03 A Harrowing Escape
│
├── escape_choice = 1 ──► 04a The Swamp of Esten ──┐
│ │
└── escape_choice = 2 ──► 04b The Midlands ─────────┤
▼
05 The Oldwood
Both branches use the same protagonist level, starting gold, default schedule, primary/extra gameplay music, 40% carryover, shared exile story panel, recalled companions, victory objective, winter deadline, and final strategic conclusion. Their scenario-specific systems are intentionally very different.
Haldric, Burin, optional Lady Outlaw, recruit list, gold carryover
Minister Edren only on river route; Ruddry versus Ladoc; last_done
Engine systems
Core AI, standard objectives, default schedule, journey/death utilities
Fog and visibility filtering versus attack-triggered nested reserve events
Assets
Shared exile panel and music palette
One route story panel and one knight portrait each
Branching-effort analysis
Design interpretation. These branches are expensive where the player notices—map, faction, encounters, dialogue, and tactical rhythm—but economical in campaign architecture. They share the entry point, core cast, balance frame, and convergence point.
Authoring strategy
Benefit
Share campaign-state assumptions
Both files can recall the same companions and inherit the same recruit list.
Use a common ending destination
Later scenarios do not need two complete versions.
Give each route one signature system
The choice feels meaningful without requiring different core rules.
Record the completed route for the transition
Transition or journey logic can distinguish the completed branch before Oldwood clears the marker.