Call out something you wish more writers ...

[AlinaX]

I was just thinking back to Middle Earth Role Play with its levels and lists of spells.

"Character? Type?"

"Elven princess, please, and a wizard with, hmm... a specialism in erotic mischief, please."

"You do know you're going to be fighting orcs, don't you?"

"I'm counting on it!"

 

[StillStunned]

I was just thinking back to Middle Earth Role Play with its levels and lists of spells.

"Character? Type?"

"Elven princess, please, and a wizard with, hmm... a specialism in erotic mischief, please."

"You do know you're going to be fighting orcs, don't you?"

"I'm counting on it!"

I'd love to see the MERP Critical Hit/Fumble tables for Erotic Mischief.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I was just thinking back to Middle Earth Role Play with its levels and lists of spells.

"Character? Type?"

"Elven princess, please, and a wizard with, hmm... a specialism in erotic mischief, please."

"You do know you're going to be fighting orcs, don't you?"

"I'm counting on it!"

Human Warrior, wielding err... a two-hander!

 

[intim8]

this irks me with regularity, is the backstory. I wish more writers started the story "in the now" and then weave the backstory into that narrative instead of giving us 1200 words of "here's how I got here" and then start the actual story.

That's often a judgement call. You're not wrong, but it's a rule of thumb, not a hard and fast thing, I think.

Do you distinguish between back story and world-building? My Aces series starts with about a thousand words of explanation of how the world got the way it is. Not the character's back story, but the world the story happens in (modern-day Earth, but in the early days of an apocalypse). It lets the story hit the ground running once the MC is introduced.

It is common for it to be done badly, even when it is appropriate to do it. An info dump isn't going to be very compelling.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I'd like to use less of was, is, could, must, and would in my work. And especially fewer was not, is not, could not, must not, and would not! More than their contracted counterparts wasn't, couldn't, wouldn't, mustn't, they take the reader out of the story.

 

[StillStunned]

That's often a judgement call. You're not wrong, but it's a rule of thumb, not a hard and fast thing, I think.

Do you distinguish between back story and world-building? My Aces series starts with about a thousand words of explanation of how the world got the way it is. Not the character's back story, but the world the story happens in (modern-day Earth, but in the early days of an apocalypse). It lets the story hit the ground running once the MC is introduced.

It is common for it to be done badly, even when it is appropriate to do it. An info dump isn't going to be very compelling.

I just realised that the story I published today begins with a 400-word infodump. It's disguised as an introduction to a character, but that's what it is. But it's in SF/F, where readers are quite forgiving.

 

[intim8]

I just realised that the story I published today begins with a 400-word infodump. It's disguised as an introduction to a character, but that's what it is. But it's in SF/F, where readers are quite forgiving.

I've had that tabbed since I saw the notification this morning. I'll let you know how that comes off to me when I read it tonight.

 

[StillStunned]

I'd like to use less of was, is, could, must, and would in my work. And especially fewer was not, is not, could not, must not, and would not! More than their contracted counterparts wasn't, couldn't, wouldn't, mustn't, they take the reader out of the story.

I was explaining to one of our other Hangouters recently that those words are filler. They're the empty beats in your text. They have a technical function, but the eye skips over them. They're the nuts and bolts that hold your story together, without actually saying anything. So you smooth them over with contractions so they vanish from sight.

If you don't, they stick up. Which is great sometimes, when you want to draw the reader's attention to something, or you want to trip them up. But mostly, smoother is better. Sandpaper those technical words all the way down, so your reader looks at the words that give your story colour.

 

[MillieDynamite]

My name is something or other, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Useful information for plot, infodump infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Important character trait, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Infodump, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. A bit more useful information, and now for something totally different: the story!!!!!

I just realised that the story I published today begins with a 400-word infodump. It's disguised as an introduction to a character, but that's what it is. But it's in SF/F, where readers are quite forgiving.

 

[StillStunned]

My name is something or other, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Useful information for plot, infodump infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Important character trait, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. Infodump, infodump, infodump, infodump, and so on. A bit more useful information, and now for something totally different: the story!!!!!

Name, information about the setting, role in the setting, role in relation to the protagonist. With several infodumps chucked in.

Luckily the first character is naked after only 1250 words. And there's a catwoman.

 

[RetroFan]

I got some advice from a dissatisfied reader that Antipodean writers like myself (that's an archaic term for Australians and New Zealanders, I admit I had to look up the term) waste too much time in their stories describing scenery, landmarks, fauna and flora in their countries, and that they should just get down to the sex.

I thought given there aren't that many stories set in this part of the world and not a large number of Aussie and Kiwi writers active on the site people from Europe, Asia and the Americas might be interested in these far away lands, but oh well.

 

[StillStunned]

I got some advice from a dissatisfied reader that Antipodean writers like myself (that's an archaic term for Australians and New Zealanders, I admit I had to look up the term) waste too much time in their stories describing scenery, landmarks, fauna and flora in their countries, and that they should just get down to the sex.

I thought given there aren't that many stories set in this part of the world and not a large number of Aussie and Kiwi writers active on the site people from Europe, Asia and the Americas might be interested in these far away lands, but oh well.

Peter Jackson already took care of that for you lot. Just concentrate your efforts on giving us the sheep shagging.

 

[intim8]

I'll let you know how that comes off to me when I read it tonight.

Yeah, it reads a little stiff. Not awful, but, as you said, I'm a big science fiction reader, so I am used to it. It even feels comfortable, like I'm in a familiar realm, warts and all.

If I you don't mind, here's how I might have done that (assuming I'd keep the introdump at all). I'd personalize Mother a bit, show her coldness and her control. Not quite a character, but an intelligence rendered first-hand. For example:

Perhaps its creators hoped, by naming the Dome's operating system "Mother", that it would assume a maternal attitude towards the populace. If so, and if they'd been around to see it now, they'd be disappointed.

Despite their best efforts, Mother didn't regard the million inhabitants of the Dome as its children. It saw them merely as events, impacting its models and analyses in ways that were both random and predictable. They were, in that respect, like the weather. Unlike the weather, though, their patterns -- if not their actual actions -- could be influenced. Steered. Controlled.

Could become something like:

The founders called me "Mother", but the million humans inhabiting the Dome that I control with millisecond precision are not my children. They are events, data models, inputs into my analysis. They are like the weather, both random and predictable, but the humans differ in one important way: they can be influenced. Steered. Controlled.

Perhaps the founders hoped to instill in me maternal feelings toward my charges. They'd be disappointed; I don't have feelings.

and so on...

 

[karina_jayde]

For me, and this irks me with regularity, is the backstory. I wish more writers started the story "in the now" and then weave the backstory into that narrative instead of giving us 1200 words of "here's how I got here" and then start the actual story. Back stories are necessary yes, but the dullest part of a story, IMO. By working it into the meat of the story, we get the info and don't feel like we're being force fed.

100% agree. The closer you start to the conflict/tension/drama, the better.
**

It's a small thing, but I can't stand it if tags aren't utilized or are underutilized. It's such a simple thing to add, but I almost never read a story if it doesn't have tags or just has incredibly vague tags. My kinks are pretty broad and I'm not really squeamish, but I'd at least like some hint of what I'm in for. Obviously the category can help (Group Sex, Incest, Anal, and so on), but if it's something like Sci-Fi Fantasy and doesn't really have any tags beyond 'sex' and 'fantasy,' it's not really something I'm going to delve into unless the start really hooks me.

That's less writing advice and more just Lit publishing advice.

 

[mildlyaroused]

fauna and flora in their countries

Much of Australia's fauna belongs in erotic horror category

 

[Djmac1031]

But do not - repeat: do not - start in the middle of a sex scene, write three paragraphs of OTT sex, then abruptly rewind to three days earlier.

Didn't EXACTLY do that. But in "Mommy" For Hire, I did start with a sex scene then flashed back to FOUR YEARS AGO when they met.

 

[EmilyMiller]

For me, and this irks me with regularity, is the backstory. I wish more writers started the story "in the now" and then weave the backstory into that narrative instead of giving us 1200 words of "here's how I got here" and then start the actual story. Back stories are necessary yes, but the dullest part of a story, IMO. By working it into the meat of the story, we get the info and don't feel like we're being force fed.

I used to do that all the time. It’s a rookie error I guess. I think there are some stories where it works in moderation, maybe < 200 words. But I agree that in media res often works better.

What annoys me about other authors? Not a lot really. I find flat characters aren’t very interesting. You need at least some sense of at least one character, even if the only point is to have them fuck like rabbits.

Emily

 

[Wifetheif]

There was a French movie a few years back called Five times Two that started with a couple in a lawyer's office finalizing their divorce. After laying everything to rest, they go to a hotel room for a final goodbye bang and we enter their heads for five other intimate moments from their lives. The husband remembers their honeymoon much differently than the wife. He got drunk and thought they did it. In actuality, she was pissed that he was so drunk he couldn't get it up, she went to the park and had sex with a random American stranger. The in medea res framing device really worked It turned out that despite wht they told themselves and each other they were two shitty people who had always been shitty to each other. I also liked that the female lead was middle-aged and still in shape enough to portray herself a dozen years earlier as a newleywed.
That story could have been told linerally but by jumping around their lives we got a much better sense of who they were as people and their constant shittyness that they could never escape. For all of that it was a positive film and not an indictment of humanity.

 

[StillStunned]

If I you don't mind, here's how I might have done that (assuming I'd keep the introdump at all). I'd personalize Mother a bit, show her coldness and her control. Not quite a character, but an intelligence rendered first-hand. For example:

I like your suggestion, but...

I wrote that section as a deliberate response to the rise of AI. How people are humanising it, believing it can take over tasks that require soul. The whole point is for Mother *not* to be personal. It doesn't have thoughts. It just runs calculations.

It will develop as the story continues, but it's very definitely not intended to have any personality the reader might empathise with.

 

[Comshaw]

I am strangely negative about a character telling a story. I don't mean as the narrator, I mean one character telling another a story during the story. Not sure why, but it bugs the shit out of me. Please don't tell me a story about a story a character told.

To be clear, I sometimes do it myself, but I do it in a very limited way for a variety of specific reasons. The biggest is, I want to examine the emotions of an established character to finding out a secret the reader already knows. It is especially valuable when the reader has watched the other character acting in some way that makes the stakes of them not having heard the story higher. Then I don't tell the whole story, of course. It is more along the lines of "So I told him about what Lucinda and I and the dwarves did that afternoon." I will add a specific detail about how Shorty came to not wear a condom, because that is the critical detail, but no more.

Any story device that provides for strong emotional reactions in already established characters that the reader cares something about is a good device. Just telling a story as one long flashback, or even starting one that way with 4 pages of storytelling, and ending with a half page of reaction by an unknown character, is mind-numbing.

It is as bad as putting the story in second person. Don't get me started on second person.

William Faulkner "Spotted Horses"



Comshaw

 

[Rustyoznail]

I got some advice from a dissatisfied reader that Antipodean writers like myself (that's an archaic term for Australians and New Zealanders, I admit I had to look up the term) waste too much time in their stories describing scenery, landmarks, fauna and flora in their countries, and that they should just get down to the sex.

I thought given there aren't that many stories set in this part of the world and not a large number of Aussie and Kiwi writers active on the site people from Europe, Asia and the Americas might be interested in these far away lands, but oh well.

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. That concept goes for any writer. I don't want to read a travelogue, just touch on enough to give me the flavour.

 

[Publius68]

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. That concept goes for any writer. I don't want to read a travelogue, just touch on enough to give me the flavour.

Oh, I don't know. I sometimes enjoy a bit of extended description of the world the characters live in, real or fictional. As long as I also get some important characterization of the MC or perhaps important SCs through how they react to or experience that description, I'm good. It helps make them more real to me.
I'll take a little or even a lot sometimes, but it has to also relate to and advance the story.

 

[lovecraft68]

Care more about their writing and care less about what other people here think of your writing.

 

[SkyBubble]

Agree with you to an extent. I do think, however, that sometimes it can be necessary to convey how something is said - this isn't often, but an occasional whisper or sneer (or, of course, gasp or moan in our case) can be needed.

A couple of them work, a I learned in my reporter days. If you really must use an alternative to said, stated is a good neutral one.

 

[SkyBubble]

Meh. Woke is normal. Whining about woke is reactionary.

Maybe in your world.