A main theme is the invisible diremption between Progress and Tradition. I say 'invisible diremption' because both terms are actually only relativized according to the present in which we have an attention span that 'notices' the change. The issue of progress and tradition only becomes viable once change takes place fast enough for us to become aware of it.
This being said, my game's world reflects this in many ways.
- The main villain is the oldest living human being (tradition/old) but simultaneously possesses a dream of eternal progression towards an infinite horizon (progress).
- The government of Arzine is at an ideological chokehold. Their former commander in chief believed in a dream of united nations- solidarity. His vision is now challenged by traditionalists who represent the 'present age'. Irony intended.
- A villain associated with tradition believes that tradition is not mindlessly following the rules of the past, but consists in adaptability. Hates 'progress' as he sees it as regressive.
- Again, Arzine is in the cusp of industrial revolution. The people of old have not had the time to adapt to new rules, transformations, and mongrelizations. This applies to culture, politics, economics etc.
- Veljok the Stable, one of the central powers, does not change at all- they have no conception of tradition or progress. Plays an important role in the story.
- PHOL, a multicultural/racial union of necessity sports internal tension owing to the rates of progress each member of the union has. Ironically united against Arzine in their limitless progress.
- The main protagonist himself is an intersection of tradition and progress through his parentage, but thereby does not feel attached to either camp.
- And much more!
The dialectic between tradition and progress resolves in 'The Timeless'. Just what is it, and where do we find it? Will it bring us bliss or pain? Both? Is it an uplifted version of 'the present moment'?
Two conspiracy groups each represent a different prong with regards to The Timeless.
1. One wishes for eternal war in order to dispense with time itself- we will be in an infinite struggle. If we can vanquish a war of this nature, we will have evolved as a species.
2. The other believes an eternal war will cause to slink back into an abyss. These want to stymie war in order to research possible ways to improve the essential human condition out of the boom/bust of civilizations.
These themes require much more actual 'plotting out' to make sense. I need to develop the world's specifics a lot more. Thinking of incorporating a lot of political drama which will run up against the inexorable influence of the conspiracy groups.
This being said, my game's world reflects this in many ways.
- The main villain is the oldest living human being (tradition/old) but simultaneously possesses a dream of eternal progression towards an infinite horizon (progress).
- The government of Arzine is at an ideological chokehold. Their former commander in chief believed in a dream of united nations- solidarity. His vision is now challenged by traditionalists who represent the 'present age'. Irony intended.
- A villain associated with tradition believes that tradition is not mindlessly following the rules of the past, but consists in adaptability. Hates 'progress' as he sees it as regressive.
- Again, Arzine is in the cusp of industrial revolution. The people of old have not had the time to adapt to new rules, transformations, and mongrelizations. This applies to culture, politics, economics etc.
- Veljok the Stable, one of the central powers, does not change at all- they have no conception of tradition or progress. Plays an important role in the story.
- PHOL, a multicultural/racial union of necessity sports internal tension owing to the rates of progress each member of the union has. Ironically united against Arzine in their limitless progress.
- The main protagonist himself is an intersection of tradition and progress through his parentage, but thereby does not feel attached to either camp.
- And much more!
The dialectic between tradition and progress resolves in 'The Timeless'. Just what is it, and where do we find it? Will it bring us bliss or pain? Both? Is it an uplifted version of 'the present moment'?
Two conspiracy groups each represent a different prong with regards to The Timeless.
1. One wishes for eternal war in order to dispense with time itself- we will be in an infinite struggle. If we can vanquish a war of this nature, we will have evolved as a species.
2. The other believes an eternal war will cause to slink back into an abyss. These want to stymie war in order to research possible ways to improve the essential human condition out of the boom/bust of civilizations.
These themes require much more actual 'plotting out' to make sense. I need to develop the world's specifics a lot more. Thinking of incorporating a lot of political drama which will run up against the inexorable influence of the conspiracy groups.
Hardly anyone believes in progress for the sake of progress, but rather for what can be gained from it, or in the mad scientists case twisted fascination. Same goes for tradition, no one believes that tradition is right simply by virtue of being tradition, though it isn't uncommon for people to believe their tradition is right without rationalizing why. It's also often for it to be rationalized that traditional practices are traditional because they are right, actually this is probably more common, in the same way people often believe whatever is common is justified they believe that tradition exists because it is the right way to behave.
Your main villain seems a bit weird, you said he's old representing tradition and dreams of progress, is he simply perceived as being more traditional do to his age or does he behave in a more traditional way? Either way if you want a conflict of interest between the two you should have it so he leans toward one on a conscience philosophical level and is drawn to the other for emotional reasons. For instance he could dream of progress and all the good things it brings but end up reverting to traditional behavior out of fear or inability to adapt.
The villain who believes tradition should be adapted, I honestly think that ideology should belong to one of the good guys.
Your conspiracy theory groups should lean to one or the other as a means to an end, you didn't quite make their goals clear.
Also try and post in a more cohesive way, try to focus on a particular faction or point in the story rather than a theme, it makes it very hard to follow as you're only getting a small part of a faction in any post.
Hello, I have a character issue and I just need advice as to how to portray him.
There is a knight in the main party, and he is sort of rough around the edges and can be hotheaded, but he is also loyal and kind. I would like to know a few things, all feedback is welcome.
He sometimes has conflict with a cleric in the main party. They don't quite see eye to eye. The knight has kind of a code based on justice and overall goodness, whereas the Cleric has a code based on natural order and goodness. For example, say the party were to find out the identity of a local werewolf, and all efforts to find a cure had been unsuccessful. The knight would want to find some type of resolve for this. It would eat him up. He would never kill this man in his human form, because he is innocent in his eyes. However, he must find a solution. The cleric would suggest killing the werewolf. He is a cleric, and he has a code to uphold all that is good, but his priority is to both preserve natural life and cleanse the world of unnatural threats. (Zombies, vampires, werewolves, etc). In this situation, these characters would clash hard.
How can I portray this knight in a way that balances his goodness and his hotheadedness in any situation?
How can I portray their strong rivalry, while also convincing the player that, when things get serious, these allies trust each other? Any ideas?
There is a knight in the main party, and he is sort of rough around the edges and can be hotheaded, but he is also loyal and kind. I would like to know a few things, all feedback is welcome.
He sometimes has conflict with a cleric in the main party. They don't quite see eye to eye. The knight has kind of a code based on justice and overall goodness, whereas the Cleric has a code based on natural order and goodness. For example, say the party were to find out the identity of a local werewolf, and all efforts to find a cure had been unsuccessful. The knight would want to find some type of resolve for this. It would eat him up. He would never kill this man in his human form, because he is innocent in his eyes. However, he must find a solution. The cleric would suggest killing the werewolf. He is a cleric, and he has a code to uphold all that is good, but his priority is to both preserve natural life and cleanse the world of unnatural threats. (Zombies, vampires, werewolves, etc). In this situation, these characters would clash hard.
How can I portray this knight in a way that balances his goodness and his hotheadedness in any situation?
How can I portray their strong rivalry, while also convincing the player that, when things get serious, these allies trust each other? Any ideas?
