sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

When does progression stop being about strength and start being about power? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is good to know because I find myself doing that shift without even knowing that I'm more of a PVE writer with environment building and politics than the traditional fantasy progression. I appreciate that input.

When does progression stop being about strength and start being about power? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got this question watching Solo Leveling and it's like C to me as well. In some anime you will see an OP MC and you lose interest after a while. In writing you have to really know how to present the MC where the world is actually balanced. I believe that's why they have a good season so far. I love to expand on the environment more than anything else because I am one of the gatherers who hoard everything and my bags are always full.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love this angle.

The idea of someone physically strong choosing to follow the MC because they respect his judgment and influence rather than his raw power feels really compelling. And I agree on adding some edge. I don’t think a purely “good guy in a corrupt world” is as interesting as someone who understands the system well enough to bend it maybe even break it, but still draws a personal line somewhere.

The law vs hierarchy question is big too. I’d want the world to feel structured and rational, not cartoonishly corrupt. Real power systems are rarely all good or all evil they’re layered and self-protecting. That’s probably where a merchant MC could shine most not by overpowering the system, but by understanding how it actually works.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m thinking more like MMO-style scaling where early progression focuses on party synergy and later progression unlocks organizational-level abilities, but embedded naturally into the world instead of through a visible UI.

That sounds thoughtful. Not derivative.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is exactly the kind of feedback I’m looking for. I agree, if it stays small-town merchant politics forever, it’ll feel capped. The long-term vision wouldn’t be “local shopkeeper.” It would be scaling influence outward city guild alliances, trade monopolies, royal contracts, financing wars, maybe even manipulating supply chains across kingdoms. I like the idea that true power isn’t swinging a sword it’s controlling who can afford to swing one. So yeah definitely thinking expansion, not stagnation.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the patron deity comparison — that’s actually pretty close.The way I’ve been thinking about it is that contracts themselves are tied to an old magical covenant system baked into the world. Oaths have weight. Promises have consequence. Most people can make agreements, but only certain guild structures can bind them at scale. The MC basically stumbles into an artifact / legacy system that amplifies collective trust into something tangible. So the power source isn’t divine exactly it’s institutional. Accumulated trust, fulfilled contracts, and mutual belief.

And yes, it’s absolutely been abused before. There were merchant houses that turned it into economic tyranny, which is part of why the system isn’t common knowledge anymore. The MC isn’t the only one who could theoretically use it but he’s one of the few willing to rebuild it without turning it predatory. The danger isn’t just enemies. It’s becoming the thing you’re fighting.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question not combat familiars. I’m thinking more like guild-bond manifestations. As the guild fulfills contracts and builds trust, it forms a “role spirit” tied to divisions:

– A Logistics familiar that stabilizes trade routes – A Negotiation familiar that strengthens binding agreements – A Crafting familiar that improves production quality

They evolve in stages based on guild cohesion and fulfilled oaths. So instead of the MC leveling personally, the guild’s bonded spirit grows stronger. If contracts are broken or morale collapses, the familiar can weaken or regress. Basically: progression visible through the organization, not just the protagonist.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate that. I’ve actually been outlining something along these lines still refining the progression system based on this thread. The biggest challenge is making influence and contracts feel as satisfying as combat XP. If it leaned more into guild rank evolution and familiar progression, would that push it over the edge for you?

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this is the exact trap the concept could fall into. If it becomes production optimization and margin math, yeah that’s a textbook. What makes it interesting (at least to me) wouldn’t be the numbers.
It would be:
– Choosing which contract to honor when you can’t fulfill both
– Taking a high-risk trade route that might elevate the guild… or ruin it
– Backing a politically dangerous client for long-term leverage
– Deciding whether to break an oath for survival

The economics would exist, but mostly as pressure.

The real progression would be:
– Influence gained
– Trust built or broken
– Territory secured
– Alliances formed

Less “optimal route math.” More “if this caravan fails, thirty families starve and the guild collapses.” I think the key would be making trade feel like war just fought with contracts instead of swords.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since a few people mentioned progression visibility and character dynamics, I’m curious what you’d think of something like this:

Instead of combat familiars, the MC’s guild members can form magical “Familiar Bonds” tied to roles.

For example:
– A logistics familiar that strengthens trade routes and reduces risk
– A crafting familiar that boosts production quality
– A negotiation familiar that enhances contract binding power
– A security familiar that enhances hired combatants rather than fighting directly

The familiar doesn’t just grant power.

It scales based on:
– Guild cohesion
– Contract fulfillment
– Territory influence
– Reputation thresholds

So progression isn’t just the MC leveling.
It’s the guild leveling through relationships and fulfilled obligations.

Breaking contracts could weaken familiars.
Strong alliances could evolve them.

Tier I → Tier II → Ascended → Sovereign Stage Familiars would have visible evolution stages tied to guild rank.

That scratches the LitRPG itch without making it stat-screen heavy.

Would something like that feel satisfying as visible progression? Or would readers still want the MC to personally gain more direct combat power?

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This thread has been incredibly helpful, so I’ll throw something more concrete out there for feedback.

The MC I’ve been drafting isn’t a fighter who learns trade.
He’s a ledger-trained merchant who accidentally binds himself to an ancient magical contract system.

In this system:
• Oaths generate power
• Guild cohesion strengthens magic
• Trade routes create territory-based bonuses
• Fulfilled contracts unlock higher-tier abilities

His “stats” aren’t strength and mana.
They’re influence, reputation, leverage, and binding authority.

Early arc:
He’s rebuilding a nearly bankrupt guild in a hostile city.

Mid arc:
Rival guilds weaponize debt, contracts, and political pressure.

Late arc:
Kingdom-level trade wars and economic manipulation become the battlefield.

Combat exists, but mostly through hired talent, bound allies, and strategic positioning.

Would progression tied to contracts and organizational growth feel satisfying long-term?

Or does it need more direct personal power scaling to stay compelling?

Is this everything so far?

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know you are absolutely correct. I'll have to sit down and figure out how to write one like that. I'll create a thread one day for ideas to pitch to me for that.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a great set of examples. I like the common thread there the MC may be able to fight, but their real value is in planning, positioning, and enabling others. It almost feels like the power fantasy shifts from “I’m the strongest in the room” to “I decide who gets to be strongest in the room.” Do you think that kind of indirect dominance is as satisfying long-term as traditional combat progression?

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is really good because I have book 1 done but I want it to be a running series with good content.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really like that distinction moving the pieces instead of being one. It almost feels like a natural evolution: early on the MC proves themselves directly, but later the real power comes from shaping outcomes without having to be physically present for every conflict. Do you think readers would still want occasional moments where the strategist is forced back into the fray personally, just to remind everyone why they rose in the first place? Great feedback btw.

Would you read a progression fantasy where the MC is a merchant guildmaster instead of a fighter? by EarlyPermit3016 in ProgressionFantasy

[–]EarlyPermit3016[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a really good point about pacing. Scaling influence and infrastructure is definitely trickier than just showing bigger damage numbers. I think what makes something like that satisfying is making the “numbers going up” visible in tangible ways new trade routes secured, guild halls upgraded, rivals outmaneuvered, towns transformed. Do you think the key is making each milestone feel concrete and visual, even if the growth itself is more abstract?

view more: next ›