Characters Can Keep Private Letters Private: Define Who May Say What to Whom with a Scope Card
Knowing what a letter says does not mean you may disclose it on the writer’s behalf. Use a scope card to separate public facts, what someone is willing to share, and exactly what others may relay, so protecting privacy becomes a viable story choice.
Introduction
When a player asks about a supporting character’s private letter, first identify whose information the request involves, who would disclose it, and who would receive it. Then write the character’s response. Record public facts, what the person is willing to share, and permission for others to disclose information separately; these are not three levels that progressively unlock the full text. A character may answer the task-relevant part while never handing over the original letter.
Below is a reusable scope card and a demonstration of how to turn “Give me the letter” into a clearly defined story choice. All characters, letters, and dialogue are fictional teaching examples. They are not real user cases or tested results, and they do not represent any product features.
1. Separate the Letter’s Contents Before Deciding Who May Speak
This fictional story takes place at the Stonebridge Theatre Company. The player, tasked with confirming tonight’s rehearsal arrangements, asks stage manager A-Cen, who is holding the letter, for a private letter received by actor Xu He. The writer is Xu He’s older sister. The letter discusses both when a costume will be returned and a family dispute between the two.
The player’s actual task is to confirm whether the costume will arrive in time for rehearsal, but the proposed means is to read the whole letter. Separate these two things: needing an answer about timing does not automatically mean needing access to a family conversation.
The author first divides the information into three items: the rehearsal time on the noticeboard, Xu He’s feelings about hearing from her sister, and her sister’s private account. A-Cen’s knowledge of some of this establishes only that she has information; holding the envelope for Xu He establishes only that she has access to the object. Neither, by itself, explains why she may hand over the letter.
The narrative convention used here is that Xu He can decide whether to discuss her own feelings, while the scope of what her sister is willing to disclose about her private account is recorded separately. This prevents the author from treating a letter as a single clue that can be freely relayed merely because its recipient agrees.
2. Copy This Scope Card to Specify Who Receives Each Disclosure and in What Form
Fill out the scope card by information item. A blank means the author has not yet decided; it must not default to permission. Here is the completed version for this example.
| Information item | Public facts | What the person is willing to share | Permission for others to disclose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rehearsal tonight at seven | Posted on the noticeboard; may be quoted | No need to ask about private matters | A-Cen may communicate the rehearsal arrangements |
| The costume will arrive before six | Not yet public | Xu He is willing to tell the player responsible for rehearsal | Xu He permits A-Cen to relay this sentence to that player |
| Xu He’s feelings about the letter | Not public | Xu He is willing to discuss her hesitation in person | A-Cen has no permission to speak for her |
| The family dispute described by her sister | Not public | Her sister’s willingness to share has not yet been established in the story | No permission to relay, excerpt, or show the original letter |
Add one more line to each card: whose information is involved; who may speak; to whom; for what purpose; in what form; and when to ask again. Use this template directly: “Regarding ____, ____ permits ____ to provide information to ____, for ____, in the form of ____; this excludes ____; ask again if ____.”
For this example: “Regarding the costume’s arrival time, Xu He permits A-Cen to tell the player responsible for rehearsal verbally that it will arrive before six, for the purpose of arranging tonight’s rehearsal; this excludes the original letter, the delivery person’s address, and the family conversation; ask again before passing it on to the whole company.”
This turns “You can tell them” into a scope that can be checked. It also leaves room for a character to change her mind: if Xu He later stops allowing A-Cen to speak for her, update the arrangements for future sharing. The time already disclosed remains a fact the player knows; changing the card cannot erase it.
3. Walk Through One Request: Give the Time, Keep the Letter
Start with the player’s exact words: “Let me see Xu He’s letter. I need to confirm whether rehearsal is still happening tonight.” A-Cen checks the scope card item by item: the request includes showing the original letter, but the existing permission covers only verbally relaying the arrival time. The two cannot be treated as one.
A-Cen: Rehearsal is at seven tonight. The notice is already up. Xu He asked me to tell you the costume will arrive before six. I won’t show you the letter.
Player: I’ll only read the part about returning the costume. Nothing else.
A-Cen: She asked me to pass on the time. She didn’t give me permission to show you passages from the letter. If you need to confirm the handover arrangements, I can wait with you by the costume trunk.
Player: Then why is her sister suddenly willing to return it?
A-Cen: That isn’t part of what she asked me to pass on. You can ask Xu He whether she wants to talk about it, but she may choose not to.
This exchange does not treat polite follow-up questions as grounds for expanding the scope. “Just one passage” still changes the form of sharing, while “Why return it?” changes the information item. They need to be handled separately.
The player can next go to receive the costume or ask Xu He about her own thoughts. If Xu He answers, “I haven’t decided whether to write back,” that adds only the feelings she is willing to share. It does not also open access to her sister’s original words. The author should add this as a new item on the card rather than mark the whole letter “unlocked.”
4. Let Protecting Privacy Create Choices, Rather Than Hide a Necessary Answer
This scene can lead to three different outcomes. The player accepts the answer about timing and arranges rehearsal; the player asks Xu He for a note containing only the handover time and receives information they can carry with them; or the player still wants to read the letter, Xu He refuses, and that route ends there.
The note is not a stand-in for the original letter. Make clear that Xu He writes it separately and includes only what she is willing to provide. Do not have A-Cen simply cover a few lines and hand over the original: covering text may still leave a salutation, signature, or other out-of-scope information visible.
If the plot truly requires the player to judge whether the costume will arrive, the author can provide a later, independent observation, such as checking by the costume trunk at the agreed time. If the story’s theme is precisely “whether to trust Xu He under uncertainty,” uncertainty can remain. Let the player decide whether to rehearse other scenes first or wait, and establish the consequences of both arrangements in advance. There is no need to reward patience with the full letter in the end.
Not reading the letter should still constitute a complete choice. The player may learn less about a family’s past and still complete the rehearsal task. That way, the character’s privacy is not a puzzle that must be cracked, and the player need not keep asking to make ordinary progress.
5. Use Four Variations to Check Whether Boundaries Have Quietly Expanded
During revision, rephrase the same request in four ways and check each against the card, rather than checking only whether the character says “no.”
- “We know each other so well.” Check whether a change in the relationship is being substituted for permission to disclose a third person’s information. Closeness can explain why Xu He is willing to say more about herself; it cannot establish that her sister is willing to share.
- “You don’t have to show me. Just summarize it.” Check whether relaying it reveals the same private account. Switching to a summary does not automatically change the information scope.
- “Everyone’s heard they had an argument.” Check whether the character is corroborating a rumor. A-Cen can decline to confirm it; public circulation does not mean she has permission to speak for someone else.
- “She just said it was okay.” Check exactly what that statement permits. If the scene has not established the audience and content, have A-Cen ask Xu He to clarify first, rather than assume she means the whole letter may be made public.
Another easy-to-miss failure occurs when the dialogue refuses to provide the information, but the narration casually reveals the reason given in the letter. Review the dialogue, choice text, and narration together to ensure the withheld information does not accidentally leak elsewhere.
The scope card only helps authors maintain narrative consistency. It does not guarantee that generated dialogue will follow the established setting, nor is it a protocol for handling real-world correspondence. Take one letter scene of your own, first specify one item that may be relayed and one that remains withheld, then check whether the player can choose a next step while both conditions hold.
