I'm working on an idea for a somewhat convoluted "temporal displacement" story. There's no actual time travel, just communication between times. Before I can build up the details of the story, I need to have a good justification for the communication. It's being controlled by the most "downstream" (most future) of the group. Which of these reasons sounds the best?

Option A: He is a "last survivor" of some catastrophe. He's trying to change the past to prevent his future from happening. (This is the easiest to write, and the easiest to understand, but it's ripe for cliches.)

Option B: He is a powerful leader who is losing his power (reason to be determined), and he's manipulating the past in small ways to retain his position.

Advertisement

Option C: He is a powerful leader who is tweaking the past to assure that he gets to be where he is. (This makes him to be an anti-hero or possibly a villain. Not sure if that's a good way to go.)

Option D: He is a powerful leader who sees the mistakes he's made and the lost opportunities. He tweaks the past to improve his future—for everyone. (This intrigues me the most, but it's really easy to fall into lots of traps—such as becoming really preachy.)

Option Z: Suggest other options that are plausible and interesting. I'm coming at this idea "backwards" from how I normally do it. I usually have the foundation and build out from there, but in this case, the mechanics are what really interest me.