Well, think of it like this... Look at the story map as a two dimensional example of three dimensional space. Assuming that each linear path is one dimensional, or a single path in time, and that branch points are points at which the timeline splits. Both events happen, independent of each other and completely unaffected by each other. Effectively creating a two dimensional object in story space/time, that exists separately from the other path, but does not cease to exist because of the ignorance of other paths of its existence. A three dimensional traveler would be able to jump from one linear path to another, with the story map effectively functioning as a time machine. Yes, they can go back and change the past, but doing so destroys what already happened, and potentially could lead to the destruction of the knowledge of three dimensional travel, creating a paradox and shattering disbelief. (An arbitrary value I assign to the audience. ) Far better to create a bifurcation/choice and at that point direct the timeline down an alternate path. It takes nothing away from the other paths, but a three dimensional traveler would be able to explore and enjoy those other paths, without changing the fundamental reality of the two dimensional space time objects that had already existed. If you get that... extrapolate time as the fourth dimension, but also other possibilities. And if you don't get that... You need some of what I'm smoking man... it's GOOD shit.
Edit: I stole most of this from Back to the Future 2... going to be totally clear on my sources here. However, my extrapolation assumes that even BTTF 1 did not actually change the "present". There's still a timeline where Marty's family sucks, etc, and they believe their son was killed in an explosion at Twin Pines mall due to an insane scientist using stolen nuclear weaponry. That's not the timeline Marty ends the story in. He creates a bifurcation in 1955... effectively writing another Choice at that point. It's just a central Hub point for multiple stories, and as a result may points branch from it. (See... I can put in pop culture too. )
Any story can work from any POV. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be better or easier to do in a different one. It's like @insertnamehere said. Does Katie want to have sex with the character? At what point does the character's personality, wants, and needs come into account? Anyone who has put effort into the characterization of their characters, or has read pretty much any decent quality book knows that they often feel very real. They have real reactions and real growth as they evolve with their experiences. Often in ways that the original author doesn't expect. When does the character influence what is or isn't an option for the reader? Let's take Sally. Sally is a shy virgin who would never have sex on the first date. You have a date with her, or I have a date with her, or TimTom has a date with her and asks her for sex on the first date. By your logic, it should be totally fine to completely break character and have her accept that proposition because that's what is wanted to be explored. Why would she ever agree to that? There are some things that some characters would never do in a million years. I'll reiterate. At what point are you not writing characters and just writing up automatons to play with like a bunch of Barbie dolls in a dollhouse? The characters in your story and their personality should absolutely influence what is or isn't an option, because if they don't then they're just automatons mimicking a character that do your bidding and don't really have a personality at all.
And in some situations, it is completely reasonable that character X can do either A or B or C. How an NPC is different to PC here? By that logic, there are no point in branches at all, because protagonist has personality and he always should do one and only one thing that matches his personality, no? Bad writing is bad writing. If character does something that isn't consistent with what the reader already knows about him\her - it breaks the story. (see The Last Jedi and what audience knew about Luke Skywalker) It has nothing to do with the style of branching points It also looks like you are also assuming that all chyoa stories should be consistent between branches. I may be wrong, but it looks like you believe that If Sally is a shy virgin in one branch she can't be a slut in another. I don't think it is necessary requirement. Again, not all stories should be RPGs
Of course there's a point to branches. Well written choices give multiple options and ways that a character can approach a scenario while staying within the character's personality. There's never going to be One Singular Option that is the only way these characters interact, but that also doesn't mean that putting inconsistent options that clash with the characters personality is a good idea. Yes, I absolutely do believe that characters should be written consistently in a story regardless of whether it's a choose your own adventure story or a linear one. I believe this because a good story always gets read more than once...especially with choose your own adventure-style stories. Readers are always going to want to go through, pick different options, and experience different sections of the story. If sally is a shy virgin in one branch and slut in another, then it begs the question to the returning reader "Why? Why is Sally suddenly a slut? what changed? What happened?" Keeping in mind that readers are going to be continuing to come back to experience different aspects of the story; You already said to yourself why this is a problem: . It has nothing to do with RPG's and everything to do with the consistent characterization of your characters.
It is easy. Sally doesn't exist until she is written. Same goes for her character traits. If in a different branch she is written differently than that means than in a different branch of the story she is a different character. If the reader doesn't expect different branches to be consistent with each other - it won't break anything. If we had two Star Wars Episode V in which there were two very different Luke Skywalkers (but acting in a way that doesn't contradict what we know about him in Episode IV) that would be absolutely fine even if Episode V ver A Luke acted in a way that contradict how Episode V ver B Luke act. Yes, some interactive stories are written with the idea of branches that are consistent between each other. Not all stories need to be done that way. It is exactly what I mean, in 1st\2nd story POV it is absolutely fine to have branching points based on decisions of characters other than protagonist as long as they don't contradict what was established about those characters earlier.
Well, maybe, just maybe, your character(s) is built through choices, instead of a "character sheet" at the beginning of the story. So, after many, more and more daring choices, even a shy virgin, can become a slut. People change, I suppose character's should as well... That is even more true if you your story like an RPG. In a lot of rpgs, the main character personality is left blank, so that the player can fill in with his own, make his own choices. If I play your game story with a shy virgin as protagonist, how much freedom are you letting me have? By the way, I'm not one for continuing this comparison between stories and rpgs... Couldn't agree more.
Why would they expect the character to be different? Because they're different branches of the same story? That's not really a reason all on its own. A character is the sum of its experiences Unless we're working with Chaos Theory, the character should largely be the same. Which brings us back to the original argument. You can do whatever you want, you can use perspective however you feel like using it. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be better from a different perspective. It doesn't matter if it's used in an RPG setting or not, Who "I" am in a first-person perspective and who "You" are in a second person perspective story is always determined in the first chapter of the story. That is the perspective that the reader is experiencing the story from. You can jump to a different character's view within the story, but most stories are experienced from the viewpoint of one individual. Why then give the reader narrative control to determine what other characters outside of that perspective are doing or going to do? If you want to give your reader full narrative control over the story, then the Third Person perspective is pretty much always better. Sure, but those choices still have to happen. If you play through a choose your own adventure style story and encounter Sally and in one branch she's a slut and the other she isn't then why? It's the same character in the same position and whatever decision that character had made before the story began have already been made. They shouldn't be different unless something happens to make them different. You kind of already answered your question there. RPG characters tend to be left as mostly blank slates for the player to play as they want.
Yes, when I have my mouth open instead of a Website.. Oh, sorry; I was assuming you meant "of English". I guess I was assuming because you chose not to start the phrase at all to assure you didn't leave it open.
Both reactions are easily achievable with a little rewording: What do you say to Katie? - Kiss her neck and whisper into her ear: "Don't ever let me go! I love you so much!" -> She starts to undress you - "No more kissing! Let's fuck!" -> She slaps you (depending on the character, the reactions could be quite different. If the other character is a slut, the first option could lead to an annoyed groan "Stop it! I just wanted to fuck! Not going to deal with that love shit again!", while the second could lead to "Oh yeah! I really need it!")
If you play through a game, you have a full right to expect Sally to be the same in all branches, true. You have a full right to expect that the game world was created beforehand together with characters But if you read a branching story, she doesn't exist until written. Her personality is established during the story, differently in each branch because different branches are, more or less, different stories that share X first chapters It can be as straightforward as You invited a neighbor girl, Sally, to a date. What is Sally's personality? A shy virgin A cock-hungry slut Will you still ask why Sally is different in two branches or accept that those are different characters??
You offer me to change protagonist's action while I want to explore different reactions to the same protagonist's action. It isn't what I want. BTW, even RPGs give a different result for the same actions depending on a roll. You either pass a seduction check and get the girl or fail and get slapped.
I'm sorry, but (@ least thinking right now) it doesn't matter if a story I'm reading was written by you or George Martin (of "Game of Thrones" or Sir McCartney); It may not be a "game" (though I may consider it that with sports shutdown), but it's certainly roleplaying. This site likely has different draws for different people, but one for me is you can say/do several things with potentially 0 consequences that would have much-different ones (perhaps other #s followed by the word "years") offline.
A character without a history isn't a character. I don't know why you keep bringing up games, but if you want to go that way we can. Fundamentally writing a storyboard for a game and writing an outline for a story is the same. You determine characters and personalities and where you want them to show up in the story and the actions that they'll take. The idea of a character just popping up out of nowhere is absolutely preposterous to me. A character exists. It has actions, it makes decisions, it has experiences. Even if they don't exist as a concept at the start of a story and are added in later (as many characters on chyoa are). They still have a history that determines their experiences. Even if we don't ever get to interact or see the events that led to that character's being. They still happened. Yes.
What you wanted were two different storylines. See: Actually... no. The seduction check roll would simply determine what the character is going to say based on the seduction skill of the character. If the player rolls a good result, the character just simply judges the situation right and pushes the right buttons. If the player rolls a bad result, the character won't judge the situation right and just blurts out what he thinks.
I like watching &/or playing games, but I don't write nor read them on the site. Honestly, I mainly quoted that so I could respond to the prior sentence with this: I don't know why you insist on writing BS on the Forums, but if you want to, I can read & correct it. In the time it took me to write all that, I literally don't know (or frankly care) how many people were born. I also have no clue, but I gotta believe that more were born while the others were adding to their "history", & on... I will waste neither your time nor mine going on with that. My point is people will be born, others will die, but among the things that don't change will be that your statement about characters requiring history to be characters will be wrong.
So what determines the personality of your characters? Just arbitrary decisions? It sounds less like writing a story and more like a power fantasy to me...
Who said that story must have an outline? Or some kind of a charsheet for characters? It is a writing style but it is subjective to consider it the best or even the only one possible. The end result - the quality of the story, is the only thing that matters. What is funny, characters do pop out of nowhere for a reader of the story. It doesn't matter what writer has created in his mind. For readers, characters don't exist until readers read about them. Readers don't care if characters act according to what is written in writer's charsheet, they care if characters act according to what they learned about the character earlier. And readers are intelligent enough to understand that different versions of a story can have different characters. Example of what I am talking about There are two Clone Wars animated series set in the Star Wars universe. I like both of them. But they are not compatible. They have different characters (same by name but actually different), they have different plots. I enjoy both of them. They both are a good continuation of episode II and both fit for the role of a prequel for Episode III. But they tell different stories. I don't complain that General Grievous from 2003 is inconsistent with General Grievous from 2008 series because I understand that those are different stories with different characters. It is exactly as chyoa stories. There are two different versions of continuation of the first two episodes. In the same way, two different branches of a chyoa story are different versions of the continuation of first X chapters. I see no reason to demand consistency between those versions. (I do demand consistency with first X chapters because otherwise it is nonsense)
A story doesn't need any of that. You're the one who keeps bringing up RPG's, so I gave an example of how fundamentally an RPG and a story can be the same. For the reader, the character comes out of nowhere. That's not the same for the writer. Why give the reader absolute power to determine what a different character's personality is. Are you trying to tell a story? Or let someone live out their power fantasy? That example doesn't really work because they don't exist alongside of each other. The 2008 animated series was created as a because Disney decided to De-canon everything including the 2003 version. It would be the equivalent of someone deleting a story and starting over. You don't have to agree with that. Blame Disney.
I think I have lost the intial point of the argument, and I'm starting to have difficulties in seeing the line between your argumentations. This must have gotten too brainy for me, I'm out.
