![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jack1. For the love of God, don't try to do it in person. You'll get stabbed before you can open your mouth, and it'll all be uphill from there. Send a message.
2. Lead up to it. Hint that you might be alive, and then what might have happened, and then admit in whom.
3. Don't start with the extraordinary hypothesis, and then try to provide evidence. However convincing, it always looks like flannelling. Start with hints, and then the evidence, and when they're hungry for an explanation, propose the hypothesis.
4. On the other hand, if try to lead up to it, leave a good explanation somewhere safe, so if you're killed again, they can piece it together
5. Being trapped in the body of an enemy is always dire. However good an idea it might seem, always try to avoid it.
2. Lead up to it. Hint that you might be alive, and then what might have happened, and then admit in whom.
3. Don't start with the extraordinary hypothesis, and then try to provide evidence. However convincing, it always looks like flannelling. Start with hints, and then the evidence, and when they're hungry for an explanation, propose the hypothesis.
4. On the other hand, if try to lead up to it, leave a good explanation somewhere safe, so if you're killed again, they can piece it together
5. Being trapped in the body of an enemy is always dire. However good an idea it might seem, always try to avoid it.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-06 07:29 pm (UTC)I am the person who reads the books in which the hero/ine stands up to great temptation (power, sex, money, love etc) and if it's not transparently obvious that the prize is poisoned, thinks "I'd do it". This probably makes me the Corruptible Sidekick character, or the one who hastily drinks from the fake Grail and instantly dies. But in fiction, the hero/ine often stand up to temptation for such poor reasons!
no subject
Date: 2008-09-08 11:00 pm (UTC):) I think it's often an instance of a moral dilemma -- that is, the narrative set-up is supposed to pretend there's a binary choice between good and corruption, and no whining about alternatives allowed, even if the context doesn't actually explain why it wouldn't work.
Of course, even if you accept that, it's often still trying to fast-talk you into thinking that keeping your word is always more important than other considerations, or vice versa...
(Funnily enough, with the villain-offers-marvellous-reward, it's often almost the reverse of real life. In real life, you'd have a legitimate claim that you don't trust the offer, whatever it is. Whereas in fiction, you're supposed to assume that it's true, but that any sort of compromise is automatically wrong :))
Maybe it only goes wrong in fictional narratives, though.
Maybe. If it were a temporary thing, and you got to play with his/her body, it could certainly be amusing. But it still makes me think it's very likely to go wrong -- there's so many things that can go wrong :)