Large backstory issue - Page 2


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Large backstory issue

  1. #11
    I'd say the big picture is respect and legacy. My story goes over two separates sides on the message "respect needs to be earned." In it that there's actually earning it, and doing ill willed actions to gain it unfairly or incorrectly. In the case of the villain, he lies the first time around to put himself in the position of defusing a generally at that point minor conflict. The second time he instigates such, it's with destructive providing of a book that could be potentially classified as offensive rhetoric, presented sort of like the grievances of the king in the declaration of independence. I'll elaborate on this later, I'm off to obligations.

  2. #12
    Hm... Eugenics with robots?
    Maybe you don't need a war. Just a serious culture clash. Robots have a mission and they run roughshod over humans. We are just in the way, no animosity.
    Quote Originally Posted by danielvaldez90323 View Post
    In writing my post apoc story's backstory I've run into a big issue I need to remedy in order to get things working.

    A pre-existing aspect of the lore here is "humans and robots co-existing after a conflict that was resolved before things reached a boiling point." Namely from an idea presented that despite superficial differences they are one in the same. The character who presents this at first initially does it out of his own personal wants, to create a sort of reputation for himself of respect, but this was sort of a lie he made for the people since there are obvious issues with this idea (i.e.: race and model type have direct differences when the changes on one half are clearly superficial while the other may have some nuance such as circuitry and internal mechanisms.) Still while flawed it's something the people believe.

    What I'm having trouble with is in creating the logical conclusion: what would the villain do to cause war? My original idea was that they'd anonymously post a sort of taboo work that not only shattered this original belief but outright used it against both sides, not rooting for one specifically but keeping in mind goals of science fiction and fact with how the people are a hindrance to one another. That doesn't really work though since it's basically giving the expectancy "grr this piece of media is so vile and against me I'm going to war because of it!" Which is hacky.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by bazz cargo View Post
    Hm... Eugenics with robots?
    Maybe you don't need a war. Just a serious culture clash. Robots have a mission and they run roughshod over humans. We are just in the way, no animosity.

    Like I said; humans would be the weak link to be exploited. With the right marketing you can make a human believe practically anything.* They are emotionally erratic, and their buttons are easy to push.


    *Right now a single news outlet has managed to convince 37% of America that Abuse of Power by a sitting president is not illegal or impeachable.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Olly Buckle View Post
    The denigration seems reasonable to you and I, but the 'James Bond villain territory' works for a lot of people, Ian Fleming made a fortune from it. It does tend to be the way that the bad guys are bad because they are bad, it is never explained why Sherlock Holmes's enemy, Moriarty, went off the rails for example, and he's a Professor. A believable explanation might even be a distraction from the main point, he's a power hungry, mad, villain.
    I'm not saying that it doesn't or can't work. But in the case of James Bond, for example, audiences don't accept it because it's believable. They accept it for the camp value. We don't take the villains seriously any more than we take seriously that in every movie James Bond is suddenly an expert in whatever topic feeds the plot or any fad is popular at the moment (snowboarding, parkour, etc.). The audience isn't expected to believe the plot, so much as just accept it as the framework for spectacle.

    In the case of our OP here, though, there seems to be some uncertainty over whether or not the backstory is strong enough to carry the weight of the story he wants to tell. In my experience, when I run into this, it's because I don't have the motivations of the characters worked out well enough or realistically.
    Last edited by InTheThirdPerson; January 24th, 2020 at 05:54 PM. Reason: Typo correction

  5. #15
    While I'm working on backstory, for reference here's some main story context. The workings of the empire the main villain runs are along the lines of using China as reference. Lines of work are separated from people of cybernetics and people of human flesh alone. Cybernetics give obvious benefits such as physical advantages, but also digital communication in the form of government monitoring chips. Basically the government gets access to information on the person, stuff like purchase history, but tracking places they go and speech. As for those who don't fall in line, nothing bad happens per se as much as the level of exclusion from benefits they can have leaves them only able to reach such a limited potential of success. This in line to keep people wanting to be what the government would see as the ideal citizen.

  6. #16
    Earlier (either in this thread or your other one, I don't remember) you had mentioned trying to sort out what your villain would do to incite a war. However, from what you just described, it sounds like you've created a society where unmodified humans have become, essentially, second class citizens. You say that "nothing bad" happens to them, per se. But being denied benefits of a higher social status has, historically, been more than enough reason for a group of people to stage an uprising.

    Sounds less like the villain needs to start the war and more like the unmodified humans do. They have the motivation (equality).

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by InTheThirdPerson View Post
    Earlier (either in this thread or your other one, I don't remember) you had mentioned trying to sort out what your villain would do to incite a war. However, from what you just described, it sounds like you've created a society where unmodified humans have become, essentially, second class citizens. You say that "nothing bad" happens to them, per se. But being denied benefits of a higher social status has, historically, been more than enough reason for a group of people to stage an uprising.

    Sounds less like the villain needs to start the war and more like the unmodified humans do. They have the motivation (equality).
    I think you're getting things mixed up with when which characters start when and what war. The villain is trying to incite war within society before the fall of such, not his own society. That being said if revolution were to start, well where to start? I guess this is another case of my fault for not explaining things, I was planning on editing my reference post, but then I got misdirected so I think this would be a good time to elaborate. In the case of china within the spectrum of high to low social credit scoring people, China accounts deductions to high social credit scoring people with friends of the low, and the deductions end when they severe friendship with them, thus separating the high from the low. It's the peoples'(?) responsibility to be role models for those below them to improve the image of their government, thus being the ones to directly influence their "inferiors". It's by associating these positive connotations that the questions come into mind "why not cybernetics? You're openly rejecting something that puts you at an advantage with minimal if any real downsides." Association = conditioning = ideological fulfillment.

    Side note: The original idea for modified humans was that their internal communications chip was actually a device the could subject the host to mind control/literal brainwashing by the government. I left this particular issue out since it's something that veers into territory of uncertainty in it I could do it, but it brings narrative caveats and solutions. For one not doing makes the conflict feel a bit more real as the people are still able to do independent thought, just that they're influenced by the government's ideas. Alternatively, the other could make it show that the government is directly/indirectly controlling its people. Spreading it's rhetoric and ideologies in a way that's presented as, well human.

  8. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    30
    I haven't read all the replies here, but could you look at climate change or destruction of the world, the machines think logically and do everything to save the planet and its resources while people are seen as being wasteful and are at risk of destroying the world. Machines try to impose rules on the humans but the humans rebel. Maybe the villain could be the one to incite a rebellion instead of trying to come to a resolution between both sides.

    You haven't said whether the villain is a man or a robot?

  9. #19
    Was this the story you described as being post-apocalyptic?
    This is actually a dystopian story (alternate future)

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by DanR84 View Post
    I haven't read all the replies here, but could you look at climate change or destruction of the world, the machines think logically and do everything to save the planet and its resources while people are seen as being wasteful and are at risk of destroying the world. Machines try to impose rules on the humans but the humans rebel. Maybe the villain could be the one to incite a rebellion instead of trying to come to a resolution between both sides.

    You haven't said whether the villain is a man or a robot?
    Well I'd argue either human or cyborg

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.