Castle Paradox

[Jack]

[Moogle1]

Resurrection is still better than "I Didn't Really Die (Zidane Syndrome)." I enjoyed bringing Crono back to life, but I felt cheated by FF9's ending and FF4's countless non-deaths.
_________________

Slime Salad :: Independent Game Design

[Shaede]

It's not overused in the slightest. It's the basis of all life, all change, all conflict, and ultimately the focus and interest of the story.

[Devi Ant]

Does this include, that the bad guy would return as somesort of spectral apparition?

Or does this mean EXACTLY it?
_________________
Activate point A by sliding slide B through points E and Z, so that the Joint TO touches the Vector 6, however avoiding an impact with vectors 34 and 5, which both are positioned at the edge of the said object near point R. Period.

Remember, Giz! You MIGHT get that candy, if you only behave well... Only.

My Art

[LeRoy_Leo]

their ghost coming back? That's not quite as overused as the ressurection plot device. And it makes more sense, if you ask me.
_________________
Planning Project Blood Summons, an MMORPG which will incinerate all of the others with it's sheer brilliance...

---msw188 ---
"Seriously James, you keep rolling out the awesome like gingerbread men on a horror-movie assembly line. "

[Gizmog1]

Horror movies are a good place to look to see how to handle death in a script. Mind you, you see both the good and the bad ways of handling it.

One of the worst movies I saw, some kids accidentally performed a demonic ritual by playing a Rock and Roll record backwards, and summoning "THE OLD GODS". It turned the one kid into a vampire, and the other a werewolf, and basically the others ran around the house screaming and fighting the various other horrors it had summoned, until the end when they somehow reversed it, returning their friends and siblings to life.

That kind of thing, where everyone that died comes back isn't usually a good choice, because nothing was ever really at stake. Think of it like a poker game. You've played for hours, it's come down to one crucial hand. You call One-Eyed Gil's bluff, and it turns out the bastard's got a straight to your three of a kind. You're out hundreds of dollars, but all of a sudden, he hands it back to you. "Oh, we was just playing, I didn't really want it.". To me at least, that'd spoil the whole night of poker. What was the point in playing if nothing was really for grabs?

It'd be different if you got lucky and won a few hands and broke even on the night, because there were ups and downs, and you played for it. But you can't just hand it over.

That doesn't mean killing a character is the only option you have. There can be defeats before victory. For a historical example, look at George Washington in the American Revolution. At one point, his army was nearly surrounded by the British. So, under cover of darkness, and leaving a handful of troops behind to keep the fires going and create the illusion his army was still there, he withdrew his forces. The British took over New York, and had won a military victory, but Washington had made sure the army was still there to fight another day. And as we all know, eventually, he won the war, but not before facing countless defeats.

Try to keep that in mind: The hero is allowed to lose. He doesn't have to win every battle laid before him. A lot of fanfic writers tend to forget that, and have characters (usually of their own creation) who have the answer to every problem, and are good at everything, and who given enough time, will bore the hell out of you.

Hell, you can even kill a character when he's had his greatest victory to considerable effect. Look at Lord Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar. He was killed by a sharpshooter during the battle, which pretty much assured England's dominance of the sea for a hundred years. The English didn't lose a single ship. That's almost a textbook example of good resolution.

If, we were to look at it as fiction, instead of history, an author might've chosen instead to have Nelson return to a hero's welcome. Likewise, he might also have elected to go along with history, and have Nelson killed during the battle, and end the story with his body being carried back to England, and the crew mourning his loss and celebrating their victory. But, you have to know where to end the story.

In my opinion, to end the story just after the battle with Nelson still alive would lack the conclusion of him reporting his success to England. But, to return all the way to England with him being dead would be dragging the story out beyond it's emotional peak.

You don't have to tie up all the loose ends, but a good ending should resolve the main point of conflict, and perhaps at least give us a hint as to where our cast of characters are going to go, and what they will do. You don't have to go through the whole 80's movie epilogue of "Mr. Belvedere moved to Washington, and had 2 dozen beautiful children, and teaches Kindergarten", even as gentle a hint as "Let's go home." could work in the right circumstances.

(Sorry to write so much, and kind of go off the topic of the thread a little bit. I may've gotten carried away.)

[eldritch]

I have to really go with weightless motivation as my largest plot annoyance. If I don't feel a character should be there, the only real reason to use it half the time is if it is insanely cool.

Use motivation, people. Usually you'll want some basic things for characters:

Long Term Goal
Short Term Goal
False Goal (To protect itself in extreme instances)

Put effort into them thinking the way they do, please.
_________________
"Live by the dice, die by the dice."

"I'd tell you but then I'd turn into a badger."

"Semper Fideles means 'we eat our dead.'"
-Anonymous marine

[Camdog]

[Shaede]

[Mr B]

Woah! Nice article, Gizmog. That's really true. A sense of loss can be a very powerful emotion, and betraying it cheapens it.

Don't insert a climax if you don't build up to it. Presenting a horrible, insurmountable problem one minute and then nonchalantly solving it the next with some ability/technology/somethingaty that the player wasn't even aware existed before is...dumb. It makes me hurt inside.

[Me]

[Devi Ant]

Well one kind of plot could be somesort of - accomplishment, target, etc. - take for exampe destroying something evil.

Now there's few characters in the game, which have their own storyline. They can be in no way connected to each other, or they can side each other. Same is in the main target. Some are directly connected with the simple formula Hero A+Target B = Target B is no more. Or then their own plot can be just one way to help to achieve the Target.

Then finally all heroes goes on with their lives on the workld saved once again - 'till next time
_________________
Activate point A by sliding slide B through points E and Z, so that the Joint TO touches the Vector 6, however avoiding an impact with vectors 34 and 5, which both are positioned at the edge of the said object near point R. Period.

Remember, Giz! You MIGHT get that candy, if you only behave well... Only.

My Art

[Shaede]

I think the worst thing you can do with your RPG's story is try to be too original or attempt to rebel against the normal formulas too much and end up with a meaningless garbled mess of a story.

[Jack]

[Mr B]

I used to think that there were two different kinds of people; the people who took the path that other people made before them, and the people who did not take that path.

Then I thought that there were three different kinds of people; the people who took the standard path simply because others did, the people who made their own paths, and the people who realized that the path exists because it is a good idea and has been found useful.

Then I realized that there are four different kinds of people; there are people who take the standard path because they are sheep. There are people who take the standard path because they realize that the path was made with wisdom and experience. There are people who avoid the path simply because they don't want to follow the crowd. There are people who avoid the path because they are questing for a better one.

Both the person who takes the path simply because others take it AND the person who avoids the path simply because others take it are controlled by the crowd; the one inpulsively follows it, while the other impulsively avoids it.

The other two types are following their wisdom as best they may, either on the path or off.