In the Power of Bitterness there is a king whom I wanted to show as at least somewhat caring and human. He didn’t need much sympathies, just enough for us to understand that he was not a ruthless, bad king.
At a council I had him supporting an orphanage.
Now as the story continued and I entered act three I came to the conclusion that I had not done a very good setup for the environmental conditions in the country. The fields did not carry enough crops and would within a lifetime be on the brink of collapse. This was something that I didn’t think of from the beginning, but was quite clear to me when I had written some on the last act.
Where to state this in a delicate manner? All I needed was someone commenting the declining growth.
That orphanage. . . All it did to the story was to add some goodwill to a character. He didn’t need it. And the story had no use of an orphanage. When I rewrite this story, it will be replaced with something concerning the agriculture instead.
I think that is as it should be. Everything said and done should have a purpose in the story. A scene just to add some goodwill, opening up ideas about things never returning is no good. Now the King will get a chance to show his character and discuss something we need to know.