From 7254234a88b96720538abcede01fc904b4a2eb96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Claude Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2025 17:14:59 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add Mission 2 'Ransomed Trust' development preparation document - Created comprehensive preparation doc for M02 development - Extracted mission details from Season 1 arc plan - Documented 9-stage development workflow - Applied Mission 1 good practices and lessons learned - Identified new mechanics: patrolling guards, PIN cracking - Outlined moral choices: ransom payment, hospital exposure - Documented campaign connections to M1 and M6 - Included risk assessment and success criteria - Ready for Stage 0: Scenario Initialization --- .../m02_ransomed_trust/README.md | 809 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 809 insertions(+) create mode 100644 planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m02_ransomed_trust/README.md diff --git a/planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m02_ransomed_trust/README.md b/planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m02_ransomed_trust/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..385a5de --- /dev/null +++ b/planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m02_ransomed_trust/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,809 @@ +# Mission 2: "Ransomed Trust" - Development Preparation + +**Mission ID:** m02_ransomed_trust +**Title:** Ransomed Trust +**Status:** 🔄 READY FOR STAGE 0 INITIALIZATION +**Prepared:** 2025-12-20 +**Development Process:** 9-Stage Scenario Development Workflow + +--- + +## Executive Summary + +Mission 2 "Ransomed Trust" is a crisis response mission where players must infiltrate a hospital hit by ransomware to recover decryption keys before critical systems fail. This mission introduces patrolling guards and PIN cracking mechanics while reinforcing lockpicking and social engineering from Mission 1. + +**Key Metrics (Target):** +- **Difficulty:** Beginner (Mission 2 of Season 1) +- **Estimated Playtime:** 50-70 minutes +- **ENTROPY Cell:** Ransomware Incorporated +- **SecGen Scenario:** "Rooting for a win" (ProFTPD backdoor, basic exploitation) +- **CyBOK Areas:** Malware & Attack Technologies, Incident Response, Applied Cryptography +- **New Mechanics:** Patrolling guards (timing/stealth), PIN cracking (safe minigame) + +--- + +## Mission Overview from Season 1 Arc + +### Story Premise + +Local hospital hit by ransomware; patient records encrypted. SAFETYNET suspects ENTROPY's Ransomware Incorporated cell. Player must infiltrate the hospital's compromised network to recover decryption keys before critical systems fail. + +### Core Challenges (Break Escape) + +- **Lockpicking** (reinforced from M1) +- **Patrolling guards** (NEW) - security heightened after breach +- **NPC social engineering** (reinforced) - stressed IT admin provides access +- **PIN cracking on safe** (NEW) - backup encryption keys stored physically + +### VM Challenge Integration + +**SecGen Scenario:** "Rooting for a win" (ProFTPD backdoor exploitation) +- Exploit ProFTPD backdoor on hospital backup server +- Recover encrypted patient database +- Find decryption keys and test recovery process + +**Hybrid Architecture:** +- VM provides technical validation (exploitation skills) +- ERB templates provide narrative content (ransom notes, patient data, hospital emails) +- Dead drop system: VM flags unlock backup access, decryption tools + +### Educational Objectives (CyBOK) + +- **Malware & Attack Technologies:** Ransomware behavior, encryption +- **Incident Response:** Recovery procedures, backup importance +- **Applied Cryptography:** Symmetric encryption, key recovery + +### Narrative Arc (3 Acts) + +**Act 1: Urgent Briefing & Infiltration (15-20%)** +- Urgent briefing - patients at risk +- Infiltrate hospital as "external security consultant" +- Establish cover, meet stressed hospital staff + +**Act 2: Investigation & Escalation (50-60%)** +- Discover ransomware deployed via vulnerable FTP server +- IT admin NPC helps locate backup systems +- Exploit vulnerability to access backups +- PIN crack safe containing offline key backup +- Navigate patrolling guards (NEW mechanic tutorial) + +**Act 3: Climax & Choice (20-30%)** +- **Choice moment:** Pay ransom for faster recovery vs. use recovered keys (slower) +- **Secondary choice:** Expose hospital's poor security publicly vs. quiet resolution +- Confront or trace ENTROPY operative "Ghost" +- Resolution based on player choices + +### Key NPCs + +- **Dr. Sarah Kim** (Hospital CTO) - Desperate to recover systems, considers paying ransom +- **Marcus Webb** (IT Admin) - Overworked, feels guilty, provides access (social engineering target) +- **"Ghost"** (Ransomware Inc. operative) - Anonymous contact demanding payment (voice/text only) +- **Agent 0x99** (Handler) - Remote support, guidance on ransomware response + +### LORE Opportunities + +- **Ransomware Note** - Includes ENTROPY cell signature, philosophy about "teaching resilience" +- **Payment Wallet Connection** - Connected to broader cryptocurrency network (setup for M6) +- **CryptoSecure Recovery Services** - Ransomware Inc. legitimate cover company +- **Cross-Cell Coordination Hints** - References to Zero Day Syndicate (M3 connection) + +### Moral Complexity + +**Major Choice:** Pay ransom (faster recovery, funds ENTROPY) vs. recover independently (slower, patients at higher risk) + +**Secondary Choice:** Expose hospital's poor security publicly (damages reputation, forces improvement) vs. quiet resolution (vulnerabilities remain, protect hospital image) + +**Consequences:** +- Ransom payment affects M6 (cryptocurrency trail) +- Hospital exposure affects future medical facility missions +- Patient outcomes reflected in closing debrief + +### Success Outcomes + +- **Full Success:** Keys recovered, no ransom paid, patients safe, vulnerability patched +- **Partial Success:** Ransom paid but systems recovered, OR keys recovered but some data lost +- **Minimal Success:** Systems recovered but significant data loss or ransom paid + +### Connection to Campaign Arc + +- **Financial Trail:** Cryptocurrency wallet connects to Crypto Anarchists (M6) +- **Cross-Cell Coordination:** Ransomware deployed too precisely (someone scouted vulnerabilities - Zero Day Syndicate) +- **ENTROPY Sophistication:** Second evidence of professional planning +- **Campaign Choice Tracking:** Ransom payment decision affects M6 financial investigation clarity + +--- + +## Development Workflow: 9-Stage Process + +Based on Mission 1 example and the story development prompts, Mission 2 will follow this process: + +### ✅ Pre-Stage 0: Mission Selection (COMPLETE) + +**Source:** `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/season_1_arc.md` lines 178-239 +**Deliverables:** +- Mission concept identified +- ENTROPY cell selected (Ransomware Incorporated) +- SecGen scenario identified ("Rooting for a win") +- Narrative theme established (Crisis Response) + +--- + +### 🔄 Stage 0: Scenario Initialization (NEXT) + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/00_scenario_initialization.md` + +**Key Decisions Needed:** +1. **Technical Challenges Detailed Breakdown:** + - VM challenges (ProFTPD exploitation specifics) + - In-game challenges (guard patrol patterns, safe PIN puzzle design) + - Hybrid integration (how VM flags unlock physical resources) + +2. **Narrative Theme Deep Dive:** + - Hospital setting details (layout, atmosphere, time pressure) + - Ransomware crisis specifics (what systems are down, patient impact) + - Moral dilemma presentation (how to frame the ransom choice) + +3. **ENTROPY Cell Integration:** + - Ransomware Incorporated philosophy ("teaching resilience through crisis") + - Ghost's character and communication style + - Connection to broader ENTROPY network + +**Deliverables for Stage 0:** +- `00_scenario_initialization.md` - Complete mission initialization +- `technical_challenges.md` - Detailed challenge breakdown (VM + in-game) +- `narrative_themes.md` - Expanded narrative and setting details +- `hybrid_architecture_plan.md` - How VM and ERB integrate + +**Good Practices from Mission 1:** +- ✅ Make stakes concrete with specific numbers (e.g., "X patients at risk", "Y critical systems down") +- ✅ Show villain's philosophy through documents/communications, not just dialogue +- ✅ Plan ERB narrative content separately from VM challenges +- ✅ Identify cross-mission connections early (M6 financial trail) + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 1: Narrative Structure Development + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/01_narrative_structure.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Expand 3-act structure from arc summary into scene-by-scene breakdown +- Identify key story beats and dramatic moments +- Plan emotional arc (urgency → desperation → relief/consequences) +- Map narrative beats to gameplay moments + +**Deliverables:** +- `01_narrative_structure.md` - Complete narrative arc with scenes +- Story beat timeline +- Emotional progression chart + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 2: Storytelling Elements Design + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/02_storytelling_elements.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Develop character voices (Dr. Kim, Marcus, Ghost, Agent 0x99) +- Define hospital atmosphere (sterile, tense, crisis mode) +- Design pacing (time pressure without overwhelming) +- Create environmental storytelling elements + +**Deliverables:** +- `02_storytelling_atmosphere.md` - Setting and atmosphere details +- `02_storytelling_characters.md` - NPC profiles with voice examples +- `02_storytelling_dialogue.md` - Sample dialogue demonstrating voices + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 3: Moral Choices and Consequences + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/03_moral_choices.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Design ransom payment choice presentation +- Design hospital exposure choice presentation +- Map consequences (immediate, debrief, campaign-level) +- Ensure educational constraints respected (choices don't skip challenges) + +**Deliverables:** +- `03_moral_choices.md` - Complete choice design with branching paths +- Consequence mapping table +- Campaign impact documentation + +**Good Practices from Mission 1:** +- ✅ Avoid vague "approach" choices at mission start +- ✅ Include mid-mission moral choice (e.g., warn Marcus about something) +- ✅ Track player actions with global variables +- ✅ Reflect choices in closing debrief with specific acknowledgments + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 4: Player Objectives and Tasks + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/04_player_objectives.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Define complete objective hierarchy (objectives → aims → tasks) +- Map VM flag submissions as tasks +- Map in-game tasks (guard evasion, safe cracking, NPC interactions) +- Design progressive unlocking with intentional backtracking +- Create objectives.json structure + +**Deliverables:** +- `04_player_objectives.md` - Narrative design of player goals +- `objectives.json` - Complete JSON structure +- `objective_to_world_mapping.md` - Where/how each task completes + +**New for Mission 2:** +- Guard evasion tasks (timing-based objectives) +- PIN cracking task (safe minigame completion) +- Ransom decision task (choice tracking) + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 5: Room Layout and Spatial Design + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/05_room_layout_design.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Design hospital layout (reception, IT office, server room, administrative wing) +- Place containers (safes, filing cabinets, medical supply cabinets) +- Design lock types and placement +- Position NPCs (static and patrolling) +- Place terminals (VM access, drop-site) +- Design guard patrol routes (NEW for Mission 2) + +**Deliverables:** +- `05_room_layout.md` - Complete room design with dimensions (GUs) +- `05_guard_patrols.md` - Patrol route specifications +- Container placement map +- Lock placement strategy +- ASCII map diagram + +**New Challenges for Mission 2:** +- Designing patrol routes that create stealth gameplay +- Balancing guard timing with player progression +- Hospital layout must feel authentic while supporting gameplay + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 6: LORE Fragment Design + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/06_lore_fragments.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Create 3-4 LORE fragments for beginner difficulty +- Design discovery locations and unlock requirements +- Align fragments with CyBOK areas +- Connect to broader ENTROPY lore + +**Suggested LORE Fragments:** +1. **Ransomware Inc. Business Model** - Legitimate "recovery services" cover +2. **Ghost's Manifesto** - Philosophy about "resilience through adversity" +3. **Cryptocurrency Wallet Analysis** - Connection to M6 financial network +4. **Zero Day Exploit Source** - Connection to M3 (exploit sold by ZDS) + +**Deliverables:** +- `06_lore_fragments.md` - Complete LORE content and placement + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 7: Ink Scripting + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/07_ink_scripting.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Write opening briefing (Agent 0x99 explains crisis) +- Write NPC dialogues (Dr. Kim, Marcus Webb) +- Write terminal scripts (drop-site, ransom payment interface) +- Write phone conversations (Agent 0x99 support, Ghost's ransom demand) +- Write closing debrief (reflects player choices) + +**Deliverables (in `07_ink_scripts/` directory):** +- `m02_opening_briefing.ink` +- `m02_npc_sarah_kim.ink` +- `m02_npc_marcus_webb.ink` +- `m02_terminal_dropsite.ink` +- `m02_terminal_ransom_interface.ink` (NEW - ethical dilemma interface) +- `m02_phone_agent0x99.ink` +- `m02_phone_ghost.ink` (NEW - antagonist communication) +- `m02_closing_debrief.ink` + +**New Ink Patterns for Mission 2:** +- Guard detection consequences (dialogue changes if caught) +- Time pressure indicators in Agent 0x99 support calls +- Ransom payment ethical debate (Ghost's persuasion vs. 0x99's warnings) + +**Constraints:** +- ✅ 3-line dialogue rule (user requirement from M1) +- ✅ Auto-detection format for single NPCs +- ✅ Hub patterns for replayable conversations +- ✅ Use `#complete_task:task_id` for objectives integration +- ✅ Use `#give_item:item_id` for item transfers + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 8: Scenario Review and Validation + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/08_scenario_review.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Completeness check (all stages 0-7 complete) +- Consistency validation (narrative, technical, spatial, choice, canon) +- Technical validation (room generation, Ink syntax, game systems) +- Educational validation (CyBOK alignment, accuracy, pedagogy) +- Narrative quality review +- Player experience review +- Polish and presentation check +- Risk assessment + +**Deliverables:** +- `08_validation_report.md` - Comprehensive validation results +- Issue tracking and resolution plan +- Approval decision (PASS / CONDITIONAL PASS / REVISIONS NEEDED) + +--- + +### ⬜ Stage 9: Scenario Assembly and ERB Conversion + +**Reference Prompt:** `story_design/story_dev_prompts/09_scenario_assembly.md` + +**Key Tasks:** +- Pre-assembly logical flow validation (no soft locks) +- Critical path walkthrough +- Assemble complete `scenario.json.erb` +- Create ERB templates for narrative content +- Generate encoded messages (Base64, ROT13, Hex) +- Document implementation guidance +- Create developer handoff document + +**Deliverables:** +- `09_logical_flow_validation.md` - Pre-assembly completability check +- `09_assembly_notes.md` - Implementation guidance +- `scenarios/m02_ransomed_trust/mission.json` - Metadata file +- `scenarios/m02_ransomed_trust.json.erb` - **FINAL PLAYABLE FILE** (if using ERB) +- `DEVELOPER_HANDOFF.md` - Quick-start guide for developers +- `MISSION_COMPLETE.md` - Master index and completion report + +--- + +## Key Differences from Mission 1 + +### New Mechanics to Design + +1. **Patrolling Guards:** + - Need patrol route design system + - Timing-based stealth gameplay + - Detection consequences (not game-over, but complications) + - Tutorial integration (first guard encounter) + +2. **PIN Cracking Safe Minigame:** + - Design puzzle mechanics + - Difficulty appropriate for beginner mission + - Narrative integration (why is backup key in physical safe?) + - Hint system design + +3. **Time Pressure Element:** + - Not a hard timer, but narrative urgency + - NPC dialogue reflects increasing desperation + - Optional: progressive system failures if player takes too long + +4. **Ransom Payment Interface:** + - Unique terminal type (ethical decision interface) + - Shows consequences of each choice + - Ghost's persuasion vs. Agent 0x99's warnings + - No "right" answer indicated + +### Setting Differences + +- **Hospital vs. Corporate Office:** + - More restrictive environment (security cameras, guards) + - Innocent bystanders (patients) create moral weight + - Sterile, institutional atmosphere vs. startup culture + - Different container types (medical supply cabinets, hospital records) + +### Narrative Tone Shifts + +- **Higher Stakes:** Patients at direct risk (lives, not just data) +- **More Urgency:** Time pressure from failing systems +- **Moral Ambiguity:** Is paying ransom wrong if it saves lives? +- **Institutional Dysfunction:** Hospital's poor security practices contributed to crisis + +--- + +## Good Practices from Mission 1 to Apply + +### ✅ Concrete Stakes with Specific Numbers + +**Mission 1 Example:** "Operation Shatter will kill 42-85 people" + +**Mission 2 Application:** +- "X patients on life support with Y hours of backup power remaining" +- "Z critical medical records encrypted affecting ABC ongoing treatments" +- Specific ransomware demand amount (e.g., "2.5 Bitcoin = $87,000") + +### ✅ Villains as True Believers + +**Ghost (Ransomware Inc. operative) should:** +- Believe hospitals with poor security deserve consequences +- Have philosophy about "teaching resilience through adversity" +- Feel no remorse about patient risk ("acceptable cost of education") +- Refuse cooperation if caught (ideologically committed) +- Present coherent worldview in communications + +**NOT:** Sympathetic hacker who regrets their actions + +### ✅ Evidence Through Discovery + +**Don't just tell players about ransomware in dialogue. Let them find:** +- Ransomware deployment logs on compromised FTP server +- Internal hospital security audit showing ignored vulnerabilities +- Email chain where IT budget was repeatedly cut +- Ghost's manifesto document explaining ENTROPY philosophy +- Payment wallet analysis showing connection to other ENTROPY operations + +### ✅ Mid-Mission Moral Choice + +**Example:** Player discovers Marcus (IT admin) will be scapegoated for the breach, even though management ignored his security warnings. + +**Choice:** +- Warn Marcus privately (help innocent ally, complicate investigation) +- Plant evidence clearing Marcus (manipulate investigation, protect innocent) +- Focus on mission (Marcus faces consequences, mission smoother) + +### ✅ Closing Debrief Reflects Choices + +**Track with global variables:** +```json +"globalVariables": { + "paid_ransom": false, + "exposed_hospital_publicly": false, + "marcus_protected": false, + "systems_recovered": 0, + "patients_saved": 0, + "lore_collected": 0, + "ghost_traced": false +} +``` + +**Debrief acknowledges:** +- Ransom decision and outcome +- Systems recovery percentage +- Patient outcomes (lives saved/improved) +- Marcus's fate +- Hospital's security improvements (or lack thereof) +- Ghost's status (escaped/traced/captured) + +--- + +## Critical Decisions Needed Before Starting Stage 0 + +### 1. Guard Patrol Mechanics Specification + +**Question:** How do patrolling guards work mechanically? + +**Options:** +- **Option A:** Timed patrol routes (player must wait for guard to pass) +- **Option B:** Line-of-sight detection (avoid guard's vision cone) +- **Option C:** Noise-based detection (lockpicking alerts nearby guards) +- **Option D:** Combination of above + +**Recommendation:** Option A (timed patrols) for Mission 2 beginner difficulty. Simple to understand, teaches timing-based gameplay. Line-of-sight can be introduced in later missions. + +### 2. PIN Cracking Puzzle Design + +**Question:** What type of puzzle is the safe PIN cracking? + +**Options:** +- **Option A:** Mastermind-style logic puzzle (guess code, get feedback) +- **Option B:** Clue-based puzzle (find hints around environment) +- **Option C:** Mini-game (lockpicking variant with numbers) +- **Option D:** Combination (find some digits via clues, guess remainder) + +**Recommendation:** Option D (combination). Find 2-3 digits through environmental clues (Marcus's birthday on photo, hospital founding year on plaque), guess final digit(s). Balances investigation with puzzle-solving. + +### 3. Ransom Payment Consequences + +**Question:** What are the mechanical and narrative consequences of paying ransom? + +**Immediate:** +- **If paid:** Faster system recovery (positive), ENTROPY funded (negative), Ghost escapes (negative) +- **If not paid:** Slower recovery (negative), no ENTROPY funding (positive), opportunity to trace Ghost (positive) + +**Campaign (M6 Financial Investigation):** +- **If paid:** Clear cryptocurrency trail to follow, but more funds available to ENTROPY +- **If not paid:** Less clear financial trail, but ENTROPY has less operational funding + +**Recommendation:** Neither choice is "wrong." Each has trade-offs. Debrief acknowledges both paths as valid. + +### 4. Hospital Exposure Consequences + +**Question:** What happens if player exposes hospital's security failures publicly? + +**Immediate:** +- **If exposed:** Hospital reputation damaged, security improvements forced, Dr. Kim may lose job +- **If quiet:** Hospital reputation intact, security may not improve, Dr. Kim grateful + +**Campaign:** +- **If exposed:** Future medical facility missions more difficult (hospitals distrust SAFETYNET) +- **If quiet:** Better relationship with medical sector, but vulnerabilities persist + +**Recommendation:** Track for later missions. M10 could reference this choice (hospital security improved or not). + +--- + +## Development Timeline Estimate + +Based on Mission 1 development experience: + +| Stage | Description | Estimated Time | +|-------|-------------|----------------| +| Stage 0 | Scenario Initialization | 8-12 hours | +| Stage 1 | Narrative Structure | 6-8 hours | +| Stage 2 | Storytelling Elements | 8-10 hours | +| Stage 3 | Moral Choices | 4-6 hours | +| Stage 4 | Player Objectives | 6-8 hours | +| Stage 5 | Room Layout Design | 8-12 hours (includes guard patrols) | +| Stage 6 | LORE Fragments | 3-4 hours | +| Stage 7 | Ink Scripting | 12-16 hours (8 scripts) | +| Stage 8 | Review & Validation | 6-8 hours | +| Stage 9 | Scenario Assembly | 8-12 hours | +| **TOTAL DESIGN** | **All stages** | **69-96 hours** | + +**Implementation (Post-Design):** 70-90 hours (based on M1) + +**Total Mission 2 Development:** ~140-186 hours (design + implementation) + +--- + +## Success Criteria for Mission 2 + +### Educational Success + +- ✅ Players understand ransomware behavior and encryption +- ✅ Players learn incident response procedures +- ✅ Players practice ProFTPD exploitation techniques +- ✅ Players understand backup importance +- ✅ CyBOK areas (Malware, Incident Response, Cryptography) covered + +### Narrative Success + +- ✅ Players feel urgency without being overwhelmed +- ✅ Ransom choice feels genuinely difficult (no obvious "right" answer) +- ✅ Ghost is memorable antagonist with coherent philosophy +- ✅ Hospital setting feels authentic +- ✅ Connection to M1 (ENTROPY coordination) and M6 (financial trail) clear + +### Game Design Success + +- ✅ Guard patrol mechanics intuitive and fair +- ✅ PIN cracking puzzle satisfying without frustrating +- ✅ Lockpicking reinforced from M1 (players improve) +- ✅ Social engineering reinforced (Marcus interaction) +- ✅ Hybrid architecture (VM + ERB) seamless + +### Player Experience Success + +- ✅ 80%+ completion rate for minimal path +- ✅ Average playtime 50-70 minutes +- ✅ Positive feedback on moral choices +- ✅ Players remember Ghost and Ransomware Inc. +- ✅ Players feel prepared for Mission 3 mechanics + +--- + +## Risk Assessment + +### Risk 1: Guard Patrol Complexity + +**Risk:** Guard patrols too difficult for beginner mission +**Mitigation:** +- Simple, predictable patrol routes +- Tutorial section with Agent 0x99 explaining timing +- Forgiving detection (warning before consequences) +- Optional paths around guards for struggling players + +**Probability:** Medium +**Severity:** High (could frustrate new players) + +### Risk 2: PIN Puzzle Accessibility + +**Risk:** Players can't find clues or solve puzzle +**Mitigation:** +- Multiple clue types (visual, dialogue, documents) +- Progressive hint system via Agent 0x99 +- Optional brute-force path (try all combinations, time-consuming but works) + +**Probability:** Low +**Severity:** Medium + +### Risk 3: Ransom Choice Feels Forced + +**Risk:** Players feel railroaded into "correct" choice +**Mitigation:** +- Present both options neutrally +- Ghost's persuasion vs. Agent 0x99's concerns balanced +- Debrief validates both choices +- No achievement/score penalty for either choice + +**Probability:** Medium +**Severity:** High (undermines moral choice system) + +### Risk 4: Hospital Setting Feels Generic + +**Risk:** Hospital doesn't feel distinct from corporate office (M1) +**Mitigation:** +- Unique container types (medical supply cabinets) +- Hospital-specific atmosphere (PA announcements, medical equipment sounds) +- NPC dialogue references patient impact +- Visual design distinct from M1 + +**Probability:** Low +**Severity:** Medium + +--- + +## Next Steps: Starting Stage 0 + +### Immediate Actions (2-4 hours) + +1. **Review Stage 0 Prompt:** + - Read `story_design/story_dev_prompts/00_scenario_initialization.md` completely + - Understand hybrid architecture requirements + - Review Mission 1 Stage 0 documents as examples + +2. **Make Critical Decisions:** + - Finalize guard patrol mechanics specification + - Finalize PIN cracking puzzle design + - Confirm ransom and exposure consequence details + +3. **Gather Reference Materials:** + - SecGen "Rooting for a win" scenario details + - Ransomware Incorporated cell lore from universe bible + - Hospital layout references (if available) + +### Stage 0 Development (8-12 hours) + +4. **Write `00_scenario_initialization.md`:** + - Mission overview (tier, duration, CyBOK areas) + - ENTROPY cell selection (Ransomware Inc.) with justification + - Recommended narrative theme ("Hospital Crisis Response") + - Complete 3-act structure preview + - Key NPCs with roles + - LORE opportunities + - Victory conditions and failure states + - Educational objectives + +5. **Write `technical_challenges.md`:** + - Break Escape challenges (guards, PIN, lockpicking, social engineering) + - VM challenges (ProFTPD exploitation specifics) + - Challenge integration (physical + digital correlation) + - Difficulty scaling options + - Educational outcomes + +6. **Write `narrative_themes.md`:** + - Recommended theme deep dive (hospital setting) + - Full inciting incident (ransomware attack) + - Stakes across all levels (patient lives, hospital reputation, ENTROPY funding) + - Central conflict (time pressure + moral dilemma) + - Beat-by-beat narrative arc (all 3 acts expanded) + - NPC deep dives with voice examples + - Tone and atmosphere (urgent, sterile, morally complex) + +7. **Write `hybrid_architecture_plan.md`:** + - VM scenario role (ProFTPD exploitation for technical validation) + - ERB narrative content plan (ransom notes, hospital records, Ghost's communications) + - Dead drop system integration (VM flags unlock backup access) + - Objectives system integration (VM tasks + in-game tasks) + - In-game education approach (Agent 0x99 teaches incident response) + +### Deliverable Checklist for Stage 0 Completion + +- [ ] `README.md` - This document (already created) +- [ ] `00_scenario_initialization.md` - Complete initialization +- [ ] `technical_challenges.md` - Detailed challenge breakdown +- [ ] `narrative_themes.md` - Expanded narrative details +- [ ] `hybrid_architecture_plan.md` - VM + ERB integration plan +- [ ] Critical decisions documented and finalized +- [ ] Cross-references to M1 and M6 documented +- [ ] Ransomware Inc. philosophy integrated from universe bible +- [ ] SecGen scenario compatibility confirmed + +--- + +## Reference Documents + +### Essential Reading Before Stage 0 + +**Season 1 Arc:** +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/season_1_arc.md` (lines 178-239 for M2 details) +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/README.md` (hybrid architecture overview) +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/quick_reference.md` (M2 quick facts) + +**Mission 1 Examples:** +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m01_first_contact/README.md` +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m01_first_contact/initialization_summary.md` +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m01_first_contact/technical_challenges.md` +- `planning_notes/overall_story_plan/mission_initializations/m01_first_contact/narrative_themes.md` + +**Development Prompts:** +- `story_design/story_dev_prompts/README.md` (workflow overview) +- `story_design/story_dev_prompts/00_scenario_initialization.md` (Stage 0 template) + +**Universe Bible:** +- `story_design/universe_bible/03_entropy_cells/ransomware_incorporated.md` (if exists) +- `story_design/universe_bible/05_world_building/rules_and_tone.md` +- `story_design/universe_bible/10_reference/style_guide.md` + +**Technical Documentation:** +- `docs/ROOM_GENERATION.md` (for Stage 5 room design) +- `docs/OBJECTIVES_AND_TASKS_GUIDE.md` (for Stage 4 objectives) +- `docs/INK_INTEGRATION.md` (for Stage 7 Ink scripting) +- `docs/NPC_INTEGRATION_GUIDE.md` (for NPC placement) +- `docs/CONTAINER_MINIGAME_USAGE.md` (for safe PIN puzzle) +- `docs/LOCK_KEY_QUICK_START.md` (for lockpicking) + +--- + +## Questions for Consideration + +### Narrative Questions + +1. Why is the hospital particularly vulnerable to ransomware? (Budget cuts? Outdated systems? IT warnings ignored?) +2. What makes Ghost (Ransomware Inc. operative) believe in their philosophy? +3. How does this mission's tone differ from M1? (More urgent? More morally ambiguous?) +4. What specific patient stories make the stakes personal? + +### Mechanical Questions + +1. How many guards should patrol? (1-2 for beginner difficulty?) +2. What's the safe PIN complexity? (4-digit? 6-digit?) +3. Should there be a hard time limit, or just narrative urgency? +4. Can players be "caught" by guards, or just delayed? + +### Educational Questions + +1. What ransomware behaviors should players observe? +2. What incident response procedures should players practice? +3. How do we teach ProFTPD exploitation context without slowing narrative? +4. What's the balance between technical accuracy and playability? + +### Integration Questions + +1. How does the cryptocurrency payment connect to M6 mechanically? +2. Should M1 choices affect M2? (Reputation with institutions?) +3. How does Ghost's character connect to broader ENTROPY lore? +4. What clues about M3's Zero Day Syndicate can we plant? + +--- + +## Conclusion + +**Mission 2: "Ransomed Trust" is READY FOR STAGE 0 INITIALIZATION.** + +This document provides a complete foundation for beginning development based on: +- ✅ Season 1 arc mission breakdown +- ✅ Mission 1 good practices and lessons learned +- ✅ 9-stage development workflow understanding +- ✅ Hybrid architecture (VM + ERB) integration model +- ✅ Game systems integration requirements + +**Recommendation:** Proceed to Stage 0 with focus on: +1. Making stakes concrete (specific patient numbers, system failures) +2. Designing Ghost as true believer (Ransomware Inc. philosophy) +3. Creating morally complex ransom choice (no "right" answer) +4. Introducing guard patrols intuitively (beginner-friendly) +5. Connecting to M1 (ENTROPY coordination) and M6 (financial trail) + +**Next Step:** Begin writing `00_scenario_initialization.md` following the Stage 0 prompt template. + +--- + +**Document Version:** 1.0 +**Last Updated:** 2025-12-20 +**Status:** PREPARATION COMPLETE - READY FOR STAGE 0 + +**"When systems fail, who do you trust? When lives hang in the balance, what price is too high?"** + +---