I think I may be using the terminology slightly differently to you. To me a plot is a set of closely related events, choices and actions. A story is multiple plots from the viewpoint of one or more characters. A scenario is a story, or part of a story, from the viewpoint of the group only. You seem to be using scenario and story to mean the same thing.
Thanks for getting me to explain that. Thinking about it has helped to clarify what I'm getting at. It is probably due to writing freeform rather than tabletop games where most plots only involve a fraction of the characters and players.
I agree that what you call sub-plots need to have less time spent on them than those involving the whole group but they still make up a story. It seems to be short changing the player to regard a crucial part of their story as nothing more than a sub-plot to be got passed as quickly as possible. Probably a case striking the right balance and depends on the particular group of players.
>> I can see at least as much interest in failure as in success.
>
>In which case you should use the standard method
>and not the costly success.
>
>However...
>
>>The immediate decision is does the character try again or not?
>
>If you can see that the character/player is so heavily
>invested in an action that he's going to keep trying until
>he succeeds, use of the Costly Success mechanic
>allows you to get to the same inevitable endpoint
>faster. In both cases, the question is not whether
>he'll succeed, but how hard it will be to do so.
I would distinguish between the player and the character here. If the character is heavily invested I would expect to see that in their words and actions - the roleplaying. In that case initiation should be no problem for they have developed the skills and attributes of the god. If it is only the player who is invested why aren't they playing the character that way?
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail