'Kill your babies.'

[RangerWickett]

As a writer, I've been told to 'kill my babies.' It means to find the things you care about most in the story, and to mess with them, to take them away or kill them. The idea is that, if you're a good writer, your audience will love those things too and will be shocked that you had such a twist; and if you're a bad writer, the audience will be glad that the one thing you loved that was actually annoying is gone.

(E.g., If George Lucas had killed Padme in the middle of Episode II, we would've been really surprised, and might have actually lamented her death a little. If he'd killed Jar-Jar, we would have cheered.)

In my modern game there's a key NPC who is pretty much necessary for the plot. Last Friday, I killed him. In fact, I had the father of one of the PCs shoot him in the face, right in front of said PC. The rest of the group, when they found out, reacted in ways I never would have expected. They were on the edge, trying to decide if the NPC was irritating and whiny, or if he was endearing because he at least tried, despite being a loser. Well, killing him martyred him. They love him now, and since they're in New Orleans on Halloween, they want to bring him back somehow.

I have another baby, but I can't talk about her right now. But I'm afraid to kill her, even though I know it would take the story down a stronger path. Do any of you have experiences to share, where killing something in a game or a story turned out particularly well or badly, from an emotional perspective? And even if people really want to, does it cheapen it to bring them back?

 

[Psion]

I can see the principle, but if you use the same technique too much, you might wierd out your players / build yourself a rep.

 

[Romnipotent]

Eating children is bad... Eating Kobold children is Survival (Wis)

 

[dshai527]

If my Wife likes the NPC she lets me know that if I kill it, I will be sleeping on the couch. Therefore they tend to live happy lives unless they are not liked by my wife in which case I may destroy them as I see fit.

 

[gizmo33]

And even if people really want to, does it cheapen it to bring them back?

I can't imagine that bringing them back arbitrarily cheapens anything more than killing them off arbitrarily in the first place.

 

[Kastil]

I've done things in my stories much the same way. Who wants to read a story where the 'hero' goes unscathed? It kinda defies reality, don't you think? The current story I've been trying to finish the main character has done stuff that goes against what he's believed in his whole life just to survive. I got a lot of 'you took a good character and destroyed him' from my husband. I'm doing the 'it works out in the end thing' but I made the character grown through his experiences. I love it when an author isn't afraid of messing with the lead character. No one should be immortal.


For example, my husband had one of his character's background have him kill this maybe 12 year old boy who was just defending his home that the character was robbing. He was going to kill off the little girl in the house, by accident, as well but when it came to writing that part, he couldn't 'pull the trigger'. Of course I've seen him get emotional over doing stuff in a game, like running a sword through someone to kill a bad guy behind them.

I think sometimes that's what separates good writers from okay writers. Can you push the envelope without getting too emotional over it? Are willing to do what it takes to write a compelling story? I'm writing because I enjoy it and for the joy it will bring others. I know I love a novel that keeps me on the edge of my seat over one that I go...that was predictable.

I look at this way. Every NPC I create will eventually die. For my game, in my novels, or for the characters I create to play in games. This will not stop me from 'humanizing' them or making them do what I know they are capable of doing.

I had an assassin who was ordered by her guild to kill the very small children of a high and mighty person. She did it even though me as the player knew it was wrong. that was what the character would do. I call it knowing the line between fantasy and reality.

Geesh! Am I rambling again?!?!

Ranger> did you hear anything back on that novel submission for Wizards? Nothing here on my end yet.

 

[Warrior Poet]

There's another interpretation of that phrase, as it relates to writing (as a writer myself, I've always heard it as "Kill your darlings").

The idea being that, as a writer, it's easy to fall in love with your own words, but that can be a dangerous trap to fall into, and that often times, the word/phrase/sentence/paragraph/chapter/book you wrote that you really, really love ("le mot juste!"), is, in fact, not very good, and gets in the way of the story. So you have to kill your darling words in order to better tell the story.

In other words, don't be overly impressed with your own work: if it doesn't serve the story, get rid of it. It's just another aspect of "show, don't tell."

I've tried to do this more in recent years regarding my own campaigns. I end up with tons of plot devices and NPCs, and have to do some winnowing, for the player's sake, and for the game's sake.

Warrior Poet

 

[MonsterMash]

It can work, but it needs to be done with care or else it becomes predictable instead of surprising.

 

[cuteasaurus]

I've always understood that writers should not be afraid to kill off characters, plot lines, etc. that they love in order to further the story, not to kill them just because they love them...

 

[ColonelHardisson]

There's another interpretation of that phrase, as it relates to writing (as a writer myself, I've always heard it as "Kill your darlings").

The idea being that, as a writer, it's easy to fall in love with your own words, but that can be a dangerous trap to fall into, and that often times, the word/phrase/sentence/paragraph/chapter/book you wrote that you really, really love ("le mot juste!"), is, in fact, not very good, and gets in the way of the story. So you have to kill your darling words in order to better tell the story.

In other words, don't be overly impressed with your own work: if it doesn't serve the story, get rid of it. It's just another aspect of "show, don't tell."

Yes, that's how I've heard the term defined. I think the first time I saw the phrase was in something that Isaac Asimov wrote. He said he had written what he felt was the best paragraph of his life, but his editor told him it had to go. It didn't advance the story.