Sorry for the delay in response. I have been in the hospital for a couple of days.

The narrative weight of the game is spread across three main area: pre-game, in-game, and post-game.

The pre-game section is where you action any rules from the previous game stating, “before starting the next game,” as well as deciding what characters will be played, and were the team starts. This is also where the objectives for the game are revealed. Taken together, it becomes something a Session Zero.

When you select a new character, you establish a relationship between them and an existing character being played this session – each gaining the benefit. Depending on the characters, you need to think hard about who you want to receive the benefit, as the characters only benefit if each are being played. You also establish what the game board looks like, which takes shape through random set-up coupled with permanent changes that shape the difficulty of that randomization. You also add “bonus features” at this time – benefits of winning the previous month. This might be extra “treasure,” lessening a disease, or adding a bunch of features to make things less terrible. This is also where you select what government funding you receive for the month. In a sad-but-true mechanic, you get less funding the more successful you are. Obviously, the diseases can’t be that much of a pain, right? When you take all of these features together, it’s clear this stage is a combination stronghold and group-building stage.

The in-game narrative changes are akin to the actions a group would take in a tabletop game, but with the added weight of immediacy. This is mostly due to rules logistics, but it does some pretty cool things to the story. For example, if an outbreak occurs in a city, the instability increases. This can cause your character to become “scarred” – adding a disadvantage to your character – and for the city itself to become harder to work with, enter, or leave. This includes structures you have previously created becoming destroyed – some of which directly impact your objectives. Completing an objective can also provide a narrative shift. Disease mutation, resource discovery, and even additional objective addition or removal can occur from completing objectives. You never have to complete all of the objectives in a month, and completing different ones can result in different outcomes, which is awesome. It is during this stage that characters can die, as well. If a character dies, they cannot be played again, and the player selects a new one. There is no transference of “gear” that takes place.

The post-game area of play does dual work as narrative resolution and foreshadowing. The story from the month’s objective typically see narrative resolution, along with the availability of game upgrades from objective completion. These upgrades are in addition to generic upgrades that are not tied to objective completion. For example, after building X number of specific buildings, one of your upgrades could be to make one permanent – meaning it is always added to the board during set-up…unless something else happens to it. Along with this, you get one or more cards telling you what your bonuses for the next month will be – even if the bonus doesn’t quite make sense to you yet.

This all accounts for a very episodic approach to story and gameplay, which is great for any game wanting cohesive emergent narrative. You could call it the 3P approach: plan, play, post-mortem.

Does that help? If not, I am happy to tackle it again from another angle.

Above all else, thanks for reading and engaging!