[DRAFT] Son of a Brick!

[Sacara]

The only thing I have is the first sentence seems to go on forever before the reader gets a break. Small nitpick, though. Otherwise looks good.

[Fauxia]

Re-worked the entire description in the end, hopefully flows better now.

[Fauxia]

Bump.

Any ideas for a better third option (I don't really like this one)? I don't like two-option issues, but neither do I like third options that are there just to have more than two options.

[Jutsa]

I still say you should make an option where you create your own secret organization to rival them.

[Fauxia]

Fifth draft up, added a new third option

[Krogon]

[fallout] the Ministry of Secret Occultist Brotherhood Screening is the largest ministry but no is supposed to know

This effect line feels very awkward.

[Australian rePublic]

I just thought of something. If @@LEADER@@'s female, could she still be a son of a brick?

[Fauxia]

I just thought of something. If @@LEADER@@'s female, could she still be a son of a brick?

I don’t know, but option 3 doesn’t include that anymore so it isn’t really relevant.

Also, you mentioned that before; idk if you did “just [think] of [it]”

Option 3- the only way to join is if you're invited. And now this brings up a different question, what if the leader is female?

[Jutsa]

uhuhu, I do like the new option; devious. >:3

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Let's look over the description.

[description] Finally getting around to dealing with your mail, you see a tip-off from an anonymous government official.

Not loving it or hating it. Stretching the edges of player autonomy, and making assumptions about how Leader works, but just about within okay.

The tip claims a disproportionate amount of cabinet members have ties to untrustworthy organizations.

So what would be a proportionate amount be? That is to say, disproportionate is not a good word choice here.

Also, if it's anonymous, why are we calling it a tip-off? Why are we lending it any veracity?

It includes photographic evidence of several at a meeting of the secretive group known as the Sons of a Brick.

Well, that raised more questions. Who are the Sons of a Brick? I don't want to be told in the options, I need to know by the end of the issue description, or at least have the fact that the reader doesn't know who they are acknowledged. How do we know this photo is of a secret meeting of the Sons of a Brick? Is there a big banner that says "secret meeting of the Sons of a Brick?". Why is this considered to be evidence of " of cabinet members have ties to untrustworthy organizations"?

The whole narrative isn't holding together. I think just get it down to it's core.

An anonymous tip-off has informed you that many prominent politicians - including members of your own cabinet - are part of a secret society called "The Sons of a Brick".

Though have to say, it's not a great name for a secret society. How about "The Brickmasons"? That immediately gives the name some context, as people will recognise it as being an expy of the masonic lodges.

I mean, I know you started off with Stonecutters, but my problem there was that you were satirising satire (i.e. the Simpsons) rather than satirising the original thing (the Freemasons).