3 edited tags
| link
2 typo changes.
source | link

I am writing a mystery with multiple endings using John Truby's 22 steps. Originally I thought that I could do it like so: The playable character is not the hero but still has a narrative drive. There are twotwo other "Heroes" who I'm banking on the player's interest in them being the narrative drive. These heroes are whom I'm writing the storylines on, meaning the beats in the mystery would lead to them having the revelation. These storylines are what has to occur for them to have a specific moral revelation (which I have my own problem with but that later) that is "canon." Then I'd write the alternative choices, storylines, and choices based off of this main storyline.

Then, I realized that the narrative drive has to occur to the hero of the story.

And that if I want the playable character and by proxy the audience to have a moral revelation, I must have Themthem go through a specific storyline, not the other two original "heroes." Still, this brings up a fear: I do not want the playable character to have a personality in the beginning. Rather, I want the choices of the player to influence the story with a specific set of choices that results in a specific ending + moral revelation. How would I go about writing this with Truby's system if no one player has the same faults/values?

Next, and this is more applicable to any story written using this system, If iI have multiple heroes, should they all have the same moral revelation? Or should they have moral revelations which are similar but applicable to their situation?

I am writing a mystery with multiple endings using John Truby's 22 steps. Originally I thought that I could do it like so: The playable character is not the hero but still has narrative drive. There are two other "Heroes" who I'm banking on the player's interest in them being the narrative drive. These heroes are whom I'm writing the storylines on, meaning the beats in the mystery would lead to them having the revelation. These storylines are what has to occur for them to have a specific moral revelation (which I have my own problem with but that later) that is "canon." Then I'd write the alternative choices, storylines and choices based off of this main storyline.

Then, I realized that the narrative drive has to occur to the hero of the story.

And that if I want the playable character and by proxy the audience to have a moral revelation, I must have Them go through a specific storyline, not the other two original "heroes." Still, this brings up a fear: I do not want the playable character to have a personality in the beginning. Rather, I want the choices of the player to influence the story with a specific set of choices that results in a specific ending + moral revelation. How would I go about writing this with Truby's system if no one player has the same faults/values?

Next, and this is more applicable to any story written using this system, If i have multiple heroes, should they all have the same moral revelation? Or should they have moral revelations which are similar but applicable to their situation?

I am writing a mystery with multiple endings using John Truby's 22 steps. Originally I thought that I could do it like so: The playable character is not the hero but still has a narrative drive. There are two other "Heroes" who I'm banking on the player's interest in them being the narrative drive. These heroes are whom I'm writing the storylines on, meaning the beats in the mystery would lead to them having the revelation. These storylines are what has to occur for them to have a specific moral revelation (which I have my own problem with but that later) that is "canon." Then I'd write the alternative choices, storylines, and choices based off of this main storyline.

Then, I realized that the narrative drive has to occur to the hero of the story.

And that if I want the playable character and by proxy the audience to have a moral revelation, I must have them go through a specific storyline, not the other two original "heroes." Still, this brings up a fear: I do not want the playable character to have a personality in the beginning. Rather, I want the choices of the player to influence the story with a specific set of choices that results in a specific ending + moral revelation. How would I go about writing this with Truby's system if no one player has the same faults/values?

Next, and this is more applicable to any story written using this system If I have multiple heroes, should they all have the same moral revelation? Or should they have moral revelations which are similar but applicable to their situation?

1
source | link

How should I write a VN using John Truby's 22 steps?

I am writing a mystery with multiple endings using John Truby's 22 steps. Originally I thought that I could do it like so: The playable character is not the hero but still has narrative drive. There are two other "Heroes" who I'm banking on the player's interest in them being the narrative drive. These heroes are whom I'm writing the storylines on, meaning the beats in the mystery would lead to them having the revelation. These storylines are what has to occur for them to have a specific moral revelation (which I have my own problem with but that later) that is "canon." Then I'd write the alternative choices, storylines and choices based off of this main storyline.

Then, I realized that the narrative drive has to occur to the hero of the story.

And that if I want the playable character and by proxy the audience to have a moral revelation, I must have Them go through a specific storyline, not the other two original "heroes." Still, this brings up a fear: I do not want the playable character to have a personality in the beginning. Rather, I want the choices of the player to influence the story with a specific set of choices that results in a specific ending + moral revelation. How would I go about writing this with Truby's system if no one player has the same faults/values?

Next, and this is more applicable to any story written using this system, If i have multiple heroes, should they all have the same moral revelation? Or should they have moral revelations which are similar but applicable to their situation?