Writing Advice

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

It has to seem obvious, the reader has to feel as if he or she came close to the solution, without anything of the kind being true.

I think this is the most important thing that's been said in the entire mystery discussion.It's similar in concept to video game design, though slightly inverted - if the player blames the game rather than themselves for their failure, they will quickly become bored.

[Nuile the Paracosmic Tulpa]

Kathy Lynn Emerson, How to Write Killer Historical Fiction. Credit where it's due. I might have reworded and elaborated upon her point, but it was hers. My sentiments when I read it were the same. It's a brilliant observation and certes among the most important aspects of a mystery. I realized that's precisely what Agatha Christie always did. Whenever I reach the end of an Agatha Christie novel, I say "Of course! I should have known! It seems so obvious!" But it never really was. It was impeccably hidden. All the clues were there, but I--and I think I'm speaking for millions of people--never noticed most of them, or did not add them up correctly.There's no secret to a good mystery. Like a good mystery, writing a good mystery is complex; it's full of secrets. But this is definitely one of those secrets.From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

Of course, that tends to mean that you've got to give it a while to reread the book, or else you'll end up seeing all the things you missed early on, because you already know the answer.Then again, maybe re-reading a mystery before you've had time to forget it would be a good tool for seeing how it's done.

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

Of course, that tends to mean that you've got to give it a while to reread the book, or else you'll end up seeing all the things you missed early on, because you already know the answer.Then again, maybe re-reading a mystery before you've had time to forget it would be a good tool for seeing how it's done.

A mystery is never the same after it's solved - subsequent readings are usually focused more on finding all the hints and how they relate to the answer.Related to the current discussion, I just started watching LOST (Waaaay behind, I know ) and saw a lot of good execution for mystery. For one, there's so much going on that you don't know which mystery a clue might apply to. I also saw a good use of dramatic irony.I also learned a new trick: an audience might forget a potentially important hint if it's not emphasized and it's quickly followed by a major event or reveal. There were a couple instances where a character referenced a previous hint and I realized I had completely forgotten about it until know.

[Jean Valjean]

I like the mystery offered in BIONICLE. I don't necessarily think of the series as a whodunnit franchise, but it was a pleasure to revel in the enigma of Mata Nui back in the online games. In the first three years, mystery wasn't so much a plot element as a part of the narrative and the atmosphere, where it was used to enhance the atmosphere and keep the followers of the franchise fascinated and curious with the unknown. I think that's what I include in my IDES series, where I let bits of my world remain unknown for a long period of time as mysterious forces aid my characters.I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[Nuile the Paracosmic Tulpa]

Of course, that tends to mean that you've got to give it a while to reread the book, or else you'll end up seeing all the things you missed early on, because you already know the answer.Then again, maybe re-reading a mystery before you've had time to forget it would be a good tool for seeing how it's done.

A mystery is never the same after it's solved - subsequent readings are usually focused more on finding all the hints and how they relate to the answer.Related to the current discussion, I just started watching LOST (Waaaay behind, I know ) and saw a lot of good execution for mystery. For one, there's so much going on that you don't know which mystery a clue might apply to. I also saw a good use of dramatic irony.I also learned a new trick: an audience might forget a potentially important hint if it's not emphasized and it's quickly followed by a major event or reveal. There were a couple instances where a character referenced a previous hint and I realized I had completely forgotten about it until know.

I concur. A mystery is never a mystery when once it is solved; even if you possess a feeble memory and wait a few decades, you risk awaking a dormant memory and identifying the villain via recollection, conscious or subconscious, rather than deduction.

But in a writer's case, reading a novel over can be beneficial. Once you know the solution you will notice clues and red herrings, which can be most instructive. I've never done this myself, but now that I think about it, I should. Personally, I would do so with The Moonstone and Murder on the Orient Express.

To the community at large, I would appreciate your various opinions on this working opening.

It is with a sense of great honor and satisfaction that I take up my pen to lay before you the plenary and genuine facts regarding the recent feat performed by a certain prodigious sleuth. I also feel that in doing so I will militate justice upon this great man, of whose exploits the general public remains deplorably nescient, an inequity due entirely to the inherent ability of the press to derange and misdescribe information. Credit, however, where it is due; upon recognizing their own incapability, [insert undetermined newspaper here] came to me, not to offer me an opportunity to present the facts of the case, but to humbly implore me to deign to the deed of presenting those facts to the world. For this they have earned my utmost respect, and have allayed my fears that the mass media is wholly void of honorable newspapers.

My primary concern is the number of "big words" the paragraph contains. Plenary, nescient, the more common inequity, inherent, deign; a fair few commonplace but--how shall I put it?--sophisticated words, such as militate and derange. I fear this may scare off potential readers. What are your thoughts?

I would also like your opinion on a sense of time and place, as well as interest. When and where would you guess, from this paragraph, that this story is set? The title of the newspaper, of course, once selected, will at once help to identify place. And is it, perhaps, a rather insipid wise in which to begin?

From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

Edited January 5, 2012 by Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

To the community at large, I would appreciate your various opinions on this working opening.

It is with a sense of great honor and satisfaction that I take up my pen to lay before you the plenary and genuine facts regarding the recent feat performed by a certain prodigious sleuth. I also feel that in doing so I will militate justice upon this great man, of whose exploits the general public remains deplorably nescient, an inequity due entirely to the inherent ability of the press to derange and misdescribe information. Credit, however, where it is due; upon recognizing their own incapability, [insert undetermined newspaper here] came to me, not to offer me an opportunity to present the facts of the case, but to humbly implore me to deign to the deed of presenting those facts to the world. For this they have earned my utmost respect, and have allayed my fears that the mass media is wholly void of honorable newspapers.

My primary concern is the number of "big words" the paragraph contains. Plenary, nescient, the more common inequity, inherent, deign; a fair few commonplace but--how shall I put it?--sophisticated words, such as militate and derange. I fear this may scare off potential readers. What are your thoughts?

I would also like your opinion on a sense of time and place, as well as interest. When and where would you guess, from this paragraph, that this story is set? The title of the newspaper, of course, once selected, will at once help to identify place. And is it, perhaps, a rather insipid wise in which to begin?

From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

First things first - I found myself reading that in a British accent. I don't know exactly why. So without being given any further clues, I'd say it was set in England in a time period where top hats are stylish.As for the complicated intro - personally, I'd brave reading through the prolouge to see if the rest of the novel is written like that. If it was, I would stop reading. Mystery novels are puzzling enough without having to grab a dictionary every few paragraphs, and I'd probably miss major clues by being distracted by unfamiliar words.I'm also not a huge fan of intros (or conclusions) that either imply or outright state as fact that the book was written by an in-universe character. I don't have a good reason for this, it's just a personal preference.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

I really don't see why someone would have to run off to grab a dictionary when reading that. To me, none of the language is particularly obscure.It all depends on the reading-level you're writing for. If you're writing for children or pre-teens, you might want to change the language around. If you're writing for an older audience, it's perfectly fine.

[Nuile the Paracosmic Tulpa]

To the community at large, I would appreciate your various opinions on this working opening.

It is with a sense of great honor and satisfaction that I take up my pen to lay before you the plenary and genuine facts regarding the recent feat performed by a certain prodigious sleuth. I also feel that in doing so I will militate justice upon this great man, of whose exploits the general public remains deplorably nescient, an inequity due entirely to the inherent ability of the press to derange and misdescribe information. Credit, however, where it is due; upon recognizing their own incapability, [insert undetermined newspaper here] came to me, not to offer me an opportunity to present the facts of the case, but to humbly implore me to deign to the deed of presenting those facts to the world. For this they have earned my utmost respect, and have allayed my fears that the mass media is wholly void of honorable newspapers.

My primary concern is the number of "big words" the paragraph contains. Plenary, nescient, the more common inequity, inherent, deign; a fair few commonplace but--how shall I put it?--sophisticated words, such as militate and derange. I fear this may scare off potential readers. What are your thoughts?

I would also like your opinion on a sense of time and place, as well as interest. When and where would you guess, from this paragraph, that this story is set? The title of the newspaper, of course, once selected, will at once help to identify place. And is it, perhaps, a rather insipid wise in which to begin?

From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

First things first - I found myself reading that in a British accent. I don't know exactly why. So without being given any further clues, I'd say it was set in England in a time period where top hats are stylish.As for the complicated intro - personally, I'd brave reading through the prolouge to see if the rest of the novel is written like that. If it was, I would stop reading. Mystery novels are puzzling enough without having to grab a dictionary every few paragraphs, and I'd probably miss major clues by being distracted by unfamiliar words.I'm also not a huge fan of intros (or conclusions) that either imply or outright state as fact that the book was written by an in-universe character. I don't have a good reason for this, it's just a personal preference.

That's rather the sense I was going for, though in truth the story is set in a rural town in America during the early twentieth century. This is precisely what I was afraid of. And I do see your point. I have to keep in mind that, though I'm feigning writing from an earlier period, I am writing for a contemporary audience, and that generally means people with a vocabulary less comprehensive than you might have found a century ago.That is as you say, a matter of personal preference. I favor stories written in precisely this fashion, myself, such as The Moonstone, A Study in Scarlet, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, Some Danger Involved. It furnishes the stories with a more more affable, more "human" quality.

I really don't see why someone would have to run off to grab a dictionary when reading that. To me, none of the language is particularly obscure.It all depends on the reading-level you're writing for. If you're writing for children or pre-teens, you might want to change the language around. If you're writing for an older audience, it's perfectly fine.

Though it was not well exemplified by this excerpt, I have a bad habit of using a thesaurus to find the most obscure words I can to encourage my readers to expand their vocabularies; I've often been complimented on the fact, but that's in the case of online readers who can look up a word with a few clicks. In the case of a novel, even directed toward an adult audience, it might be more appropriately labelled "encouraging my readers to feel ignorant." I suppose a balance needs to be found; perhaps part of that is using unusual words in a context that makes the meaning clear. Another way is to use the same unusual words frequently--although not to the point of becoming irksome--throughout the story. From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

[Jean Valjean]

My advice is to not use a thesaurus except for in those cases when there's a certain word that you want to use but can't think of it. Sometimes I feel a certain word would most technically describe the thought I'm going for, and I have look up similar words on Thesaurus.com. Take, for example, if I wanted to say that the Declaration of Independence "legalized" America's war, but the best word that came to mind was "ordained".The other way I find the thesuaurs useful is when I want to avoid using a word twice in the same sentence or too often in a paragraph, which I believe is the most common reason for using a thesaurus. However, I try to use the most simple and direct word I can find, because otherwise it becomes obvious that I'm slipping in vocabulary on purpose.Here's my advice: whatever words and phrases come to your mind first are probably the right ones. Don't use a thesaurus unless you have to and let your natural vocabulary direct the narration. I take this philosophy from Stephen King and the great Mark Twain.Another thing you have to keep in mind is that if you try to include too many advanced words in one spot, none will stand out to the reader. Spread them out so that when one comes up the reader has time to take it in.-By the way, I've decided not to drive Brutus to the verge of killing Michelangelo in the first book. Instead I'm going to wait until the second book, where the situation seems to favor the Julius Caesar reference better. Part of my reasoning is that the first book is entitled IDES part I, implying that there's a second part, so the audience is going to assume that the story is heading toward an Ides of March analogue in a future part of the series. I'll end the references to Julius Caesar with the second book, when it becomes clear that the title is actually the name of the universe (Interdimensional Economic System).By the way, the awesome thing is that sophomores in my school are putting up a campaign divided between Julius Caesar and Marcus Brutus. They're setting up all sort of campaign ads throughout the school trying to influence the school staff who's supposed to vote. Pretty interesting. I'm all in favor of Brutus.I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

Honestly, with a name like Brutus, everybody's going to be expecting him to kill somebody. It's quite possible that, in the eyes of some readers, this will go beyond a reference into the territory of directly lifting a scenario from someone else's work.

[Jean Valjean]

Actually, I'm a history nerd and the Roman Empire always interested me. To me that's not lifting directly from another person's work, and taking direct inspiration from history has never seemed wrong. I've seen plenty of good works with blatant inspiration from history.However, Brutus actually doesn't kill anyone. I just figured that there would be some thematic parallels between the Brutus in my story and the Brutus in the year 44 BC. The reason I gave him that name was purely because I liked it, and my policy with names is that I give my fictional characters the ones that I know I wouldn't end up naming my own future children. There's only one simple parallel between the two Brutus, in that they both betray a friend, but it' not in the same way. The chemistry is altogether very different. His real inspiration was from A.K. Applegate's Jake from the Animorphs series, who was my first inspiration for characters of great leadership potential. Many other characters, such as Spock, Caesar from Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Superman have inspired me for this character. Overall, I decided to give him the name of a historical leader I admire. Now as it happens he betrays a friend for the greater good, but I believe that was already in there, because many of his inspirations had to go through the same test (especially his first inspiration, Jake).Now as it happened, the name of my universe happened to be the IDES, and I named my story after the universe, so it all seemed to fit together in a coincidental way. It gives the audience something to expect for a little while, but it's a red herring. The rest of the series is inspired a little more by the Crusades, though it's not a complete retelling. After all, Julius believed Brutus to be his illegitimate son, considering that his mother, Servilia, have been Julius' lover when he was younger. But alas, no such room in my story.Though come to think of it, it would be awesome to write a drama about such a scandal, were it real.I appreciate your concern, but I also understand that from the outside looking in it is always difficult for someone to make an accurate forecast of what the weather is really like inside the brainstorming mind. My story has and will continue to take on an atmosphere of its own.I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post. Edited January 10, 2012 by Tron Paul

[Takatu]

I have found it more difficult than I thought to express my reasoning behind some writing decisions I've tried to explain to the one person I trust enough to give such details. Definitely hear you there. That being said, I love history, even if it's made up history (I can't tell you how many hours I've spent in Skyrim reading in-game books that have no effect on the game otherwise). Go for it.I'm trying to flesh out my protagonist a bit. I guess I shouldn't be surprised it's more difficult than my villain, I've always shown more interest in the bad guys. When I was a kid, Darth Vader was by far the coolest part of Star Wars (and still is, darn it). Still, I realize everyone likes an underdog story, but I'm trying to avoid the whole "random stable boy ends up having a better chance of saving the world from evil than trained soldiers" plot. In a way it'll turn into more of an underdog story due to unfortunate circumstances, but meantime my hero does have some kind of combat/military training. Probably not an exceptional amount, but enough to keep him alive for the most part.But I digress a bit. His role in society and physical capabilities are pretty much good to go, just trying to make him more of a person. Heroes are hard, gotta have him or her be someone the readers will look up to or admire to some extent, but have them flawed enough to struggle and learn and be at least somewhat relatable to the reader. What do you guys think, what qualities do you like to see in your protagonists?

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

I have found it more difficult than I thought to express my reasoning behind some writing decisions I've tried to explain to the one person I trust enough to give such details. Definitely hear you there. That being said, I love history, even if it's made up history (I can't tell you how many hours I've spent in Skyrim reading in-game books that have no effect on the game otherwise). Go for it.I'm trying to flesh out my protagonist a bit. I guess I shouldn't be surprised it's more difficult than my villain, I've always shown more interest in the bad guys. When I was a kid, Darth Vader was by far the coolest part of Star Wars (and still is, darn it). Still, I realize everyone likes an underdog story, but I'm trying to avoid the whole "random stable boy ends up having a better chance of saving the world from evil than trained soldiers" plot. In a way it'll turn into more of an underdog story due to unfortunate circumstances, but meantime my hero does have some kind of combat/military training. Probably not an exceptional amount, but enough to keep him alive for the most part.But I digress a bit. His role in society and physical capabilities are pretty much good to go, just trying to make him more of a person. Heroes are hard, gotta have him or her be someone the readers will look up to or admire to some extent, but have them flawed enough to struggle and learn and be at least somewhat relatable to the reader. What do you guys think, what qualities do you like to see in your protagonists?

Hmm, protagonists are definitely difficult. I have three major protagonists at this point (one is in a completely different time period). The first two aren't even trying to save the world - they're just trying to stay alive after a scouting mission goes wrong. I think that makes their personality a bit easier to develop, because the entire story is how they react to the situation they've been thrust into. Actually, they both wind up going insane to some degree...The other one I'm working on is harder to develop, actually because of his personality. He's basically a slacker - he has no motivation to do anything interesting in his life, and he just kind of drifted into a legendary situation. He's also got the whole long-lost hereditary super-power thing going on (cliche, but it works), but he just tries to distance himself from events and go about his life.Specifically, I'm having a tough time balancing him between realistically consistent and annoying. At a certain point, readers are going to want to strangle a main character who doesn't want to do anything.

[Takatu]

Oh yeah, I'm all for a team of protagonists, if anything that's easier to write about than a single, lone hero (and tends to be more fun, I think). I have around five protagonists directly involved in most of what's going on, but like Bionicle, there's one that's a little more important to the rest -- in this case, his birth is directly involved with my villain, so he's going to have an overall greater impact than the others.I feel like having your protagonists thrust into a bad situation is practically a staple of fiction, at least fairly lengthy fiction. That's not bad at all, one X-Men writer put it best when he said (paraphrasing due to language) that good fiction, especially with teams of good guys, is taking a bunch of basically likeable individuals and throwing them into situations that make their lives royally suck.

[Jean Valjean]

I tried the rout of an utterly unremarkable person making no difference in the world, and I also went to the point of making him so flawed that he was unlikable. I relate to both your issues. Since then I've learned to base my stories a little more off of fairy tales. In fairy tales the protagonist is usually a normal person from every-day life (he or she is a peasant and there's typically something about their family structure that makes you like them, whether they have a loving family, a wicked family, or a missing family, but altogether it's an important part of their background), but there's also something that enables them to rise above everyone else, be it that they discover something important or because they had a special talent all along.This is something I've thought about religiously. Let me put this issue into the context of my own story.First, I have two main characters in the first book who are trained soldiers. One is Buzzy, who has been in the military since he was 8. The other is me (I plan on going into the military). There are other characters who are soldiers as well. I know that the stable-boy is a good archetype in literature, but at the same time I think that the soldier is one too. I derive this from the other age-old archetype of a "knight in shining armor". I admire the military. I consider the soldiers of my country and its allies to be real-life heroes. I don't want to disrespect them in my series. My realistic perspective is that soldiers have a better chance of surviving in a danger zone than a normal person.Yet, my series isn't normal. Even the "normal" people are larger than life. That's the nature of romanticized literature. The true main characters of the first book are Brutus, Michael, and Nixon. Here's how I view them as protagonists in terms of this discussion:Brutus Nobody: My idea here was to base him off of strong leaders. I've listed earlier what literary sources have inspired him. However, I hope I can find further inspiration on leadership to help create this character. The idea is that even though he has modest backgrounds and only ever aspired to be a carpenter, he was a born leader. Not only does he have natural inner strength, but I also wanted him so develop something beyond what he starts out with. First, even though he was born with leadership abilities, I think of them as being dormant at the beginning of the series, visible but not being actively engaged. I want to see him develop personally. Yet, I understand the need for more than just that in such a large premise. So I make sure that he attains something that makes him "super" along the way. In particular, I imagine that he's stuck in a place with gravity 8 times greater than Earth's, and in time he overcomes it, and goes even further when Nixon introduces him to a fruit that gives him strength. I decided to revert to one of the most basic, archaic symbols of heroism is physical strength. I think it works well for this character.Nixon Zweifel: How do you make a teenage girl strong and essential to the end-result of the story? It's not as easy, considering that I decided that she wouldn't become "super" in the story. Although there is the fact of her unnatural good luck when she needs luck the most. What makes her special is that there are supernatural forces with a keen eye on her. It's hidden in the background, but the curtain is lifted for a moment when she has a vision that takes her away from the gaze of Quarr, and she sees what in the future we will earn is Professor White in the form of Dreamcatcher. During this vision, she is taken outside of the limits of our universe, even outside of the limits of time, and she catches glimpses of crucial things. For the rest of the story she has the benefit of having a vague idea of things that no one else can know about, even the seemingly all-knowing Craytus. For example, she knows of the fruit that can grant Brutus strength.So basically, I use another archetype here: the character who has a vision. It's another classic method of storytellers to set their main character apart from everyone else. In many ways, she's the only person who can save the world because of this.Michelangelo Zweifel: The archetype that he starts off as: the shy person who hasn't seen much of the world, let alone a space opera. I also use the archetype of a sad family life in the form of a divorce. Other classic elements implemented into him are a longing for something greater in life, the motivation of revenge, physical suffering, and a mix of abilities and severe disabilities. At once what sets him apart from the other characters as an essential element of the plot is that he can translate nuadine and see through the eyes of others, though these abilities came at a price. He suffered pain 53 times greater than what the human brain is neurologically capable of, and before even that he had his eyes burned to ashes. My first priority was to make the audience want to like him. My second objective was to make him useful for the story and do what no one else could do. Even though other people could speak nuadine and see through the eyes of others, what makes him special are his connections, so he has enough opportunity to change things. Then, later on in the series, Michael also becomes one of the largest stockholders in the General Astronomics, one of the largest corporations in the IDES, making him very powerful and influential.That's what I think is important when it comes the main characters in stories like ours. We want the story to work out so that only the protagonists could have solved it. In order to do that they have to have the right opportunities. The way I see it for my main characters, Nixon is the one person who knows enough to save the world. Though often she can fend for herself, Brutus is the only person who can ensure that she can survive. Yet, Brutus could never have lead a resistance if Michael hadn't translated for him and otherwise served as his agent.What it comes to finding out what makes the character special throughout a series, however, I think that sometimes it can't always be obvious. At first you might think that Luke Skywalker was special because he had the force, but it was more than that. What really made it possible for him and only him to resolve the conflict of the story was his relationship as son of Darth Vader. I think that there there should always be one core thing about a character that makes them special at the beginning of the story and continues unchanging to the very end. Nixon comes across many opportunities that make her special in many ways, but the heart of her place in the narrative is that she is one of only a few people who have seen Professor White. Brutus enjoys many positions, but what makes him special is his leadership and ability to bring together allies. It's hidden, but what makes Michael special is his unique relationship with Death.This is by no means discusses everything that can be said about the archetype of the "unlikely hero", nor have I even said everything about the subtopic of "opportunities and especial traits". I think that this subject should almost invite a contrasting discussion on "likely heroes", which would make for a very healthy overall talk on developing protagonists.- I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

It all depends on what I need from the character - bugger what I want with them, that's not the key issue. What I want is going to be tied up in sentimentality, and could get in the way of telling a good story. The only people I need to be concerned about wanting things from are the readers - do I want them to love or hate the protagonist? Envy or pity? Do I want to get impressionable teenage girls swooning over a character, or do I want to inspire insipid blog posts about how such-and-such protagonist doesn't deserve whatever they've got because they don't look and act in a way the blogger thinks is "romantic"?A better way of explaining things than insulting potential readers, of course, is to use examples. There's a character I've made - haven't done much with him yet, but he's there in his setting - named Lenny (might change it to Lemmy) Karls (might switch the K with a C, might make it Carlson). He's the protagonist, and in many cases the closest thing his story has to a hero, but I don't want the reader to precisely like him - maybe envy him a little, or have a bit of grudging respect for him, and certainly I hope they find him funny, but I'd rather they weren't actually fond of the fellow, at least not when they first get to know him.To that end, I crafted his personality into someone who, without any special powers (now might be a good time to mention that Lenny's a sun god), would simply be considered a mean-spirited, awful person, and left there. Lenny is spiteful, lazy, refuses to commit to anything that would force him to deal closely with people (he's actually uncomfortable with people nearly to the point of phobia, but that's not the point), and uses his status as a sun god to get whatever he wants - he hasn't paid his taxes in years because the tax-man is aware enough of the eternal darkness that would follow him forcing the issue with Lenny.And yet, to his annoyance, Lenny is forced time and again to save people (not specific ones usually, just people in general) from other powerful people, because he is well aware that, just as he keeps the mortals supplied with sunlight, they keep him supplied with many of the amenities he's gotten rather used to. It's not like the fondness that other important characters in this story have for humanity, he's just fond of running water and electricity.The plan for the readers' feelings is that the immediate reaction to Lenny is that he's an awful person, and the very first time he's confronted in-story with a rogue god, the readers are rooting for the rogue god. As the story progresses, more sympathetic elements of Lenny's personality should begin to emerge, keeping the readers from completely hating him, but I don't think I ever want him to become a fully sympathetic protagonist - characters like Lenny only really work, I think, if, while it's possible to not hate him, it is completely impossible to love the character.

[(Daedalus)]

*Incoming Transmission*In one of the stories brewing in the unclear vat that is my mind, I had a group of teenagers on a planet being populated by us humans. The planet isn't populated by a lot of people; there are about two major cities in each of the six distinct climate regions (the large continent populated by the humans is based a little off Mata-Nui, even though story has nothing to do with Bionicle). The teenagers were with a small group of people that escaped from a city that was attacked by a private military group that was taking over the major cities (I'm still working on all that; I don't want to make it cliche). Eventually, all that's left of the group is the teenagers.My original idea was that this group of teenagers was super lucky and somehow managed to rally some rebels and they overthrow the private military group. Unfortunately, I couldn't do that in a way that wasn't absurd. So then I thought, why not just make these teenagers wander around trying to survive?The idea took off, and the story began to form. Basically, this small group of teenagers is on the run from the military group. The military wants to get rid of them because if people find out a group of teenagers got away from them, the people might try to usurp the military. But in keeping the people from knowing, they can't send a large army out after the teenagers because people will notice and questions will be asked. But these teenagers aren't fighters, and they are slowly killed off.I chose three that survive the longest: a sixteen year old boy named Mikhail (he's not Russian, his mom just liked the name), a sixteen year old girl named Julie, and a twelve year old girl named Katie. I chose these to be the primary characters of the majority of the story. I was then going to have them do something crazy and unwittingly kill the leader of the military group, but again, I found this too absurd. So in the end, I just decided that their primary goal would be to survive. I found that this proved much more believable.Of course, I'm still working on the details, and there's an aspect of the story I still can't decide if I should include. I want to have a benevolent entity in the background (inspired by but slightly different than the Illusive Man from Mass Effect 2) that doesn't ever act directly, but through other people. I don't want it to seem like there's something super mysterious going on in the background, though, because I don't want to detract from the feel of the main characters' situation. I don't think it will, because the "benevolent entity" will only be in a few brief portions of the story, but I want to be careful.*End Transmission*

[Jean Valjean]

I find your situation interesting, Daedalus. I have something similar going on, which I've mentioned before, with a character in the background called Professor White. I've described him as a supernatural being, but actually he's more like a being who lives in a billion dimensions of space and also one billion dimensions of time. Like you, I intend the audience to only vaguely know of his existence. The way I get the desired effect is for there to be several mysterious things throughout the books that may or may not be connected, and several of them are signs of him.Actually, asides from the sign in the first book that came through Nixon's vision, he's also the figure known as Santa Claus who appears to various key characters on every Christmas Even with gifts that will help them with their quests.Back onto the subject on the making of main characters: while I put a considerable amount of time elaborating on the idea of the "unlikely hero" and "likely hero". Heroism aside, I think that there's also more going on than just how capable the main character is of resolving the main conflict. Rather I think that their ability to drive the story forward is equally important, as well as their likability. For example, in Jurassic Park there are plenty of characters who could have survived, but regardless of how capable a character is, I would have preferred watching nobody over Lex and Tim, the two adorable grandchildren of John Hammond. This applies also to the hero in "saving the world" and "making a difference" scenarios, when it has to work with the character's plausibility as a hero.-Anyways, I'm still thinking of possible degrees to take, though it might take some additional thought. I've thought about theology, philosophy, history, art history, journalism, and most recently astrophysics. On the subject of astrophysics, I might mention that in my series I love classic space battles. I don't know how many of you people remember the outdated plot I posted in the old forums, but I recall that it was terrible and it was universally panned on this topic. I think one of the reasons that it was a mess was because it was set on a planet and immersed in a specific culture. I don't think that's true to my series and doesn't get it off to the right start (because the first book should be a classic example of the series's premise). I think now I have something that's a more suitable origin for my series and better captures the immortal elements of the fantastic.Again, I'm reminding myself of Jurassic Park. Dinosaurs have long been something that have always help captured the imagination and curiosity since childhood. There's something magical about them, something deeply sentimental. I want to write a book that makes me feel like a child again. I think that Grant actually compared the wonder of dinosaurs with the wonder ofthe stars himself in Jurassic Park III: "There are two kinds of boys: those who want to be astronomers and those who want to be astronauts". Astrology and the mysteries of space have long fascinated me and I think that it's a resonant cord that I want to strike in my readers.- I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[Takatu]

Oh I agree with that, the protagonist's capability of solving the main issue is just a small facet. And I get what you mean about likeability, people love to see their favorite characters make it out in the end, but at the same time, that likeability is a useful tool in determining who to kill off. This depends entirely on the overall type of story it is, of course. But if you really want the reader to feel an emotional impact by killing a character, you're best bet is to get rid of one that people like. For example, Harry Potter: Who didn't feel amost betrayed when Fred died? When I read the book for the first time, I actually yelled, "NOOOO!!!" at the pages, lol. Of course, you could also take the George R. R. Martin/Game of Thrones route and tick everyone off. But I digress again. Been bouncing ideas off of what you guys have been saying though, thanks!

[Jean Valjean]

Oh my: Fred. You hit the hammer on the head, and I reacted about as passionately as you did, only I took it out by crying. Siriius and Dumbledore were dramatic, sure, but out of all the deaths in the series and all the bodies listed in the Battle of Hogwarts, Fred stood out to me as the tragedy of the series. My sister, being weird, didn't feel that way at all, and I feel alone by not listing Dobey's death as the saddest part, which it seems most people do. I'm a little comforted by your like feelings.I appreciate people who can pull off tragic deaths. I think that it's a good sign of just how engaging characters are when readers can be genuinely sad that they died. Not that I would kill off a good character just to prove the point. I think very hard on whether or not a character should be killed off. Sometimes it can be a tough call and you really have to know what the story calls for. Personally, if I wanted the reader to be sad, I tend to kill a character's emotions, not their bodies. For example, I love the look of regret on John Hammond's face at the end of Jurassic Park. Cinematically, it was more powerful than killing him off, as in the book.I really should write my official review of that film in the "Last Film You Watched" topic. Speaking of which, I just learned that a Jurassic Park 4 is coming out! I just hope that it has more of a plot than the monstrosity (literally) that was Jurassic Park III. I mean really, the last one was just a survival film. I just want to see Lex and Tim again.- I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[Takatu]

Yeah, you have to be very careful with character deaths. I find that I rarely use a death for tragedy, simply because I've seen more stuff in movies and TV and books that don't involve death that hit me on an emotional level. Definitely recommend never killing someone purely for shock value, seems cheap; closest I get to that is if I have a villain kill someone in a very dismissive way, and that's less for shock than it is establishing the lengths my villain will go to in a single scene.

[Legolover-361]

I've always found heroes and villains hard to develop. I guess it's because it's impossible for me to write a story in black and white -- it has to be shades of gray (even very dark gray and very light gray is fine), because otherwise it won't be realistic. Human nature is flawed by definition; even the cruelest, most insane real-life villains have done things for reasons (though in some cases, for example, Hitler's, the reasons didn't make much sense). I guess my trouble is that I want to make every character relatable.That's one of the reasons I like Bionicle's mercenary group the Dark Hunters: They're cruel, they're vicious, but it's all for the sake of earning money, and I'm sure we can all appreciate how hard it can be to make a living. Even the Brotherhood of Makuta in Bionicle is relatable: They aren't all bad, they're just misguided; after millennia upon millennia of working for the sake of the Matoran Universe and just as many years of being looked down upon, they just got frustrated at the lack of thankfulness.* * *In other news, I'm trying to think of a story premise for an annual contest Amazon is holding. You know how Barnes & Noble's PubIt! allows you to upload and sell e-books? (If you don't know, check it out.) Well, Amazon has a similar program: Kindle Direct Publishing. In relation to encouraging authors to self-publish, they're holding the Breakthrough Novel Award competition annually; to enter, budding authors must submit:1. Manuscript: your novel, which must be between 50,000 and 150,000 words2. Exceprt: the first 3,000 to 5,000 words of your story, excluding any table of contents, foreward, acknowledgements, etc.3. Pitch: a pitch of your manuscript, consisting of up to 300 wordsI'm a little too late to write a novel this year, but I still desperately want to participate next year even if I don't end up winning -- the Grand Prize is a publishing contract and, upon fulfillment of the contract, fifteen thousand dollars (which is a large sum for me ).My main problem is creating a premise that can carry its weight through at least 50,000 words. As of now, I have nothing. Granted, I do have a year, but I want to get something done now so I have time to edit. Do you guys generally think of a story idea first, a question to answer, a genre you want to write in, a title, or something else?

Edited January 14, 2012 by Legolover-361

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

BAH! I had a nice long reply typed up, then I hit the thumb (back) button on my mouse.Let's see, what was I going to say... Fred's death wasn't all that tragic to me because somebody told me about it before I read the book, so Dobby was more shocking to me.I also try to avoid main character deaths, and even when I do have to kill off a main character (it's a war, after all), I try to keep a couple "oh, he's not actually dead" loopholes on standby. There should always be a cost to a character's "death", though, even if it isn't permanent - maybe they come back as a villain, or a hundred years later so everyone they know is dead.

Do you guys generally think of a story idea first, a question to answer, a genre you want to write in, a title, or something else?

It's a story idea for me. A story concept usually happens like this:> Looking out car window, bored> Thinks "Hey, what if *crazy idea* happened right now?"> Runs through story idea in my head with myself as the main character> Realizes it's a decent concept> Invents new characters to deal with the situation (I try to avoid self-insertion)> (Usually) invents a fantasy world because real-world physics, culture, and history are inconvenient for my story - plus readers would definitely notice that I constantly make incorrect assumptions about all three.Sometimes the formula differs when I already have a world - then I'll think of a genre to integrate. So far for Eons, I've got standard fantasy (not quite medieval, there's a difference), medieval fantasy plus a bit of Western (it works! Check out the "Hidden Village" from Zelda: Twilight Princess), semi-steampunk, and sci-fi. For Bionicle, I've tried to mimic the feel of countless other movies, books, and games, short of doing an actual crossover. (Heck, sometimes I've done a crossover too

[Takatu]

Yeah, I get story ideas first. I guess genre works hand-in-hand with it though, because what kind of idea it is usually ends up defining what genre(s) it'll be. Not always, but sometimes.Definitely agree with the black-and-white comment, for the most part, gray is much more interesting. Although in what I'm writing, I guess it's a little closer to black and gray, or very very dark gray and gray. Even so, one of the things I'm exploring it what exactly defines "evil," since what my villain is doing he sees as justice.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

For me it wavers between the story idea and the setting. Sometimes I'll build a whole world out of boredom, and then realize that a story would fit pretty well in there, while other times I've got the story first - usually, the ones that start with the story are ones that take place in some version of our own world.As for character deaths, I've gotten to the point where I seriously think about decisions like that before I make them, so there's no need for loopholes unless I'm definitely intending to use them - and if I decide later that I don't want the character dead after all, the thing I'm most likely to do is just go back and edit their death out. If I just want them to appear dead for a bit, I've got to be very careful about that, as it's been done in so many stupid ways it's no longer funny to point out the stupid ones (so instead, I'll direct you to Mr. Boddy's death in the movie Clue).

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

Definitely agree with the black-and-white comment, for the most part, gray is much more interesting. Although in what I'm writing, I guess it's a little closer to black and gray, or very very dark gray and gray. Even so, one of the things I'm exploring it what exactly defines "evil," since what my villain is doing he sees as justice.

I agree and disagree. I think that it's definitely good to have good and evil - but the good guys need to be tempted, and the bad guys need to have motivations. The "I'm going to take over the world because I'm evil" villain has been overused and they never really were interesting. That said, a purely evil villain with no clear backstory or drive allows the heroes to take the spotlight, so there's reasons to go either way.

As for character deaths, I've gotten to the point where I seriously think about decisions like that before I make them, so there's no need for loopholes unless I'm definitely intending to use them - and if I decide later that I don't want the character dead after all, the thing I'm most likely to do is just go back and edit their death out. If I just want them to appear dead for a bit, I've got to be very careful about that, as it's been done in so many stupid ways it's no longer funny to point out the stupid ones (so instead, I'll direct you to Mr. Boddy's death in the movie Clue).

I haven't seen the movie Clue, but I've seen a play based on it... is that where Mr. Boddy actually "died" twice in the beginning, but you didn't find out he wasn't dead the first time until near the end?I'll definitely have to think more about my major "deaths". One character is definitely not dead - maybe I should make that obvious. The other one - maybe I'll just *wince* leave him dead. It depends on how much I like him at the end. Maybe I'll just let him lose a leg or something.Although I really like the idea of a character interrupting his funeral after realizing he can't have possibly died in the way described...Hmm...

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

Yes. The first time, he effectively pretended to be dead (either helped by the incompetence of the Professor or hidden because the Professor wanted to finish the job, depending on which ending you're going with), and then the second time he got up to leave after he thought everyone had left, and was killed by somebody who had hidden in the room with him, with various motives depending on which ending you're going with.

[Nuile the Paracosmic Tulpa]

Oh I agree with that, the protagonist's capability of solving the main issue is just a small facet. And I get what you mean about likeability, people love to see their favorite characters make it out in the end, but at the same time, that likeability is a useful tool in determining who to kill off. This depends entirely on the overall type of story it is, of course. But if you really want the reader to feel an emotional impact by killing a character, you're best bet is to get rid of one that people like. For example, Harry Potter: Who didn't feel amost betrayed when Fred died? When I read the book for the first time, I actually yelled, "NOOOO!!!" at the pages, lol. Of course, you could also take the George R. R. Martin/Game of Thrones route and tick everyone off

I agree absolutely. Killing off someone who your readers actually care about makes it much more dramatic and emotional than killing off Unnamed Person #5. However, this has to be perpetrated carefully. If you're going to kill off an important character it has to be dramatic, they should die like a hero; if they random trip and stumble into a deep pit and break their neck, that's just melodramatic. To use your example, J.K. Rowling went overboard killing important characters in Deathly Hallows, without providing any drama to the deaths. Granted, it also evinced the gravity of the situation--there's a war going on, of course people are going to die anti-climactically. But that doesn't mean your reader will feel any less cheated.

I've always found heroes and villains hard to develop. I guess it's because it's impossible for me to write a story in black and white -- it has to be shades of gray (even very dark gray and very light gray is fine), because otherwise it won't be realistic. Human nature is flawed by definition; even the cruelest, most insane real-life villains have done things for reasons (though in some cases, for example, Hitler's, the reasons didn't make much sense). I guess my trouble is that I want to make every character relatable.That's one of the reasons I like Bionicle's mercenary group the Dark Hunters: They're cruel, they're vicious, but it's all for the sake of earning money, and I'm sure we can all appreciate how hard it can be to make a living. Even the Brotherhood of Makuta in Bionicle is relatable: They aren't all bad, they're just misguided; after millennia upon millennia of working for the sake of the Matoran Universe and just as many years of being looked down upon, they just got frustrated at the lack of thankfulness.* * *In other news, I'm trying to think of a story premise for an annual contest Amazon is holding. You know how Barnes & Noble's PubIt! allows you to upload and sell e-books? (If you don't know, check it out.) Well, Amazon has a similar program: Kindle Direct Publishing. In relation to encouraging authors to self-publish, they're holding the Breakthrough Novel Award competition annually; to enter, budding authors must submit:1. Manuscript: your novel, which must be between 50,000 and 150,000 words2. Exceprt: the first 3,000 to 5,000 words of your story, excluding any table of contents, foreward, acknowledgements, etc.3. Pitch: a pitch of your manuscript, consisting of up to 300 wordsI'm a little too late to write a novel this year, but I still desperately want to participate next year even if I don't end up winning -- the Grand Prize is a publishing contract and, upon fulfillment of the contract, fifteen thousand dollars (which is a large sum for me ).My main problem is creating a premise that can carry its weight through at least 50,000 words. As of now, I have nothing. Granted, I do have a year, but I want to get something done now so I have time to edit. Do you guys generally think of a story idea first, a question to answer, a genre you want to write in, a title, or something else?

I agree absolutely. There's no such thing as black and white; it's always gray. But sometimes it can be black or white with just a splash of gray; sometimes it can be entirely median. Every hero has darkness in their heart; every villain has light in their heart. Gray deepens character, lends them vitality. As you say, nobody does something without reason. To quote Hercule Poirot, to say someone is plain evil is "merely unintelligent and stupid." Everything they do is logical, "given their twisted view."And I do not think that it is a trouble to want to make every character relatable; rather a gift. Well, I guess the ability to do so is a gift; the desire to do so is a noble dream. But that does not mean the ability cannot go hand-in-hand with the desire; or that the former can be developed from the latter.Thank you for mentioning this. There's no way I'll be participating this year, but I'm in the process right now of writing a novel that should end up qualifying; and I might just end up entering. Fifteen thousand dollars, as an advance for a novel, is a profusion of money. But if one can manage to beat every other entrant, that one certainly deserves it.I generally come up with a story idea first; in the case, however, of the aforementioned novel, the genre came first and the main details just dawned on me soon thereafter.From the desk of Nuile: Lunatic Wordsmith

[Takatu]

Oh I agree with that, the protagonist's capability of solving the main issue is just a small facet. And I get what you mean about likeability, people love to see their favorite characters make it out in the end, but at the same time, that likeability is a useful tool in determining who to kill off. This depends entirely on the overall type of story it is, of course. But if you really want the reader to feel an emotional impact by killing a character, you're best bet is to get rid of one that people like. For example, Harry Potter: Who didn't feel amost betrayed when Fred died? When I read the book for the first time, I actually yelled, "NOOOO!!!" at the pages, lol. Of course, you could also take the George R. R. Martin/Game of Thrones route and tick everyone off

I agree absolutely. Killing off someone who your readers actually care about makes it much more dramatic and emotional than killing off Unnamed Person #5. However, this has to be perpetrated carefully. If you're going to kill off an important character it has to be dramatic, they should die like a hero; if they random trip and stumble into a deep pit and break their neck, that's just melodramatic. To use your example, J.K. Rowling went overboard killing important characters in Deathly Hallows, without providing any drama to the deaths. Granted, it also evinced the gravity of the situation--there's a war going on, of course people are going to die anti-climactically. But that doesn't mean your reader will feel any less cheated.

Eh, I agree to an extent. The death certainly has to have some important impact, but dramatic deaths can very easily not work. You have to be very careful, if you drag it out for even a couple seconds (or in this case, words/sentences) too long, it's a little too dramatic. No need to get Shakespearian about it. I actually had no problem with the way J.K. Rowling handled the last book, it's actually my favorite in the series, and I would have felt cheated if she didn't go to such lengths with deaths. In situations like that -- pretty much pure chaos, which can be really fun to write -- sudden death I think are the way to go. I don't think she undermined Fred's death at all, since it clearly stayed with Harry pretty much through the end of the book (as well as all the other friends that died in that battle). So at least she didn't kind of brush it off the page after it happened.EDIT: I lol'd, this conversation looks like Christmas. XD Edited January 16, 2012 by Takatu

[WriterofReapers]

In other news, I'm trying to think of a story premise for an annual contest Amazon is holding. You know how Barnes & Noble's PubIt! allows you to upload and sell e-books? (If you don't know, check it out.) Well, Amazon has a similar program: Kindle Direct Publishing. In relation to encouraging authors to self-publish, they're holding the Breakthrough Novel Award competition annually; to enter, budding authors must submit:1. Manuscript: your novel, which must be between 50,000 and 150,000 words2. Exceprt: the first 3,000 to 5,000 words of your story, excluding any table of contents, foreward, acknowledgements, etc.3. Pitch: a pitch of your manuscript, consisting of up to 300 wordsI'm a little too late to write a novel this year, but I still desperately want to participate next year even if I don't end up winning -- the Grand Prize is a publishing contract and, upon fulfillment of the contract, fifteen thousand dollars (which is a large sum for me ).My main problem is creating a premise that can carry its weight through at least 50,000 words. As of now, I have nothing. Granted, I do have a year, but I want to get something done now so I have time to edit. Do you guys generally think of a story idea first, a question to answer, a genre you want to write in, a title, or something else?

Wow, how did I miss this post? Even though I don't post here very often, I thought I did a better job of watching it! That sounds really interesting... Maybe I'll give it a shot next year, when the novel I'm working on has (hopefully) reached that 50,000 word mark.Anyway, I come up with the story idea first. Unfortunately, my ideas come to me at the most random of times, and since my memory is so bad, I've had to start keeping a small notepad on me at all times to write them down as they come.But then I forget to bring a pencil...

[Jean Valjean]

Where does a story start...Well, that's a good question. It's hard to think about that. I can list many ways in which I've started a story:1. Inspiration from another story. I've been inspired by Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, The Glass Menagerie, Star Trek, Harry Potter, Bionicle, Smallville, and so forth. In fact, I've even been inspired by sources that I'm not proud to admit inspiration from, such as a few anime shows, though generally all that inspired me was just one aspect. The more I read, the more ideas I get. It's preposterous to claim that my characters and stories are original: they've all been influenced by something or other. Sometimes a character I read about will inspire a character of my own, or maybe an entire story will inspire a character, which was what happened recently when I watched The Glass Menagerie. Sometimes a story will give me ideas for how to fill up unanswered questions in my stories, help me understand my story better, or help me figure out the narrative style of my story. Sometimes I will pick up emotions and places. To be honest, getting acquainted with other stories helps a lot. However, I suppose it really isn't too often that an entire story comes up from just one book I've read.2. Music. Music can help with finding the mood to a scene to prevent writer's block or it can inspire a story all by itself. Or, like the last point, it can simply fill in empty spaces to works in progress.3. Characters. They say that characters make the story. I admit that for the most part that's true. I get ideas for characters and then a story comes from them, assuming that from this character I also learn of what sort of setting they live in.4. Spontaneous Story Generation! Really, sometimes a concept just pops out at me. Perhaps the plot itself isn't revealed right away, but the idea for the story does. Plot is one thing. The story is what it's about. I think that it's a simple enough concept that it's possible to conjure instantaneously.Alright, so not all of those were the best, but wait, the last two are pretty big:5. Write a series first. Or in my case, I just imagined one, but ah well. The idea is that I didn't just come up with a story. I imagined a few characters their names Ian, Ivan, Ike, and Io. I had no idea about their backgrounds and their story changed every single time. They were constantly put into different settings. Eventually I incorporated other eccentric characters for them to interact with. They went on to continuing adventures. Much of this derived from the characters, of course, since they were extremely active, and after a while emotions drove my episodes as the characters began to follow their story arcs. After a while of the characters doing whatever it was they did, a story began to emerge. There's a lot of history leading up to the final idea for a story, history perhaps too good to give up. My story developed as I sought ways to complete an arc.5. Life. Life, the common bond shared by all of us, yet for everyone so different. Yet it is from life that I see stories emerge. Emotions dominate the mind and equip the author with the passion to write a story based on their experiences and their feelings. Love has driven me to imagine the most beautiful romances. There's also the random stuff that happens, good or bad. Life has defined who I am, and by knowing myself better I found that I understand better what life is, and from there come full circle by realizing what stories can be glimpsed from it. The two most powerful tools life has given me for inventing stories have been nostalgia and hope, one focused on the past and the other looking forward to the future. I remember by own story like honey, and with my other eye turned to what lies before me I find ground for my imagination to work miracles.- I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[Jedi Knight Krazy]

So, some random thoughts on stories...I was playing the video game Rochard (very fun, I'd recommend it if you like Metroid and/or Portal - but the game isn't relevant to this topic, only its story) and a recurring phrase was "it's all connected"... but there was an odd sense of disconnection in the storyline. While they tried to make it seem like there was a lot of depth and backstory, it wound up feeling like a convenient, improbable set of coincidences.For example, at the end, the hero's partner tells him to plug an ancient alien power source into a fairly modern human gun. It fits perfectly. The explanation? "It's all connected." It was like just by throwing the phrase out there, they felt they could get away with any nonsensical plot twist they wanted.I still don't really think I'm making much sense... let me use a more familiar example: Star Wars Episode II. Somehow, Obi-Wan traces the would-be assassin of Padme to Kamino, where a totally unrelated, but ultimately more important, plot thread starts, and the original mystery of the assassin is more or less forgotten. It feels like a huge coincidence that he got there.I can't think of any stories that have pulled off coincidences and the "it's all connected" thing well - does anyone know of any good examples? Or have any thoughts on coincidences as a plot element?

[GSR]

It's been a while since I played through it, but Hotel Dusk had a remarkable amount of connections between its cast (comprised of about seven strangers staying at a hotel on one particular night and three of the hotel's staff). Nobody ever suggests it's destiny or anything like that (though a common theme is wishes) - it's a very down-to-earth game - but instead some justification is given for seemingly disparate yet unknowingly connected people showing up there on a given night (December 28th, 1979), which helps keep down the nagging sensation of it being all one massive coincidence (though it doesn't totally alleviate it). It also helps that a few of the characters are unconnected to the greater plot (in fact the sequel Last Window does this even more).I think the fact it's a game and not a novel helps as well, since the satisfaction of uncovering a connection yourself helps one overlook the unlikeliness of some of the situations.

Edited January 23, 2012 by GSR

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

Coincidence happens, and if it is coincidence, it should be shown as coincidence, at least to some extent. Trying to connect everything without ever showing how it's connected is one of the most frustrating things a storyteller can do, because they're handing themselves a fantastic opportunity and then beating it to death with a lit torch.Situations like the examples given from Rochard and one of the recent Star Wars movies are just bad writing and worse planning.

[Takatu]

I know what you're getting at, Jedi Knight, and it actually has a pretty cool premise by the sound of it, just no payoff. If they had a revelation scene at the end explaning why it's all connected, it would have worked (like "Would you kindly?" in BioShock). As it is, though, is kinda bad.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

Yeah. If "it's all connected," then whoop-dee-freaking-doo mister Storyteller, why don't you show us some of the rivets and bolts sometime? Having serious looking men in serious-looking suits just stand in front of the doors to the interesting bits of this big connectedness-thing you've built and nod and say (with serious-looking faces), "Yup. Connected. Totally. How? Uh... It just sort of is. Do not question the connectedness-thing."Because the first result of the serious-looking-suit-wearing-serious-looking-men-with-serious-looking-faces trying to get us to stop question the connectedness-thing is us questioning the connectedness-thing. Readers/Viewers/Players/People in general, really, are just like that. If we see a big red threatening button that must not be pressed under any circumstances but you don't care to tell us why we shouldn't press the button, well, we're going to want to see it pressed.

[Jean Valjean]

Actually, I think that the plot hole in Star Wars episode II wasn't really a plot hole. My assumption was that the Sith were trying to give the Jedi leads to discover Kamino without revealing themselves. Of course, that's an assumption, but it works for me.Anyway, this line of conversation and the reference to the big red button leads me to a pet peeve of mine: why is it that some wise mentors don't inform their pupils about crucial information that's essential to their quest? Sometimes there's a legitimate reason. Sometimes I can understand that it's a difficult conversation to bring up (e.g. when a parent puts off having "the talk" with their child or telling them that they're adopted), but sometimes it makes no sense. And by that I mean mentors who decide to go the route of Linda the Good Fairy who conveniently forgot to mention to Dorothy that she could go home with three clicks of her slippers. What was the explanation? Dorothy needed to go on a quest of personal discovery. Balderdash! That's putting an innocent girl in harm's way against her will when you could have found someone else to do your dirty work or do it yourself, lady!To use a more contemporary example (though Linda will forever be the text-book definition for this), why did Dumbledore have Harry go through the trouble of retrieving a few lost memories? Evidently Dumbledore already knew about the Horcruxes and the altered memory as it was had enough information to give everything away already. Why couldn't he have just told Harry everything he needed to know about Horcruxes and then begin to prepare him throughout the year instead of at the last minute? The politically correct answer is probably something akin to Linda's wonderful question-dodger: "Personal discovery!" I say that Dumbledore should have at least told Harry about the Horcruxes and then have had him retrieve the full memory from Slughorn in order to gain more conclusive evidence to support the hunch that Voldemort created 6 Horcruxes. That would have been more legitimate and everyone would have been happy. Dumbledore gets the satisfaction that Harry went on his own journey and the audience would have had the satisfaction that Harry got practical help. Harry's had enough journeying already. I think he could have handled learning about Horcruxes a year sooner.I'm not saying that I dislike Dumbledore as a mentor, just that this is a part of the story that seems a bit contrived.Then there's the matter of the mentor who puts others in danger by not telling the protagonist what they need to know. I recall distinctly the first episode to a cheesy and obscure TV show called Galidor...Ugh!Personally, I like people like Van Helsing. He was pretty cool. Gandalf was also pretty sweet for admitting up front that Bilbo's adventure would change him. Fortunately, I can come up with a far more extensive list of good mentors than bad mentors.- I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[HeavyMetalSunshineSister]

First off, Glinda. Not Linda. Second, my opinion of that is that she's actually a very clever, devious villain, who used Dorothy as a low-rent hitman, and that was basically the whole point.I mean, think about it. What reason does Dorothy have to believe the Wicked Witch of the West is evil? Because she's mad that Dorothy dropped a house on her sister and then stole the shoes off of her sister's corpse's feet, and because Glinda said so, that's what. Seems pretty suspicious.So, if the "mentor" is actually trying to put the protagonist in unnecessary danger because they don't care about the protagonist and are just furthering their own scheme, I'm cool with it. But if they're really benevolent, and there isn't an excellent, non-evil reason for not sharing the info up front, then yeah, that's pretty stupid and just a little contrived.

[Kaleidoscope Tekulo]

Or, you know, the entire civilization of emprisoned munchkins who were celebrating due to their liberation of the "dear" sister of the Wicked Witch of the West. Did you see her reaction to her sister's death? Pfft, she didn't care, she just saw it as an opportunity to get some deus ex machina shoes (and they're quite stylish to boot!). But hey, she could still have a nice personality "and your little dog, too!" Though I like Wicked's twist on that story the most. I view Glinda to be a sort of anti-hero (at least in the original). She thinks about the good of the people in the grand scheme of things and uses anything and anyone as tools to carry out her cause. She's crafty, but at least she doesn't want total destruction (and then there's the fact the entire novel was about, you know, a ton of politics back in the day so it's all just symbolism put into a story). But that's why I could see Glinda's actions. She wanted the Wicked Witch out of power and she used Dorothy as a means to do so (and I'm pretty sure she put the slippers on Dorothy just so the Witch couldn't get to them first. It's actually scary how far she thought everything through. XDD).