Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5561255" data-attributes="member: 80487">Even without an enforced plot line, you can have some assurance of certain matters coming to a head if you set up the initial situation strategically. Any old hand at wargames will understand how the combination of objectives, terrain and initial disposition of forces can paint in broad strokes the likely course of an engagement."What they don't realize is that it was just a servant of a greater evil," eh? The "onion peeling" scheme was part of the appeal of "Doc" Smith's Lensmen series. "Boskone" had many layers to penetrate, the powers deployed increasing with the magnitude of evil uncovered.A rationale for such a structure is that the Enemy needs time for its plans to ripen. As awesome as its heart may be, that is at first vulnerable to a well-placed thrust.A corollary in game logic -- a necessary supplement to whatever rationales might serve an author whose characters do not (as players do) have minds of their own -- is that the players also need time not only to gather intelligence but also to muster their strength. Thus, there is a race between the forces of Good and Evil.The first thing you need is a goal for your ultimate villains. They want something, and the players want to keep them from getting it.Next, you need a number of objectives that bring one side or the other closer to its goal. There should be more than one way possible to approach each, and the failure to attain a subsidiary objective or two should not spell a "sudden death" defeat. It may, however, be desirable or even necessary to accomplish some steps in order to follow a given way to an objective.For instance, let us suppose that there is a legendary magic sword that some dedicated order of Good has been keeping in readiness. Only an heir of a certain legendary hero can wield it, and it will very valuably counter the power of one of the greater minions of the Enemy.As an objective for the players, this involves1) securing the sword;2) securing a wielder;3) getting sword and wielder into position;and possibly4) getting other forces in position to exploit the advantage.The Enemy will seek to thwart these very steps. Among the things they may try are:A) capturing the sword;B) capturing or killing eligible wielders;C) coming between the keepers of the sword and any wielder trying to reach it;D) keeping wielder and sword from confronting the minion in question;E) keeping other forces from deploying to full effect.As a complication, there could be an heir or heirs at first unknown to both sides. What both sides take at first for the real sword could turn out to be but a decoy.A "double edged" variant could have an heir in the service of the Enemy eligible to wield the sword, and perhaps even manipulating the champions of Good to bring it to him/her (or him/her to it)!It is possible that sword and/or heir might trade hands several times, even that the possessors might not always know just what they have until it is lost again.Now, this may seem quite enough, and I suppose it could be for a novelist. For a game, though, we want to have enough going on to pose the drama of weighing trade-offs and then gambling on the choice. We do not want the whole game -- too soon, anyhow -- to hinge on any one choice or toss of the dice."Come for the sword if you will, heroes, or else go to the aid of your allies! Either way, you will pay today a price you will remember until I send you to your graves!"</blockquote>

Verification