How to Write the First Round of an AI Text Adventure: Player Identity, Resources, Actions, and Feedback Template
The first round should let players know who they are, what they need to accomplish right now, what actions they can take, and what their actions have already changed. Prepare the initial state, then break down the result of one action into narrative, status, log, and next steps, and you can check whether the opening has formed a complete turn.
Introduction
The first round should let players know who they are, what they need to accomplish right now, what actions they can take, and what their actions have already changed. Prepare the initial state, then break down the result of one action into narrative, status, log, and next steps, and you can check whether the opening has formed a complete turn.
The following uses the fictional story "Rainport Lost and Found" as a demonstration. This is a design template provided by DramaFork; the example values and turn results are set by the author and do not represent any actual play session or model output.
Give the player a task they can do right now
The player is a night-shift partner who, before closing, discovers a claim slip with an abnormal time. The opening goal is to verify its source, and the pressure is that there are only twenty minutes until closing. Just explain these three things, and the player has a reason to act.
"Explore destiny in a city full of secrets" cannot replace the first-round goal. It does not explain the immediate object, and it is impossible to judge what "check the records" and "contact the owner" each solve. The background can unfold later, but the first round must provide the information needed for action.
The name and talent in the player profile should also have a use. If "Archive Intuition" is chosen, then when cross-checking, the player can pay extra attention to the numbering format; but the talent should not automatically reveal all the truth. The author must specify which observation it improves, and which steps it cannot skip.
Show only the status that this round will actually read
The status bar does not need to be stuffed with profession, equipment, and ten attributes. First list the fields that actions will read or change, and define what each field means.
| Field | Initial value | Current use |
|---|---|---|
| Time until closing | Twenty minutes | Limits the verification work that can be done this round |
| Valid clues | Zero | Records facts that have already been verified |
| Partner trust | Level one | Determines whether Xu Lan shares additional records |
| Current goal | Verify the source of the claim slip | Reminds the player of this round's task |
| Completed actions | None | Prevents repeated queries from being treated as new discoveries |
"Trust level one" is only an example scale, and the upgrade conditions must be specified. Fields with no clear use can be left unshown for now, to avoid players mistaking decorative numbers for operable rules.
Also distinguish between "finding one anomaly" and "already proving the claim slip is forged." The former is a clue, the latter is a judgment; if the status table conflates them, later plot will be built on unverified conclusions.
Write premises, costs, and information gains for the options
The first round can offer three actions: check the original register, contact the number on the slip, or first ask Xu Lan. The option text explains the action, and when necessary hints at known costs, without revealing the full result in advance.
For example, "spend five minutes checking the register" is easier to judge than "seek the truth." The player knows time will decrease, but still needs to decide whether it is worth it. If contacting the number takes the same amount of time, it should bring different information, not just swap in a different piece of rhetoric.
When also accepting free player input, first list the range of actions this scene can reasonably handle. If the player proposes "look for nearby cameras," it can enter the verification process; if they propose "directly know the future," it needs to be explained that the current character does not have this ability. Detailed handling of free input can be made into a separate action table later; the first round should first ensure the main path is complete.
Write one complete turn that can be compared
Player action: "I spend five minutes checking the original register, first looking at the claim number."
Narrative example: "You turn to number seven three one. The registration time is earlier than the time the item was logged into storage, yet there is no supplementary note beside it. Xu Lan pushes another copy of the registration over and suggests comparing the signatures first."
This result confirms the action and also gives a new observation, but does not arbitrarily declare who is lying. The corresponding status update is as follows:
| Item | Before action | After action | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remaining time | Twenty minutes | Fifteen minutes | Completed one register verification |
| Valid clues | Zero | One | Discovered a time anomaly lacking an explanation |
| Partner trust | Level one | Level one | This round has not yet met the conditions for a relationship change |
| Completed actions | None | Checked number seven three one | Prevents obtaining the same clue repeatedly |
The log is written as: "Checked original record seven three one: registration time abnormal, supplementary note missing, signature comparison pending." It keeps only observed facts and unfinished tasks, does not repeat the entire narrative, and does not write the author's secrets to the player.
The next step then offers "compare signatures," "question the claimant," and "investigate the supplementary record." These actions respond to the information just obtained, letting the player see how the previous round changed what can be done.
Use three abnormal inputs to check the opening
First input a normal action, and check whether the narrative, status, and log are consistent. If the narrative says five minutes were spent, but the status does not change, it means the turn has not completed reliable alignment.
Then input an action with insufficient resources: only three minutes remain, yet it requires five minutes of verification. The author should decide in advance whether to refuse, provide a simplified method, or allow overtime with clear consequences; the same scene must not arbitrarily change the rules.
Finally input a vague action: "I'll deal with this slip." It is necessary to ask the player whether they want to verify, modify, or hand it to someone else. Directly interpreting vague input as the highest-cost action will make the player bear a choice they did not express.
DramaFork text game directory provides a text adventure entry point; when designing, it is still necessary to distinguish between model-generated narrative and verified status results. Requiring consistent resources in the prompt does not mean all calculations are guaranteed by deterministic rules. When reliable values are needed, key changes should be checked separately.
Expand the world only after the first round passes
Have someone who does not understand the setting read the opening, and ask them about the current identity, goal, option costs, and what just changed. If they need the author to explain further before they can answer, first revise the information and feedback.
When delivering, keep the initial state, player action, turn result, and abnormal input handling. These four materials let later writers know which facts are already established, and also make it possible to check whether the second round has forgotten the first round. First verify one turn clearly, then add chapters, items, and endings.
