Reminds me of GURPS, the role-playing system, oddly enough, which has formed one of the central ideas that shape my perspective. You have x number of character points (50-100 for a regular person, 250+ for super-people), start out with a typical person with typical attributes. You can buy enhanced stats and abilities with character points, but you can also choose disadvantages -- physical limitations, moral or cognitive restrictions, obligations -- that give you back points. Sure, you can be super-strong, but maybe you're bound by a certain code of conduct
( ... )
The last huge, sprawling work that I tried to complete was maybe 1/7th complete, but most of the characters -- protagonist and antagonist -- fit that same formula. One of my instructors long, long ago insisted on his version of the dramatic formula: "I want ___, but ___, however ___, so ___." And all you need is to fill in the blanks. So all of my characters had that half-complete: "I am/can ___, but ___." And in the best case -- or at least the case that seemed the fairest or truest to life -- that equation would balance. And sometimes they'd differ based on the time -- sure, you might be able to innately understand and empathize with your twin brother, but what happens after he's dead? Maybe you're the deadliest man in the world with a gun, but what if you can't kill anyone anymore? Maybe you can move three times faster than anyone else, but that means the rest of the world is always three times slower than you -- every hour is three hours long, every day three days.... Maybe sometimes you can get a peek into tomorrow, or
( ... )
Comments 3
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment