The various roles in quest creation
Posted: Sat Jun 08, 2019 5:53 am
Something I've thought about is the hesitation some might feel about writing quests. There are multiple roles to fill, and not everyone is meant for each of them. However, a person can certainly be good at one or two and collaborate on the others. Remember: it took the great minds of Ted Peterson and Julian Jensen working together to make Daggerfall's quests. There's good reason why quest writing can seem so daunting to a single person.
Now, the roles in order of execution:
1. Quest concept: The big picture: "Is it a dungeon-delver, an item search, a rumor chaser, a town visit, or a combat quest? What is something new or memorable I want players to feel with this quest? What would make this quest enjoyable? What would attract people to play it?"
2. Dialogue writing: I usually spend more than half my time writing dialogue when making a new quest -- which is the sum of the whole design, mechanics, and testing phases! Dialogue is tremendously important for both flavor and purpose. Imagine how dull FTL would be if every event space merely said, "New enemy craft. Destroy or spare?"
3. Mechanics: All gameplay aspects from quest acceptance to victory/failure conditions. This requires a good analytical mind that can learn the system's capabilities and limitations.
4. Testing: This includes both completion testing and feedback. I've had to shelve a few quests that first sounded fun or innovative, which were really rather mediocre in practice.
If anyone feels hesitant about writing quests, consider if you feel better off taking one or two of these roles rather than all four. Imagine the utility of a single person writing a whole draft for a quest's dialogue, and then offering it up for someone else to fill in mechanics for it -- or on the flip side, someone who programs a bunch of interesting encounters and/or actions and then leaves a bunch of placeholder dialogue for another person to write; or just a person who wants to test other people's work. I'm certain there are some quite talented people around who could do well with a more specialized approach.
Now, the roles in order of execution:
1. Quest concept: The big picture: "Is it a dungeon-delver, an item search, a rumor chaser, a town visit, or a combat quest? What is something new or memorable I want players to feel with this quest? What would make this quest enjoyable? What would attract people to play it?"
2. Dialogue writing: I usually spend more than half my time writing dialogue when making a new quest -- which is the sum of the whole design, mechanics, and testing phases! Dialogue is tremendously important for both flavor and purpose. Imagine how dull FTL would be if every event space merely said, "New enemy craft. Destroy or spare?"
3. Mechanics: All gameplay aspects from quest acceptance to victory/failure conditions. This requires a good analytical mind that can learn the system's capabilities and limitations.
4. Testing: This includes both completion testing and feedback. I've had to shelve a few quests that first sounded fun or innovative, which were really rather mediocre in practice.
If anyone feels hesitant about writing quests, consider if you feel better off taking one or two of these roles rather than all four. Imagine the utility of a single person writing a whole draft for a quest's dialogue, and then offering it up for someone else to fill in mechanics for it -- or on the flip side, someone who programs a bunch of interesting encounters and/or actions and then leaves a bunch of placeholder dialogue for another person to write; or just a person who wants to test other people's work. I'm certain there are some quite talented people around who could do well with a more specialized approach.