Hey All,

So this thread is a combination of several things I've been thinking about recently:

1. My game concept Argonauts, which basically involves doing a supers game set in classical Greece.

2. Narrativist d20. That is, whether it's possible to create a Narrativist framework within the limitations of the d20 system, or whether you can encourage enough Narrativist drift to create a non-incoherant Sim-Nar hybrid game.

3. Mutants & Masterminds. Picked up this game recently and boy does it kick ass. Takes almost everything I don't like about d20 and pitches it out the window. Only pet peeves left are GM-determined Difficulty Levels and Fortune, but I'm used to those.

So, here's my outline for a game supplement that could probably be released for free, bearing the "M&M Superlink" thing that Green Ronin has set up. The purpose is to take M&M, set it in classical Greece, and then drift it to be As Narrativist As Possible (ANAP).

The Basic Idea

You're one of the heroes of classical Greece. Heracles. Odysseus. Orpheus. Jason. Achilles. Atalanta. Phaethon. Theseus. This is the time of real heroes. The monsters have all the superpowers and you get jack. Maybe a little superstrength. Maybe a magic ball of thread. Maybe some winged sandals. The bad guys, however, are equiped to kick ass and take names. Fire-breathing, regenerating, 12-foot-tall, scaly, 6-headed, teeth-sharp-as-swords, flying, turn-ya-to-stone, maiden-eating monstrosities. And you're supposed to take 'em down.

On the plus side, assuming you don't die a horrible death (and the beast's cave is surrounded by the bodies of those who failed), you recieve fame as word of your deeds spreads. As your myth grows, you increase in power until you might even rival the gods themselves. And they respond in turn by raising the bar, sending you even tougher Trials to test your valor. Gee thanks.

Finally, the bigger they are the harder they fall. Having a Big Myth might be fun for a while, basking in the glow of the masses, but all Greek heroes are pretty much doomed to come to a tragic end. And the bigger your Myth is, the worse your end will be. Just ask Agamemnon. *shiver*

Concepts

1. Low-Powered Heroes. M&M characters start off at 10th level by default. In Argonauts, 5th would be more like it, or even less, depending on the hero. They would also be limited to certain kinds of superpowers, mostly Feats, super-attributes (Super-Strength, Super-Constiution, Super-Skills, etc.), and other things that would fit the source material.

2. Suffering Heroes. Probably have a pretty extensive system for determining just how hurt a hero can get before he/she dies. After all, when you put relatively-normal humans up against super-powered monsters, the humans are likely to get tossed around a good bit (or poisoned, or have their flesh burnt off, or get broken bones, etc.). Being a hero should be glamourous, but also very dangerous. Players should be encouraged to try risky things, but should also be encouraged to think them through a bit. Oftentimes in Greek myths, the clever hero is the one who succeeds.

3. Dynamic System of Protogonism. Argonauts die all the time. It's the ones that manage to survive that go on to become famous. If your character Praephon, Prince of Thebes, gets eaten by a Minotaur, pick another crewman to be and don't make the same mistake again. Balance between characters is not especially desired. It makes sense for Jason and Heracles to be the most important characters in the story. They're surivivors. They have a higher Myth and (consequently) higher power levels than the rest of the crew. But if Jason is stupid and dies, some of the other crewman can certainly step forward into the spotlight. This also leads to another great theme in Greek myth: betrayal. Maybe if we slip Heracles this poisoned tunic, we'll actually get some girls too.

4. The Myth System. There's a new ability/resource called Myth. You add your Myth modifier to any roll to see if people have heard of you. It can often be combined with Charisma if you're trying to impress or gain influence with others ("Yes, well, if you continue to defy me, I might have to treat you just like that Nemean Lion..."). When you kill a creature or pass through a trial with a higher Myth level than your own, your Myth increases (yes, Shreyas, yet another Torchbearer-influenced mechanic). However, every so often you are forced to roll against your Myth, with a higher Myth making the roll harder. Failure means that a piece of your tragedy has occured.

5. And the Rest is Silence. Tragedy works like this. Each character sheet has a "Progress Chart" that shows the character's tragedy enacting itself. I might divide it into a 5-act structure, with interesting names like "The Prophecy/Warning," "The Setup," "The Lure," "The Sinker," "The Climax," and then end with a conclusion phase like "The Aftermath." Each time you fail a Myth check, part of your tragedy enacts itself. All tragedies end with either the character's death (Heracles) or the character no longer able to be a hero (Oedipus, Orpheus).

6. Life After Death. The shifting protagonism makes it totally possible for long-term campaigns to happen, even with characters dying all over the place (either from monsters or from tragedies). You can have new characters take up the causes of old ones or take the group in entirely new directions.

7. Player Antagonism. Nothing says that the players have to be on the same side all the time. Just as you can raise your Myth by becoming "The Hero Who Killed Scylla," you can alsoi raise your Myth by becoming "The Hero Who Killed Hector." This isn't the default playing style, of course, but you could totally enact the Trojan War with the model, getting a few players to play the Trojans and a few to take the Greeks. !0 years of War? No problem. The Myth just keeps growing and growing as players kill each other, and the victors evntually succomb to their own tragedies. When Hector dies, you just bounce into another hero. Same with Ajax, Achilles, Paris, and the rest. By the time Odysseus leaves for Ithica, his Myth is so high that it's no wonder his tragedy gets him stranded for 10 more years :)

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

Would these additions help create the kind of Narrativist or Sim-Nar Hybrid game that I'm trying to build? What other things could I do to further support this goal? How well do you think players would react to dramatic protagonism and regular character death/tragedy? Are there any real problems inherant in this kind of system that I'll need to address?

Ok question:

What makes this about superheroes? To me superheroes is not about being /powered/ heroes--but about attitude and flavor. This is why many Pulp protagnisits aren't called "supers", just as your average D&D character may well have powers beyond mortals but isn't a superhero.



Now that out of the way--Consider suffering, must it all be physical /damage/--you don't say so but your first setnance under this header of Suffering Heroes mentioned /hurt/. Something to consider is that there are levels of damage, and then there is HURT--Hercules family was killed IIRC by him in a mad rage after he'd been poisoned. Greek Myths tend to have very tragic things happen to those around heroes that impact the heroes--Odysseus entire crew died--they survived the Trojan war, but eventually he alone was left. This suggest that the Mythic hero is benefitted by his cleverness so that while he suffers emotionally, pschologically, and physically he's hardier than he may seem.


I'm not a fan of switching heroes, frankly while heroic seeming people die in those stories, usually the /actual/ Hero survives to the end (even if the end of the story is his death.) which complicates matters--do you want to have games simulate Greek Myth, or do you want it to /be/ a re-telling of Greek myth? The two are distinct in /one/ the primary characters such as Heracles, Jason are girded a bit by harm (re-telling) in the other, you may lose main characters (or those specific ones may not exist.)

Sidhain wrote: What makes this about superheroes?

Consider suffering, must it all be physical /damage/

Do you want to have games simulate Greek Myth, or do you want it to /be/ a re-telling of Greek myth?

Sidhain wrote:
I'm not a fan of switching heroes, frankly while heroic seeming people die in those stories, usually the /actual/ Hero survives to the end (even if the end of the story is his death.) which complicates matters--do you want to have games simulate Greek Myth, or do you want it to /be/ a re-telling of Greek myth? The two are distinct in /one/ the primary characters such as Heracles, Jason are girded a bit by harm (re-telling) in the other, you may lose main characters (or those specific ones may not exist.)

Valamir wrote: But I'm not seeing anything particularly narrativist about it...

Jonathan Walton wrote: Or maybe I should just stop worrying about GNS and just design some good games, because each time I start dealing with it I end up confusing myself. Maybe it's just not my thing, huh? I'm starting to think I should just ignore it.

Hey there,

Glad you're continuing work on this. It looked good in the competition, and I was sad not to get to see more of it.

One aspect that you may already have considered (and possibly discarded) is the influence of the Gods. Athena's meddling with Odysseus helped him turn out to be one of "those remaining", and the jealousy and requirements of the gods are easy protagonizing forces that could be used to frame the plot and introduce complications for your merry band. They were important even in the heroic myths and could lend the appropriate air of periodicity etc.

That's my unsolicited suggestion for what you should add. :) (No pressure, it looks fine how it is.) But if you want to go for narrativism, the gods are such an appropriate prod to use. Your setting begs it.

Respectfully,
Em Care

Emily Care wrote: One aspect that you may already have considered (and possibly discarded) is the influence of the Gods. Athena's meddling with Odysseus helped him turn out to be one of "those remaining", and the jealousy and requirements of the gods are easy protagonizing forces that could be used to frame the plot and introduce complications for your merry band. They were important even in the heroic myths and could lend the appropriate air of periodicity etc.

That's my unsolicited suggestion for what you should add. :) (No pressure, it looks fine how it is.) But if you want to go for narrativism, the gods are such an appropriate prod to use. Your setting begs it.

No, and that's a damn good point. I'm sure that the damage system in M&M could also be adapted to handle stress and emotional pain. In fact, it might make sense to have a general threshold, where pain and emotional damage all built up on top of each other until the hero can't handle it anymore. In fact, now that I think about it, what if, instead of a damage system or hit points, failing any kind of damage check (emotional or physical) would simply move the character closer to the tragedy that will ultimately destroy them? That way, heroes can't be killed; they can only be destroyed by the tragedy of fate and their own making.

I like that :)

layers, upon starting the game or losing their character to tragedy, can create a new character using one of two methods:

1: Create a higher-Myth character based on a well-known Greek hero like Jason, Heracles, Theseus, etc. However, due to the character's high-Myth, parts of their tragedy have already taken place. They are already half-way to destruction. Additionally, the early details of their tragedy should match the tragedy that befalls then in their actual real-life myth. When their tragedy comes about, the players should try to mimick the myth as much as possible (or as much as the campaign desires; some groups may want to depict alternate myths and not hold fast to the originals).

Thanks for the thoughts on when to use GNS, Ralph. That's sorta the point I was getting to myself, but you nailed it and left me free not to worry about it anymore.

Emily Care wrote: Glad you're continuing work on this. It looked good in the competition, and I was sad not to get to see more of it.

One aspect that you may already have considered (and possibly discarded) is the influence of the Gods. That's my unsolicited suggestion for what you should add. :)

Hey Jonathan,

As flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods,
They kill us for their sport
- King Lear, IV, i

Randomize them. Gods are petty and political, but really only broadcast a few different "channels." Take a look at Vin Diakuw's The Reverse Role-playing Game. Randomize a god's status quo every so often, maybe at the beginning of of every session, interpret the result in the context of their ongoing politics, and allow the players to decide if their characters want to avail themselves of their patron's favor.

Paul

Paul Czege wrote: Randomize them.

hi, Jonathan... I like the way your game is looking, particularly this part:

Jonathan Walton wrote:
4. The Myth System. There's a new ability/resource called Myth. You add your Myth modifier to any roll to see if people have heard of you. It can often be combined with Charisma if you're trying to impress or gain influence with others ("Yes, well, if you continue to defy me, I might have to treat you just like that Nemean Lion..."). When you kill a creature or pass through a trial with a higher Myth level than your own, your Myth increases (yes, Shreyas, yet another Torchbearer-influenced mechanic). However, every so often you are forced to roll against your Myth, with a higher Myth making the roll harder. Failure means that a piece of your tragedy has occured.

Hi Jon,

I realized I mis-spoke a bit in my last post. The gods may be useful to protagonize the characters in Argonauts and are easy hooks for prodding your characters into action etc. I like Paul's idea for handling them. The classical gods are principles after all: love, war etc. A shtick and a roll could direct their actions handily.

If you want to have the game be more narrativist, then you'd probably want to include some theme/Premise that each of the heros is exploring through their life and actions. The gods could be useful in expressing this.

Just realized I'd been fuzzy in my use of the term narrativism. Glad if the suggestion is useful.

Jonathan Walton wrote: F. The results are read in the following manner:

1. Failure, kill a crewman
2. Failure
3. Success
4. Success
5. Sucess, kill a crewman
6. Failure, kill 1D4 crewmen

Emily Care wrote: The gods may be useful to protagonize the characters in Argonauts and are easy hooks for prodding your characters into action etc. I like Paul's idea for handling them. The classical gods are principles after all: love, war etc. A shtick and a roll could direct their actions handily.

Yow, that's some elimination you've got going there. Are pc characters exempt?

Replying to myself... Clearly a sign that I'm a loser :)

Anyway, I've synthesized my own concepts and the fabulous suggestions I've gotten here and created something like a proposal. It's basically a draft of what I plan to send Green Ronin when I apply to use their "M&M Superlink" logo.

http://www.godmachine.org/argonauts/

At this point, since this looks to be a "quick and easy" project (famous last words, I know), I'm thinking that I might sit down and do this in a couple of weeks (writing, art, layout, everything). That way, I could try to build some recognition for 1001 Designs and myself, before I release Ever-After in the early Fall. This comes from Phil Reed's experience and some other comments, where getting some attention for d20 stuff carries over to non-d20 stuff.

Still, mostly looking for comments on the document above and not on my business plan. Specifically, I'd like y'all's thoughts on:

1. Myth as a Modfier? In game terms, Myth is basically going to be treated like a modifer and added to certain rolls, so I'm having players keep track of it that way (+1, +2... +20). However, functionally, they also have to roll over it on some occasions, so it sometimes functions just as a number. Should I ditch the whole modifer business and have it just represented as a number? This is not a big issue, but mostly aethetic and relates to accessibility and clarity.

2. Specific Fate vs. Fatal Flaw: The example Fate I give for Heracles is "to destroy and be destroyed by those closest to you," which is pretty different from a Fatal Flaw like "Violent Rage." What kind of difference will this make in gameplay, do you think? Is there a reason I should choose one form over another? The Flaw is certainly less specific than the Specific Fate. Perhaps the character's understanding of their Fate could develop over time?

3. Prophecy/Spin/Measure/Cut: What do you think of this system for having the tone of the campaign switch to reflect different character's progress towards their Fate? Are Spin, Meaure, and Cut evocative enough? I chose them to reflect the Three Fates, but they don't really tell the players much about what "being Measured" or "being Spun" is supposed to feel like to a character. Should I switch terms or just try to offer concrete descriptions of what I'm going for?

4. Patronage System: I based this mostly on Emily Care's insightful suggestions (thanks, Em!). Does it sound workable? How do I balance the benefits of being patronized by minor dieties (Muses, locus dei, titans, etc.) compared to having an Olympian patron? Obviously, minor dieties would have less servants and more time for you, but how do I reflect that in game?

5. Any Other Issues You Want to Bring Up: Those are just the things that I myself have concerns about. If you see anything else in the design that bothers you or looks like it could be ever cooler, don't hesitate to wax poetical. Thanks to your earlier suggestions, it's now twice as neat as it was before.

Jonathan Walton wrote:
1. Myth as a Modfier? In game terms, Myth is basically going to be treated like a modifer and added to certain rolls, so I'm having players keep track of it that way (+1, +2... +20). However, functionally, they also have to roll over it on some occasions, so it sometimes functions just as a number. Should I ditch the whole modifer business and have it just represented as a number? This is not a big issue, but mostly aethetic and relates to accessibility and clarity.

2. Specific Fate vs. Fatal Flaw: The example Fate I give for Heracles is "to destroy and be destroyed by those closest to you," which is pretty different from a Fatal Flaw like "Violent Rage." What kind of difference will this make in gameplay, do you think?

Is there a reason I should choose one form over another? The Flaw is certainly less specific than the Specific Fate. Perhaps the character's understanding of their Fate could develop over time?

3. Prophecy/Spin/Measure/Cut: What do you think of this system for having the tone of the campaign switch to reflect different character's progress towards their Fate? Are Spin, Meaure, and Cut evocative enough? I chose them to reflect the Three Fates, but they don't really tell the players much about what "being Measured" or "being Spun" is supposed to feel like to a character. Should I switch terms or just try to offer concrete descriptions of what I'm going for?

4. Patronage System: I based this mostly on Emily Care's insightful suggestions (thanks, Em!). Does it sound workable? How do I balance the benefits of being patronized by minor dieties (Muses, locus dei, titans, etc.) compared to having an Olympian patron? Obviously, minor dieties would have less servants and more time for you, but how do I reflect that in game?

5. Any Other Issues You Want to Bring Up: Those are just the things that I myself have concerns about. If you see anything else in the design that bothers you or looks like it could be ever cooler, don't hesitate to wax poetical. Thanks to your earlier suggestions, it's now twice as neat as it was before.

I'd probably supplant the role( of Hero points with "Myth" score ir better yet an axis of Myth Vs Hubris) it does two things creates a non-limited resource--one which can be tested against/used without loss, but also can risk some suffering (for example a High Myth failure means the hero banked on his fame/myth and failed--obviously he was showing hubris at this time, so the Gods take note.)

Jonathan Walton wrote:
1. Myth as a Modfier? In game terms, Myth is basically going to be treated like a modifer and added to certain rolls, so I'm having players keep track of it that way (+1, +2... +20). However, functionally, they also have to roll over it on some occasions, so it sometimes functions just as a number. Should I ditch the whole modifer business and have it just represented as a number? This is not a big issue, but mostly aethetic and relates to accessibility and clarity.

Mike Holmes wrote: You need a hubris characteristic. One that a player can add to for something like re-rolls, which drives him towards his Fate, and earns him the enmity of the gods. This would be altered by his relationship with the gods. Thus, do what Zeus says, and reduce hubris, and make his patronage stronger. Don't do what Zeus says, or make enough re-rolls (avoiding fate), and Hubris becomes an unstoppable force driving toward disaster.

Mike Holmes wrote: Sticky. What About both? Like 20/+20. Nah, that's probably worse.

Maybe the character gets his Flaw as a result of being Spun. Then he gets his Fate as a result of being measured. Then he meets his Fate as a result of being Cut.

Have you seen the In Nomine rules for Invoking your superior?

You need a hubris characteristic.

Piers Brown wrote: You know, I'd be tempted to conflate the Myth attribute with Mutants and Mastermind's Power Level, while decoupling power level from number of points used to build the character. Thus Power Level/Myth goes up when the characters add to their mythic stature, and may well outpace or lag behind the rate of 15pts per level.

In view of which, I'd also suggest that you might want to reconsider the use of Hero and Villian points in the game in terms of Patrons.

Jonathan Walton wrote: Can you explain more about why you want to "decouple" Myth/PL from Power Points? My intent was for GMs to build Mythic Deeds for the characters using the same system, so you get 150 points to build a Myth 10 creature/adversary/labor for them to take on. And then, once the characters overcame it, they would all go up a Myth level and gain another 10 points to invest, making their powers grow with their Myth. Are there specific advantages in making them seperateAlso, I wasn't intending for Argonauts characters to be able to gain Power Points in any other way. Unlike superheroes, mythic heroes' power only grows through raising their Myth, and they can only raise their Myth by committing Mythic Deeds. Are there issues here that I haven't considered fully??

In view of which, I'd also suggest that you might want to reconsider the use of Hero and Villian points in the game in terms of Patrons.

Ooooo. I like. Not quite sure how to implement it yet, but it's definitely a good idea. Perhaps a successful invocation, instead of providing yet another modifier, could provide the hero with an allotment of hero points, depending on how successful the role was. And, of course, really bad failures would lead to the GM getting more villain points to play with. Definitely something worth thinking about.

Mike Holmes wrote: You need a hubris characteristic.

How's this: I need a mechanic for getting rid of "X" anyway, and since that involves running away from your oncoming Fate, what if you can trade "X" for points of Hubris, and vice versa, at any time. You gain Hubris by running away from your Fate and can loose Hubris by accepting your Fate. Then Hubris becomes a negative modifier whenever you want to invoke the gods. Since you are arrogantly avoiding the Fate the gods have given you, they decide to stop giving you their aid. That way, like Sidhain said, both Myth and Hubris tie into Fate, but in very different ways.

Jonathan Walton wrote: Haven't seen Primeval. Is it somehting I can get my hands on easily?

So are you suggesting that maybe patronage could be a value that you could roll against, attempt to invoke your Patron's aid?

That way, like Sidhain said, both Myth and Hubris tie into Fate, but in very different ways.

Piers Brown wrote: Base Target Number 15
Gain 1 Hero Point plus an additional one for every five over the target.
Give the GM 1 Villian point for every 5 or part thereof under the target.
-5 cumulative, for second and susequent invocations of same God(dess) during the session.
-3 cumulative, for each invocation of different deity.

Sound workable?

Mike Holmes wrote:

Sound workable?

Very. What else you got? When's it available to playtest?

Replying to myself again... sigh.

I finally finished the first page of the character sheet (so far, the second page is only going to be Super Powers and Gear). Since it has most of the new mechanics on it, I thought I'd throw it up here. All of the text is saved as vectors, so it looks 200% better if you actually print it out. Thoughts on layout, clarity, readability, etc. are welcome.

http://www.godmachine.org/Argonauts-M&M.pdf

Assuming that Green Ronin approves my use of the M&M Superlink, I should have a free playtest version out in a week or so.

I'm really digging this game, Jonathan. The character sheet looks very nice, too. It's clear, easy-to-read, and the pseudo-greek font kicks ass.

I have a question for you about pace. Let's say I start out with a Myth 1 character. I then need another 19 mythic deeds before I face my doom and (maybe) die. How long in real-world time should this cycle take, from beginning to end? Are you thinking there will be a mythic deed done every session? That's about 20 sessions for the whole arc of the character (not accounting for X's coming and going through the process), which, at 1 game session a week, is roughly 5 months of play. That's pretty much as fast as I can imagine it getting done.

I don't know if I have point, after all. I'm just musing about how real-life time relates to the built-in storyline of an Argonauts character. Did you have anything specific in mind about how long the cycle would take to play? It's easy enough for each play group to tweak this factor to taste (by managing how common the mythic events come up) but maybe it's worth saying a few words about it in the full text.

Thanks for the comments, John.

As far as speed-of-play goes, I imagine that characters will be constantly attempting Mythic Deeds. This doesn't mean that ever session has to be completely filled up with the attempt, but that the attempt will probably be the focal pooint of every session. The rest, interacting with family members and lovers, travel, being hosted by the kings of foreign lands, drinking with your comrades, etc. still happens, but it's not the focus of play. Real heroes, after all, live for Doing Great Deeds.

Some deeds, of course, could be multi-part and take several sessions, like the quest for the Golden Fleece. Some, like the Trials of Hercules or the Odyessy could really be broken up into several seperate Mythic Deeds (the Nemean Lion, the Hydra, the Stables of Whats-his-name, Cerberus, etc.). But there should probably be a suggested maximum speed of one Mythic Deed per charcater per session. And GMs will be encouraged to make bigger Deeds for all the characters to accomplish together.

However, I don't think this'll mean 20-30 sessions to reach their ultimate Doom. Since the damage system is based on Fate, I imagine characaters will reach their Doom at various speeds, depending on the GM and the amount of risk they enjoy. If you want to have characters that embody the "live fast, die young" philosophy, it's certainly easy to have a micro-tragedy in only a few sessions (3-5). In that case, though, I'd probably let the players keep raising their Myth as fast as they wanted. However, if you want to give the characters time to die dramatically, or to try to escape their Fate, that's possible too. You just drag things out and give the characters time to build up a ton of Hubris. Finally, the wrath of the gods should be enough to strike them down.

So, to try to answer your question, I don't know that there's a specific speed that I'm aiming for. Actually, once we start playtesting, one of the things I'm going to be looking for is suggestions for how groups can pace things. For instance, if the players thinks the tragedy is happening too fast, what should they do? Likewise, if things are dragging and the characters don't seem to worry about their Fate, how can they speed things up? I'm definitely going to press the point that the GM shouldn't be the one who decides when tragedy strikes. The GM just builds potential Deeds and lets the players decide what to do with them. S/he's an equal participant in the tragedy, not the arbiter of Fate.

How's that sound?

Ah... I had forgotten about damage being tied to Fate. That clinches it, in my opinion. In fact, that was one of my favorite things when I first read the idea -- strange that I would forget all about it a day later. Anyway, I think that will address the pace issue very well. The GM can manage the frequency of mythic accomplishment (i.e. Power Level growth) and the player's choices will affect how much suffering they have to endure (pushing them closer to their Fate). Very nice.

And did I tell you how much I love the idea that characters can start at any Myth level? No? I love it this much.

Also, I can't wait to playtest this. My group has been itching for an ancient Greece/hero thing for a while now. We did something with it in Universalis, and they're just going to eat Argonauts up.

Feng wrote: And did I tell you how much I love the idea that characters can start at any Myth level? No? I love it this much.

So when can we see a write up for playtest?

Mike

Chris Pramas approved my use of M&M mechanics today, so as soon as I can get my fingers on a keyboard for an extended period of time, you should have it. I'll try to get the writing done by next weekend. But since Green Ronin has to approve the final playtest version before I can release it publically (to make sure I'm not violating OGL with their support), two weeks would probably be a safer bet.

Good luck! :)

This thread's a few days old, but I didn't want to hog the indie design board, so I'm going to post updates here. Here's the intro portion that I worked up last night. Tell me what you think.

INTRODUCTION

"For you it is the will of heaven and destiny that ye shall return here with the fleece; but meanwhile both going and returning, countless trials await you. But it is my lot, by the hateful decree of a god, to die somewhere afar off on the mainland of Asia. Thus, though I learnt my fate from evil omens even before now, I have left my fatherland to embark on the ship, that so after my embarking fair fame may be left me in my house."
-- from The Argonautica by Apollonius Rhodius (c.250 BC)

A Time of Heroes

It is a time of real heroes. When men are real men, women are real women, and mythology runs in the veins of the masses. Who will step forward and take up the mantle of the hero? The son of a king, the daughter of a god, or the orphaned child of mystery. The call to greatness pounds in the ears of every mortal that draws breath. With every splash of your heart, a legend is summoning you to be a part of it. It says, "if you will only give yourself to me, dear child of the Achaeans, I will raise you above those others around you, up to the pinnacle of this Age. Others will look to you and say, 'That is how a life is to be lived.' I will burn you bright and fast, and you will not last long, but I will make of you a beacon that shines eternal. And you shall never truly die." This is the promise made to every hero, and the bargain, once made, is never broken.

The Labors of Heracles

You did not decide to become a hero while sitting beside a roaring hearth. You decided with your sweat and sword and blood and bone. When you bested the monster that had stalked your village for decades. When you dared to drive the chariot of the gods. When you escaped the clutches of your enemies on wings of wax and feathers. When you sang a song that made the trees weep. This is the path of the hero. For you, there is no other. This is what your own heart expects from you, and it is only satiated by the thrill of victory and the exaltation of thousands. You were not born to do this, but you have made this life your own. There is no turning back. The headiness of adoration is sweeter than wine.

No Happy Endings

Joining the few and the proud, you have given up all hope of every leading a peaceful and boring life. You will never grow old as you watch your grandchildren and great-grandchildren blossom in the springtime. You will never clutch your true love to your chest, hold them tight, and promise them forever... without knowing it to be a lie. For the hero, there are no happy endings. There are no sunsets to ride off into. There is only disaster and weeping. It is not a question of "if." It is only a matter of "when" and "how." But this is the sacrifice you have willingly made in order to become myth. Nothing is gained without risk. And so you have risked all for a single chance at everything.

Fatal Tragedy

It is not as if you are going in blindly, without full knowledge of the agreement you have made with Fate. Troy, after all, was not destroyed in a day and the indomitable spirit of a hero is not so quickly crushed. Instead, it is slowly disassembled, piece by piece, as you look on, helpless to stop the ruin of everything you hold dear. Your existence has become a grand tragedy of epic proportions. Act by act, scene by scene, line by line, it plays out on the world stage for all to see. And, when it's all over, there will be no curtain call for you to hear the applause. The rest, as they say, is silence.