I was told before on a story by readers that they felt that certain plot twists and turns were implausible. Personally I am use to that happening in a story, and I can often see implausibilities in stories. Not that that's necessarily bad for me. A lot of times I do not mind characters behaving implausibly, as long as they are not behaving impossibly. I rewrote a whole new story outline, where the characters behave much more plausibly I think, but I feel it builds towards an anticlimax as a result. Since everyone behaves in the most plausible way possible, I feel that nothing crazy or shocking really happens. It feels too predictable, because the more plausible a person behaves, the more predictable it can be, and everyone has to stay in their own boxes and not be able to come out and take the story in climatic directions because of it. I also feel that since it's a thriller, most thrillers as they build more and more towards the end, the pacing becomes faster and faster traditionally, because the steaks are raised and the race against time is running out and closing in. But when I wrote my new outline so that everyone behaves much more plausibly, the pacing actually slows down, because since it gets more complicated, it actually takes longer for characters to resolve their problems and it kind of slows down, instead of building faster, as traditionally thrillers do. What do you think? Should I go against my instincts, and write the story with an outline where characters behave the most plausibly, even if it builds towards an anticlimax? If plausibility is more important to the reader than I can, but will a lot of people still find an anticlimax disappointing for thriller genre expectations?