and ends with italicized text. My guess is that it’s probably used to represent the voice of something that lurks within the tomb, but we shall see.

WRITING STYLE

The story utilizes a deep point-of-view, where the protagonist’s thoughts and feelings are interwoven into the narrative. For instance, this occurs on the information page about the pharaoh. I appreciated how it wasn’t just purely a textwall of information, but it reflected the protagonist’s process of finding out information about the elusive Kannok, along with their motivations for this. This furthered characterization. Another thing I enjoyed was that this was all explained the way I imagine a history student/ historian would, from the natural curiosity shown through all the unanswered questions to name-dropping past pharaohs of Egypt without stopping to over-explain much about them.

I notice the descriptions include lots of active verbs, often personifying the surroundings and natural environment. You are ‘greeted’ with the dunes, the air ‘feeds off’ the moisture of your tears and the sun ‘kisses’ the top of the dune. This adds to the atmosphere, making the setting feel almost alive. It’s also a nice detail that later in the story, forces of nature are involved in a number of death endings.

On the page about ‘Setvanet’, there’s a brief moment where the story shifts to past tense (second and third paragraphs), though I didn’t catch any other tense changes. Another word choice error: “unknown to how the locals will react to see you again” (you could replace ‘unknown to’ with ‘unsure’). Also, it’s “quite” not “quiet”. Although there are a few more word-choice, spelling and grammatical errors scattered throughout the story—likely due to contest constraints, I’d assume—I won’t list them all here. Though if you plan on editing your story and would like me to point them out for you, do let me know; I’ll be happy to help.

Quick note: ‘we’ is used for first-person point of views, so maybe switching that to ‘all of you’ or ‘the three of you’ would keep the point of view consistent.

I enjoyed the way tension was stretched out in the scene where Ahmed, Babu and the protagonist were trapped on the rising stairs. The use of the ‘thuds’ and short, simple sentences about the protagonist’s observations quickened the pacing while prolonging the suspense. Even after this, they faced a new problem: being cut off from the rest of the group. This is a great technique to keep the reader invested, as the protagonist’s life is continually placed at stake.

A slight improvement might be to avoid repetitiveness. I’ll briefly paraphrase advice that was given to me a while back: when the same information is repeated, readers might lose interest and it slows down the pacing. An example: there was a part of the story which mentioned “the door directly before you describes a trial of wits and logic”, yet the same information is repeated again when the protagonist says “The first door talks about wits and logic”. The same thing happened with the second door. Another instance of this: the sentence “there must have been some sort of truth to what happened but no one would believe you if you told them” and later, “you know that no one will believe you if you told them, so you must show them.” Though, I’ll add that this is not a prevalent issue in the story and is more of a minor nitpick.

In many death scenes—or those where the protagonist suffers a fate worse than death—the descriptions are quite uncanny and otherworldly, which depict the characters’ descents to insanity really well. Part of this is because of how the protagonist takes note of seemingly ordinary details, acts accordingly, observes something else, acts, and only when it’s too late do they realize that this chain of events led to a horrifying outcome. In a way, this ‘innocuous sequence of events leading to tragedy’ structure can be said to apply to the overarching story, but more about this later. The metaphor of the voice being described as a ‘puppet master’ in this path is so very fitting. An example of this: the protagonist enters a room with statues, sees a chair, and notices nothing remarkable about it except that it’s a stone chair (nice reference to the stone which seems to absorb all the protagonist’s tears at the start). They move towards it. There’s also a crown. So the protagonist puts on the crown and sits on the chair. Nothing happens. Then the statues appear to be staring. Only then does flesh begin melting off their hands and they turn into one of the silent observers for all of eternity. I like this technique and might steal it for future stories.

CHOICES

The consequences to most of the choices are realistic and foreshadowed well. For example, the protagonist’s evident lack of distrust for a businessman and his bodyguards turns out to be well-founded, as it creates the consequences where, if you still decide to trust them, they will backstab you (both metaphorically and literally, which made me chuckle).

Another thing I liked was the fact that the death scenes after incorrectly answering the riddles were all different. Some were even quite relevant to what was chosen: ‘night time’ making everything go dark and ‘thoughts’ removing heads.

PLOT & CHARACTERS
(This part includes heavy spoilers, read at your own risk)

There were two main side-characters: Babu (characterized as being the most trustworthy) and Ahmed (the one with the most expertise). This was a good way of setting the stage for some of the choices and events later in the story.

Maybe it’s a bit of a nitpick, but I feel that Ahmed’s sudden breakdown when choosing a door was out of character, especially since he’s portrayed as an expert in ancient Egypt. Perhaps if this occurred due to his expert knowledge—e.g. he knew that ancient Egyptians prided themselves on creating the most unsolvable riddles, hence he thinks they’re unlikely to escape the tomb—it would not only increase the stakes but ensure the characterization remains consistent.

Actually, ignore everything I just said. This is brilliant. In another path, where the protagonist chooses a different door, Ahmed seemingly for no reason goes insane and attacks Babu, saying that only one can take the throne. That makes so much more sense! After all, it is later shown how Kannok possesses and takes control of individuals, after luring them in and driving them to insanity. There’s the implication that Ahmed’s expertise of ancient history is the reason he was chosen in this path. That, and the earlier characterization of Babu as someone who is extremely loyal.

I must say, I’m quite impressed by the revelation/ plot-twist at the end. First, let’s discuss how the italicized, small-font text was used throughout the story. In some paths, it calls the protagonist a ‘coward’ or a ‘weak fool’, and in others, it gives them the gift of knowledge. Then we have the amazing foreshadowing. At the start of the story, when choosing to find out more about the Great Pharaoh, the mystery of Kannok was established. He somehow was mentioned at various points across the centuries, alongside famous pharaohs, though the protagonist wasn’t sure if those were merely his descendants or bloodline. Even though it’s never explicitly stated, the answer to this is heavily implied given the number of endings where the protagonist or another character becomes a vessel for Kannok. He possesses them, taking control of their mind and body. Another detail I loved was how the voice guided the protagonist throughout the whole story—and in fact, choosing to listen to it was the most strategic option—yet at the end, this leads to betrayal. The protagonist’s survival only mattered to Kannok until he reached the amulet. Moreover, in the endings where the protagonist chooses to reject it, he replies, “you will not reject me again”. Then the story loops back to the start. Not only does this create the effect of the protagonist now being trapped in a time loop—which is foreshadowed in one of the riddles, whereby the tomb’s ability to do this is revealed—but it also insinuates that from the moment the reader begins the story, the protagonist is *already* trapped in this time loop (hence the word ‘again’). Thus, there is no way out, other than to follow Kannok’s orders or to be killed. A true puppet-master indeed. As such, this story is a tragedy, doomed from the very first choice.

TL;DR

I recommend this storygame. Despite the grammatical and syntactical errors, it was an enjoyable read, and the plot-twist at the end was brilliantly executed.

For the time-constraints of the contest, this is near-perfect! I played this many times going through all the various routes. There isn't much in the way of variety with endings, but it really doesn't need one. The limited scope works in this story's favor and made for good pacing for each new run. I also really liked the inclusion of historical references, which made the setting feel authentic.

If I had to suggest an improvement, I think that making the riddles a bit harder would have made the puzzle sections even more engaging. Not that it wasn't already engaging, but I did recognize the riddles from other works of fiction, and those that I didn't recognize I was able to easily solve using the multiple choice format.

SPOILERS:

I like the idea of how rejecting the amulet will lead Kannok to force you to start over, as if you're stuck in a never-ending loop. I was glad to see that the idea of a supernatural force of the mummy's curse was used for this storygame. There is no escape for those who dare trespass into the Grand Pharaoh's Tomb!