Writing Thread

why do people do this? what is so hard about adding an "ou"?

Yeah, but that's like saying "don't fucking suck at writing". It's weird because likable and sympathetic don't even seem like things most people would try to give ALL characters, probably just a few main ones, and for villains it's rather unexpected. Gul Dukat is basically ALL of these things (even the redundant ones) at least at times, and it doesn't ruin anything because it's done smartly. He's sympathetic/relatable when he's fighting for his people or mourning his daughter, likable when he wants to be, and these add a lot to the character. But he's those things because he's thought out and dimensional first.

I can assume what he's trying to say is: make characters interesting and dimensional, don't FOCUS on likable or sympathetic because those will come naturally with the first two. It's basically a "don't put the cart before the horse" message, at least that is the only way it seems to make any sense at all. So I suppose there is some round about wisdom there, but it's presented in a really clumsy and redundant manner.

let me see if i got it straight because it seems you're overthinking it, but i'm no fantastic writer in my opinion

likeable, relateable, sympathetic are all playing for the feelings of the reader, which you have absolutely no control over. a character's motivations are probably black and white with these green cards. "he's just a real nice guy and he does all the best things for his friends :)" but a reader might also look at this and go "none of these things are things anyone would do". basically look at the protag Max of the game Life is Strange for these green cards. she's a shit character that makes shit choices and has absolutely no depth, but the game basically takes every action the character can make, boils it all down to "correct and progresses the story" and "incorrect and gets you a game over because it's not what Max would do" or it kills someone or some shit

the orange cards are basically saying even if you can't into compelling writer, try to make your character believable and something the reader might want to actually invest in looking at. give your character some depth and some gray morality motivations. REAL SIMPLE EXAMPLE protag might be a real nice guy on the outside but then you realize maybe he's really selfish, and kind of shitty. but that's real life. a lot of people shit on Shinji from Eva but really look at that character. he is only the protag because he is the protag, but in no way does he WANT to be the protag. he doesn't want to do what people tell him to because he doesnt want to step up and be a man and take control of his situation. when he gets any sort of power or control he goes into a murderous rampage, mostly because he's an abused child. when he finally mans up and takes full control of a situation, he literally ruins everything. you can look deeper into that. and it's not just because "well he's likeable and i relate to him :)" that kind of shit comes naturally, or you don't relate to him but thats still a natural reaction to that character.

i dunno dude thats all i got. pic related, The Sopranos had amazing characters written all to be horrible walking pieces of garbage, but have depth and interesting day-to-day moments that make you either like them or hate them. their moments are just laid bare right in front of you, and that's all the audience has to go on to make their choice of whether that character is likeable or relatable or sympathetic.

I don't think I'm overthinking it, and I even think we're basically on the same page by this point. The goal should be to make your character a person first, and not just a person, one people will want to know more about (at least the main characters). If you can make a character that, once the story is over, another person could write and be objectively "in character", then you probably explained that person enough for your story to make sense. Because if you don't make your characters people first, even fantastical people, the story is just going through the motions and none of the plot matters. I suppose also that people also can't really relate or like a obviously underdeveloped character the way they can a fully realized one. Even disliking a realized character is more satisfying, because at least then you understand why you dislike them so much as a person.

But would you consider him a better character then even Admiral Zhao?

Bolin was really a failed attempt to make another Sokka (goofball member of the lead team). He didn't work at this since he was so pathetic a character with little to make up for it.

There's also how many characters that objected to Korra's antics who didn't end up either hoping aboard the Korra Train or getting painted in a not so bright light somehow (see President Raiko and how he's shown as a two-bit politician getting in Korra's way).

The problem I had with Bolin personally was that he was only likable because every other character was so goddamn terrible.

Mako is a massive ass who learns nothing throughout the entire series, Asami could have been a great character but Bryke had no fucking idea what to do with her and Korra is just a fucking awful character all round.

I think what killed Bolin for me was when he was stuck in an abusive relationship and he didn't ever stand up for himself and tell that crazy cunt to fuck off, instead the entire subplot has no resolution (like every other goddamn subplot in that fucking show) and well it's just horrid writing.

So can we talk about our own characters? I'm trying to figure out how to work with one of them.

Main character is someone whose parents were murdered by bandits in a village siege, so she was raised by a local ranger from a young age. She let's revenge consume her life and is very cold and bitter. First game basically is the culmination of her obsession and getting in fights with bandit more and more until she finally gets to the one responsible.

After this she'd finally be able to let go of her anger and would start to develop as a more caring and less cold person, but with all the focus on revenge now gone a lot of repressed emotions and PTSD start to seep in. We start to see she's more fragile and unstable than the first game where she was just a rolling boulder that could not be stopped from her goal. This is also where she'd be forming bonds with other new characters.

By the third game (last in the trilogy), she's teamed up with another character and share the spotlight as co-protagonists. She'd start to warm up a bit, maybe still be distant and not ever showing happiness besides a few moments, but the desire for family that she lost would make her grow to be protective of the other character. The other protagonist had her parents kidnapped and she's helping her rescue them, since she knows the feeling of loosing her own I guess she sort of sees some of herself in her and doesn't want her to go down the same path she went (main character acknowledges that you do not want to be like her).

The problem is the character's meant to be in vidya, so character development would take place throughout multiple games instead of trying to cram it all into a single story and I'm kinda worried she might be too flat or unlikable in the first game. The other is trying to make the change in character believable and not too sudden.

This is my problem. I have an entire lore ready, but no main story. Its fucking hilarious because im willing to make or copypasta any obcure simple story as an engine to get the lore presented.

Annoying.

I say you shouldn't worry too much about that as most video game protagonists are bland lifeless characters with little to no actual personality. That's why whenever I play Mass Effect I never once go "What would Commander Shepard do in this situation if he was a real person" because I know Shepard is just a bland slate and the player is meant to give their Shepard a personality.

Plus to be honest I don't think you can really do character development well in video games.

I think I need someone else to help bring my bad ideas down to Earth and make them good. I think I have the problem where I think of cool moments but have trouble coming up with an overall plot to get to and past them.

Happens to everyone user, just think about why those moments are important and why they fit into the overall narrative.

Would love to help. Been looking to partner up with someone.

I would suggest highlighting things she wouldn't do during those stages of her life as much as you highlight the things she would do. If she's on the way to her vengence, will she go out of her way to save or assist a village set upon by the main bandits, or will she use that chance to sneak into their main camp and poison their well? If she would do the latter, but one day she would change her mind and do the first, make special not of that, either through in game narration or mission descriptions (depending on how the game is structured and how optional you want plot elements to be). It's a lot like using AI in a game, the AI being able to not do something is as impressive as them doing something at times, and it has to suit the gameplay.

Remember, if there is anything you can do with gameplay to convey the personality of your MC, do so. She could have a rage mechanic in game one, but it changes to a slightly different focus mechanic in game two and three. I haven't played more than the demo, but the new Doom game (from what I've seen) does a good job of converying that Doom Slayer doesn't really CARE about the details of what's going on, and resents people have fucked up and allowed Hell to start shit again. Killing demons is living to him, both in the narrative and in the gameplay.

Remember, the thing about making a convincing character in a video game is that it isn't impossible, it's just HARDER because you don't want to leave your player with nothing to do for long periods of time while you tell him a story. They need to live the story. Think about how fighting games have astounding characters, who pack more personality into several minutes of animation, a few intros, win qoutes and short endings than a lot of movies or comics can for their main character. Every frame of animation, every sound and character interaction, all has to build a character who is immediately interesting to play. You have to portray her character from every step of the way from design, to animation, to how she handles enemies. So always focus on her current motivations, and how they effect her actions.

how would i make a good story about boxing that isn't rocky/hajime no ippo?

Oh, that's easy, you just steal directly fro-
… oh. Fuck if I know.

Do you do boxing yourself? There honestly should be other ways to tell the story, but I think it would have to be something a person with experience boxing would say those stories lack.

if i did, i wouldn't be wasting my time with this
it's for a vidya game, i need a generic premise
the only mildly original thing i can think of is to just ignore the generic boxing/underdog story and go for something bizarre like ultimate muscle but with boxing

Have you thought about the game mechanics first or have some sort of concept? I.e. This mc is the underdog trying to get on top, and said player is the coach whose managing the mc's training and you can be successful by via bonding/pushing the mc to their limits/And helping the mc gets sponsors.

Bit of a question, I'm doing this fan fiction you can bully me if you want, and there is a bit of romance which is not the central part of the story. Is it best to keep the romance slow burning (like how it progresses in airbender) or go in a semi fast pace?

all i've got so far
no idea about story whatsoever
player is the boxer for sure

also slightly newer version

Honestly this look and play to realistic. Experiment something specular or faster with the mechanic then maybe you get a original idea how the game story and theme around boxing will be.

First you need to ensure that the audience will actually care if these two characters get together before you go to far.

If you say so mate. Again, I admit it's pretty ehh and needs grounding.

The idea has has been about a young man who has the Greek God of Death Thanatos sealed within him and can transform into him every time he dies. This power is triggered one night when he tries to interfere with a mugging or something and gets shot.

His unlocking of Thanatos would trigger the awakening of other sealed Gods, and while that's happening the few left in the Pantheon would be trying to capture and seal him. The Thanatos guy must also go Punisher and kill bad people, haven't decided.

That's the general origin idea. Sure you're still interested?

Understood, user. Thanks for the tip.

With that mindset no wonder…

Well the first game's sorta just focused on her one-track mind of revenge so the first games really just focused on her. I think the it helps with just the focus on her for this one since it helps emphasis how it's really just a war with her and the bandits since that's all she's focused on. I know it makes the game sound a bit lacking but I feel for what I want the first one shouldn't really have sidequests. I think that's where the second game comes into play and relates to her character development. Now that her obsessive quest for revenge is over and she realises how hollow she feels without it she decides to join a group of rangers (actually ranger probably isn't the right term, this is set in Asia sometime between the 16th to 19th centuries) who go around dealing with the bandit problems in other areas. This is where she starts to become more focused on others because she doesn't want them to go through what she did, and she really, really hates bandits. I should mention though since you brought up the poison thing is that she doesn't kill. The only person she wants to kill is the one responsible for her village's massacre. She does get pretty brutal though, very pragmatic in combat.

I thought about that but I'm not too sure. It might make it feel too, I dunno, "gamey" perhaps? It's a combat-heavy sort of action game (I think there'd be elements of adventure too, but there's a heavy focus on combat) but it's not a really over-the-top like game like Bayonetta or Devil May Cry. Wanted to focus on combat that's challenging so you don't just mindlessly plough through enemies. Like having to switch up attacks or have enemies immune to certain ones, ect. In the second one I was thinking maybe add some stealth elements like surprise takedowns and the option to either duke it out or try to be more quiet about it.

I guess I've already implemented some of that (perhaps unintentionally). She's a snow leopard (yeah yeah, furshit, I know, but I was inspired by the Kung Fu Panda game and wanted to imagine what a more mature take on it would be like), so there's stuff like claw attacks in addition to punches and kicks, and claws are pretty nasty so it's pretty fitting for someone filled with anger. I should mention that she also contrasts with the second main character who I mentioned for the third game, who is kind and more innocent (well as innocent as you can be before fighting) and unlike the main character's fighting style which is brutal and self-taught, the second characters is more based on actual techniques (probably some kind of martial arts), evasiveness and countering.

Thanks for all that advice by the way. It's really just a pipe dream but I'm interested in writing so if it never becomes a game I can always just go full story and use it for visual media instead.

I'm working on a story based on the massive extended universe I created when playing with my younger brother when he was like 4.

However it seems like writing comics is kind of hard. Do you guys have any tips on how to do the formatting? That's my biggest problem.

also, if anyone wants to follow my progress i'm over at /agdg/
8ch.net/agdg/res/26836.html#27537

This is the format we use on Infiniverse

Whether it's the focus or not, it's better to do it slow. The rule of romance is that it's 80% buildup. Once the audience has their romantic resolution, there's not much to tease anymore you know? Obviously try not to plod along too much because that's frustrating to read. When you write scenes with both of them included, it's important to have small moments with them together. Comforting each other over a loss, making sure the other is okay, bringing them up in conversation often, that sort of stuff

I had a project like that once, was going to be a comic to go along with a rpg project I was helping out on. It was going to follow a few characters, much like PCs of a campaign, on a quest that would take them from major location to major location, sort of a guided tour with some fights, chases and drama thrown in. You still have to do everything for making your characters real, but it's easier because you understand the world and how they should perceive it. So just focus on making characters who would logically have adventures in your world.

That's looking pretty good so far, user. Keep it up.

I was thinking the same too, but is it alright to make those two characters friends first (with a few crushes for other characters here and there.) then it progresses into a romantic relationship?

I fully agree with this as well. I'm glad we have the same thoughts on it, user.

Yeah, it's the little moments that count. Big bombastic love scenes are great for the ending and all but genuine affection is shown in small scenes
My personal favorite is the girl wearing the guy's clothes. Jacket or hoodie or something

Same. Another thing I enjoy is the build up that comes with the ups and downs of friendship then it comes down to the two of expressing their love to each other either be it hand holding or finally saying it. However, just the tiny bits of genuine affection and respect is enough.

Regarding a comic about superheroes, what do you guys prefer; Episodic or a continued narrative?

He may not be, but I sure am user

Both can be great. I would probably write with an overall character arc from start to finish of the series, but most individual issues would be very episodic. But like no one really needs episodic stories of the Watchmen characters, they want just the narrative they're in because everything plays off other parts. But for characters like Captain America, I just love seeing him go on different adventures and kick ass for America or turn into a werewolf or get high on super cocaine

That's sort of how its setup right now. There's major events spread out to 8 "arcs" with a bunch of single stories between each arc. The tone is pretty light overall with the major events being dramatic. I'm just worried that I'll run out of ideas and make it a slog

The only thing I can suggest is to NEVER RUN OUT OF IDEAS!

Honestly though, as long as you build the characters up enough early on or well before you really start, then plotlines will crop up from time to time on their own. Especially if the relationships are figured out real well, so that the actions of one character to another could send ripples through the whole cast.

Thanks for the advice user. I feel like the world is well thought out enough to survive for a while

Okay. One idea I had about his transformations is that the more bodily damage done before death, the longer his transformations into Thanatos. The form heals his body and once it's done, he reverts back. For example, a clean shot through the head would cause a shorter transformation than, say, getting crushed to death.

I'm also conflicted on whether Thanatos should have his own conscious or if it's only the form and power that remain. Both smcertainly have their ups and downs, but right now I lean toward the latter. While the former would be good for expositional purposes, I feel that it would cause more problems in the long run.

...

I got an idea:
It's about a fat fucking faggot trying to lose weight in time for the big comic book convention so he can go as Superman.

Can he lose the weight, but end up missing the convention to visit a sick kid he knows about in the hospital? People who dress up as superheroes and visit sick kids always punch me right in my human emotions

and he learns what it truly means to be a hero.

Well I suppose it depends on how you want the tone to be. If it's relatively light, I say the former. You have more opportunities for amusing dialogue that way. You could do both in a sense. Thanatos would be the personality but not have control of his movements

Do it user

I disagree. You see, chances are, your final product will not turn out to be the way your first manuscript was conceived. Plot is important because, well, you gotta give the characters something to do. It is harder to make a character fit the story, but you can change the plot to fit the character.

I put the plotting first because if I don't, I'll just have a bunch of disjointed ideas that make no sense and it would fucking frustrating to put them together.

Ian Fleming wrote the Bond books in about a month, but he took the rest of the year just making corrections and researching, because he knew that playing fast and loose was the only way he found to them done in the first place.

...

...

...

Some interesting stuff, thanks.

...

FUCKING
NO

Replacing "said" with random words is a guaranteed way of making you sound like a hammy amateur. Here's why: readers ignore the word 'said' because they read it so much. It's like the word 'the'. No one goes around saying you should replace every instance of the word 'the' with some five-syllable, ten-dollar word taken from the retarded section of the thesaurus. If you keep changing the word 'said', especially when it's not necessary, soon the reader will start noticing it - and there aren't enough synonyms in the world to keep the word 'said' fresh throughout an entire manuscript.

Oh, and if you absolutely have to change the word 'said', for the love of God use something that actually relates to how something CAN be said - a SOUND. What the fuck does it sound like when someone 'requests' something?

"Explain to me just what the fuck this is supposed to sound like?" James requested.

Can you picture that mentally? No. Of course not. Because the request is in what you're saying, not how you're saying it.

"FUCK YOU, GRIFFITH! FUCKING DIE ALREADY!!" Guts requested.

Don't even get me started on fucking "thought".

"Ejaculated" still works.

Conversely you could just read the dictionary cover to cover. Clark Ashton Smith did, and he was a fucking wordsmith.

In the last thread when this was posted in (since deleted I assume), I wrote down in a sketchbook what one user said it what it means

Woah, that's some top-notch stuff from Peter Chung.

Chung knows his shit.

Shit, I haven't checked this thread in a while. I'm the original user who said he was interested in helping out. I read what you posted and I am a sucker for stories that have elements of Greek mythology, and I do like the fact that you're using a god who ISN'T one of the overplayed, extremely popular ones like Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Athena, etc.

To answer this with my own suggestion, I think that an entity as powerful as a Greek God like Thanatos should be able to communicate and be aware of his own existence. First of all, he can communicate with the protagonist, be a good way of delivering exposition about what's going on with the other gods, and could be a good source of banter between the protagonist and himself.

I've learned so much from this. I think I'm gonna actually finish my shit for once.

The issue I'm having with writing is the fact that I have this text document filled with all sorts of ideas relating to my main story but when it comes to actually writing down the story, I can't seem to ever start, or when I do, I feel very displeased with the result of how the opening paragraphs came out. I want to write but it feels like I can never nail the opening with something eye-catching.

I was reading Aristotle Poetics (in reality, many summaries of the book), and i'm quite fascinated by the concepts of tragedy.

I want to write a tragedy. However, my -problematic-, main female protagonist doesn't have a lot of plot compared with his antagonistic brother.. Also, since Oedipus had the quote "I already knew this tale", my story have to be rewatchable. Must bring sorrow and fear, and it must have a theme. While I have the sorrow and fear, I don't have a particular theme. (Oh, how tragic… but without a meaning, what is tragedy?)

Writing is hard. Ambiguity is also a plus, things of expanded universe. I noticed how fans were interested in Gaster and Sans from Undertale (things that are not explored in the game) and the whole Steven Universe deal (pink Diamond and all that shit). So, in my tale, the brother does something out of love, and is punished for it. How did he found that "mean" for love?

His mother. Was the mother evil? Was she a victim? What was her intention? I also made her have a cool design.

Just checking, sorry for nothing!

You can't write something with just the intent of "I want it to be tragic" and expect to nail it. Do not try to emulate the classics, write your own story
Tragedy is so… Well tragic because it reflects humanity. The classics capture some element of the human spirit and that's why they are classics. Tragedy is sorrow, passion, the fire in all of us. It's hard to write about something you don't know anything about. You need to put some of yourself into this tragedy, reach deep within your memories, find the lowest moment of your life and grab hold of it. Reflect on it, on what led up to it, and what happened after. This is going to be difficult at first but I believe that you can do it

When you start out you shouldn't focus so much on the opening lines, you'll never get anywhere. Write drunk, edit sober is something you might hear. It doesn't mean you need a bottle of whiskey by your side to get started, though that might help, it means that the hardest part of writing is getting over yourself and starting, the fine tuning is for later, when you're "sober"

So pretty much get through my first draft playing it "fast and loose" and then really take my time during the revisions? Yeah, I can definitely see how that helps a lot. I try to write with so much detail and try describing every little thing, but I am never happy with it so I never make any progress. I will change up my strategy and write with less detail, a little less time wasted on details, and hopefully I can get somewhere with the book.

It'll save you a lot of time and mental energy, particularly if you're writing an action or fight scene. Somebody pointed out to me how straining it is by having me write a play by play of a boxing match. It took me close to an hour to finish and the result was over detailed slog

Alright, apart from comics, what do you guys read?

I am not making a comic book, so I don't read comics as tools of inspiration. Since I'm actually just writing a regular novel, I've been browsing some modern selections and let me tell you, the most popular books on shelves nowadays are all shitty rip-offs of the Hunger Games or any story that features a teenaged girl caught between a love triangle who is a mary sue. So I decided to read some old classics just for fun and maybe as a boost of inspiration so I've been reading Brave New World, 1984, Catcher in The Rye, Tale of Two Cities. All great books imo.

Thanks, I've heard about that exercise but I have never attempted it. I also fall into the same pit when it comes to action scenes (something my story would have quite a lot of), where I spend too much time writing about every detail during the fight that any intensity from reading it dies out almost immediately.

Tell me about it,. Hard as fuck to actually find good Fantasy nowadays.I did find the Khale the Wanderer books and they're fucking fantastic,

Alright so I only read one but I shotgunned that book. I hadn't done that in years. Bought the second but ended up busting my tablet and when I finally fixed the damn thing I got shoved back into school.

I also gotten my old hard-drive and now have my work from 2014. It's weird looking at it; like a time capsule but much more shitty.

For the first time in years I am whole and I'm terrified but in a good way. Like crossing boundaries.

Another tip for fighting; focus on sense then a blow by blow. The smell of blood, the sound of fist impacting flesh. The subtle ache of your knuckles.

Hardly any decent fantasy that isn't "My Affair with the Orc" or some Tolkien-esque copycat that just takes the same elements from the Hobbit and thinks that'll make for an instant success.

But is there a way to focus on that without getting too detailed and slowing down the pace of the action scene with too many details?

Read some Robert E. Howard. He wrote some great boxing stories, as well as Westerns, fantasy, horror, noir thrillers, etc, and his action was always on point.
Lovecraft for mood, Howard for action, Clark Ashton Smith for poetry, CL Moore for character.

gutenberg.net.au/plusfifty-a-m.html#letterH
Here ya go, scroll down to Howard. This shit will grow hair on your chest, and if you are female reading it could make you pregnant.

Check out the boxing stories, too, that's how you do it.

Out of curiosity, is there ever a decent story or show that handled a love triangle idea well? From what I've read, most triangles tend to be one-sided, and most of the time, the said rebound character is decent comparing the main love interest. Why is that? And how do you make both possible candidates in a love triangle decent with their own pros and cons?

Thanks for some helpful sources. Been looking for some new material to read that isn't a typical big name author that gets thrown around.

I mean, a love triangle CAN be done well, it's usually the main premise in most romance novels for decades, but as someone who peruses the local bookstores for a new read every once a while, all the modern shit that is on shelves pretty much takes the premise of Hunger Games or any YA book that got a movie series.

All of them follow the same formula:
Pretty much every Young Adult book right now, and unfortunately YA is the busiest genre and overpopulates every shelf, leaving little room for any other genre.

Because usually, the rebound character actually has an ounce of depth, dimension, and personality unlike the main love interest which is usually just a walking combination of the writer's personal fetish fuel/likes in a person.

Well, first of all, you need to make both of them actual characters and not think about them as just candidates for a love triangle. You need to create them to act like real people, with quirks, flaws, habits, emotions, etc. Once you've done that, then you can throw two of them together to duke it out for the girl of their dreams, and see how their personalities conflict.

If you ask me, I really don't like love triangles whether it's between men or women. 99% of the time, it's always just an excuse to blue ball the audience with "will they get together or won't they?" and "who will he/she choose?" and even then, I find it hard to respect a man who would still want to be with a woman who takes her sweet-ass time fooling around between two guys in a love triangle, not knowing what she wants so she gets tastes of both men as if it were just some strange open relationship. Any guy who still wants a woman after that kind of emotional roller coaster like that is definitely a cuck and deserves to live in a cuckshed.

Just spilling some of my autism about my book since this is a writing thread after all but the relationships in my story aren't the main focus and are just there as a form of character building and a way of having romantic and lewd scenes between characters, but there isn't much relationship drama like love triangles or "will they, won't they?" scenarios since they have bigger problems (since they're all stuck in a virtual world).

My best advice is to fall in love with two women, and agonize every night about which heart to break AND THEN LOSE THEM BOTH BECAUSE LIFE FUCKING SUCKS

It's probably best to think about your focal point character, and what they want. A lot of characters can be simplified into basic opposed ideas like stability/freedom, sexual satisfaction/emotion support, or… being a vampire forever vs being with an indian werewolf. You probably want to make them both people that the audience could possibly understand the main going for, unless you want it to be purposefully frustrating (like one of them in a guilty pleasure that encourages self destructive behavior). But if you really want it to be a love triangle instead of just a tragic romance/hurdle in the main relationship, you have to make both contenders interesting.

And both contenders should probably seem as equally prominent as you can make them, or it's pretty obvious who will be "chosen". Maybe not exact same screen time, but similar importance. So they could both spend a lot of time with the main, or maybe one is there for them through more of it, but the other appears in times of big trouble and really saves the day. But they should both have good and bad attributes, times they make things easier or more difficult for the main. Like a real relationship. Also, how they both handle the knowledge or discovery of the other side of the triangle is important. Handled wrong it could make one seem abusive or a doormat, which should probably only be approached if you do so on purpose. If you want them both to feel strong, you have to make their actions reflect their type of strength.

Or they could all just have a threeway in the end. That'll get some attention

Another interesting bit of lit theory that's stuck with me is the "drama triangle", the theory that the difference between drama and melodrama is that in drama, the relationship of victim, victimiser and rescuer changes, while in melodrama it stays static.
That's kind of a point especially with comics.
You never see Lex Luthor rescue Superman from Lois Lane, or Gwen Stacy rescue The Green Goblin from Spider-Man.

Stephen Donaldson based his "The Gap Into" series on this structure, and who you root for is very fluid, the characters tend to do a lot of heel/face turns and vice versa, victims turn into monsters once they have the upper hand, heroes go way over the line, and assholes shit in pussies so much they turn into assholes too.

"Don beat'em, Peter! He mah babydaddy!"

Easy. Set doable goals, accomplish them, every day or every week do a little bit more.

I don't know if that sounds trite, but it works. Works for me. I used to be a casual faggot reader, but I'm getting better. I'm a reader because I want to be a better writer. Stephen King said "Read a lot, write a lot," so that's what I'm doing.

Example: Week 1–Write 100 words. Week 2–Write 200 words. Or 150 words. Or 100 words. Look into agile development, which is something programmer fags do. Works in various places, like schools. Should work for writing too.

scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html

Good thread, I saved a lot of shit.

As a writer, here are my personal struggles. I practice writing by making fake greentext stories in various places. I can't tell you where. I've always been the kind of guy who has always known what Jack Kerouac knew, but I was ashamed that I was doing it. It's interesting how this kind of thing happens naturally, but in some contexts its considered a sin.

Which isn't to say I'm some genius writer, but I try to tap into whatever intelligence I do have, for better or worse. So what helped me get back to my creative center was learning how to a) clarify my ideas, b) how to structure a story so it helps the idea along.

Essentially, a story has to be a setup, and a demolition of that setup. The more fucktarded a story ends up, the better. Laughter, for example, is a reflex. I consider appreciation for a story a reflex as well. My aim is to touch something carnal within the reader, to make someone go apeshit via intelligence.

Good luck everyone. We're gonna make it, bro.

The sad truth, and it's shame that most of YA books these days are like this.

I always hate that type of shit either be it in books/anime/games/ect. Especially if main lead doesn't even acknowledge that "So-so likes me" or possibly try going out with them for once or have more interactions with them like catching up on things, join them on a walk with their dog, and ask on what have they been doing or other stuff.

I had a feeling that was the case, but thank you for giving me more insight/reassurance and reminding me on what to do, and I'm glad we're on the same wave-length on this.

In pure honesty, I don't really like it either, but admittedly I do have a guilty pleasure (especially childhood friends) to liking that sappy stuff, but only IF both characters are treated equally, have the same amount of attention as every character, the idea is handled well (this includes the consequences around it), and there's enough lewds to satisfy both parties without the NTR/Cuckolding shit.

I feel the same way too on this, but out of curiosity. If the said MC and their main love interest dated other people (MC dated the childhood friend and main love interest going out with their crush) during the story's timeline, and after trying (meaning they did enjoy going out with those characters, but at the end of it, it ended with either 'the spark is gone' or both agreed that they see each other as good friends.) would that be considered as cuckolding or blue balling the audience?

That sounds like one of the concepts I was going to use for a character. Except it's a girl who blueballed the MC, and subsequently made that MC unsure and unwilling to go further into a relationship or be confident enough to be close to anyone either be it.

I agree on this, and like the other user, I'm very glad that we're on the same wave-length on this, and thank you for the helpful tips.

>or they could all just have a threeway in the end. That'll get some attention.
That'll be one hell of a way to end it, that's for sure.

Yeah, to be fair, I do like a lot of the corny, cutesy shit in a relationship between people who start out as friends and then grow to love each other. Just feels right, even if it's a too "Hollywood" happy ending.

Not really because it's normal for people to date others before finding the "right one". That's a common part of finding a good match, but when I mean blue balling and cuckolding is when a girl is caught between the love of two men and instead of making her mind up, she spends a year switching between guys, letting both of them take her out on dates, letting both of them of them fuck her, etc. and then after the year has passed, she FINALLY picks one of the two guys. If the guy she picks really wants to be with her after she's been jumping between guys, that man is definitely a cuck.

When it comes to blueballing, I mean the audience always wants a pay off. The audience WANTS to see the guy get the girl at the end, the audiences WANTS to see a relationship blossom and work out. You don't know how frustrating it is to see two characters about to kiss or confess their love but are interrupted by some asshole suddenly showing up and killing the mood. That's a total buzzkill and the audience was denied the big payoff, which doesn't feel good at all.

Basically, if I were your audience, I would actually want to see a relationship between two characters go past the "well we're friends but we like each other but it's still awkward and both of us are trying to give the other some hints on it".

Same, and for a bit of a confession, I prefer how romances in Eastern media are handled. Granted yes, there are a bunch of asspulls and moments in the romance department of where you drop the series or flat out pissed on how it ended, but most of time, they handle it in a lighter tender way while recent stuff in the West is handle it by screwing over the audience or completely dropping the ball (biggest offenders = LoK, Regular Show, and in some way, Harry Potter when it comes to the sudden romance with titular character and his best friend's little sister).

I agree as well, which is why I've decided to make feMC take the bullet on going out with her old time buddy (who had a crush on her, but due to shitty events, both characters were unable to reciprocate those feelings), and be happy even if the relationship might not work out in the end.

That's because most love triangles are written for women so most of the characters in the love triangle are just there to show how desirable the mc is. Love triangles for men have more of a serious expectation that he might get together with any of the girls or all of them

That's what irks me when it comes to female love triangles. Granted, some love triangles for men are like this (can't think of a western one right now, but the anime, Aquarion Evol, or the mangas, I''s or Ichigo 100%, comes into mind.), but the way it's handled in the female perspective, it's not as balanced as how it's portrayed in most love triangles that are aimed for men, unless I'm wrong about this one.

It's all about social status. Being desired is good, but having Billy the Booger Eater think that he can have you would be awful for your social cred, so lower status candidates need to be humiliated to keep your rank up. It's like in Twilight, you have Edward as the pick, Jacob as the rival and then all those minor characters Bella treats with contempt for thinking they have a chance.

Why would you remind me? That ending is pure suffering. Zessica deserved better

boku no pico

Pretty much, and she deserves someone who isn't a fag like sora. You can blame the writers for that shit. Anything with aquarion, never again.

I know for a fact that LoK had a butchered mess for a "romance" subplot, and I'm pretty sure it's because the writers had their heads so far up the tumblr's ass, that they made sure they had to please them at every turn especially with the finale.

I stopped watching Regular Show early on, but from what I gather there's a lot of the blue balling and on-again-off-again bullshit that I mentioned before. I know there are episodes where one character walks in on another character and there's a big misunderstanding and they break up, then get back together once the mess has been resolved, then they rinse and repeat.

Well, that's one way to write a relationship, and that's totally cool. The way I'm writing mine is pretty much that my MC meets the chick and finds her to be extremely hostile and the two do not click at all; however, the two eventually team up on their adventures and become good friends, learning what makes the other tick and so on before they inevitably develop strong feelings for each other. I figured that there would be enough troubles that they'd have to go through as friends and there's enough gradual build-up to the actual romance that no one would mind that their relationship becomes smooth sailing after all the shit they go through, but that's just me.

I think my biggest problem when it comes to writing is well being lazy and tending to overthink my stories to the point where I just end up scrapping everything and moving onto something else.

I overthink because I tend to try and plan out long term projects and never short term ones, I once wrote an entire series bible for a seven issue sci-fi mini series but that went nowhere because I got lazy.

Guess I've just been stuck in this rut and it sucks because then the doubts start to creep in and well you know how it goes.

Stardust by Neil Gaiman is a good example of that type of romance. I'd read it if I were you. There's also a movie but I don't know how faithful it is

I feel like that's a common problem for a lot of writers

That idea sounds very endearing, user, and having them first become good friends then lovers is one of those things I hope to find when it comes to reading and watching things. I wish you the best, user.

I share the same problems too, especially in drawing which I need to get back onto. One moment you get all heated up on making something and wanting to improve, next thing you end up burning out, and you may never come back to finishing/polishing that project unless you force yourself to go back to it or reuse those scrapped ideas for another project.

...

It's like someone else is writing my ideas. I can't fucking deal with this, I don't want to get rid of this idea It's the only thing keeping me alive, long story short but I can't find a way to write it that I've actually liked.

It take a long time to refine some ideas into exactly what you want. Maybe try taking it from different angles, or focusing on different parts of it first. Maybe you aren't feeling the beginning, but you know the middle or end well. Once you get one part you really like, you can build around it.

I think a problem I have along time same lines is that once I got a good idea of how the story will go, I lose motivation because a huge part of the drive is FINDING OUT where the story will go. So it's a selfish bit of me that says "well, I got the story I wanted, fuck everyone else" (when I really like the story, that is).

...

I have a similar problem. I think I have good ideas but I don't like my writing style. It's too rigid and awkward
Start reading a lot more. Pick up cues. When you right something, say it out loud. It helps.

Nothing activates my autism more than this. I keep focusing so much on trying to properly write down my ideas as I see them in my head, but they will never come out as I want them to.

Thanks, user. Hopefully, I can actually get my work out there and even share it here on Holla Forums when the time comes.

I seemed like someone trying to find excuses for being lazy.

Hey anons I have a writing blog on blogger to do my stories and writing n shit. How the fuck do I get more people to read em and provide feedback and criticism?

This is an entertaining image but its dumb. Apparently your skill doesn't matter, you're either talented or your not and if you"re not dont try because it'll suck anyway

Post it here

sticksntrickwritingshticks.blogspot.com/?m=1

To be frank, I really botched my recent story. Turing test. I don't like it so much as the others.

You know, what's a good site for a writer to keep his work? Is it alright to use Blogger/Fiction Press/Wattpad, or is there a point where you should make your own and put your work in a portfolio/database?

Anyone else get an idea for something then after thinking about it you get the 'Yeah I could easily see how people would get the wrong idea from this'. I had an idea for a short comic I wanted to write, something that is really just a 'fuck it' idea, about how high grade weapons are made legal in hunting. A deer stumbles across a cache of the weapons and decides to fight back. It's meant to be actiony, comedic and straight up violent with video game/cartoon-tier guns. But thinking about it I could easily see people misinterpreting it as an anti-gun thing. I'm just thinking go forward with it and if anyone gets the wrong idea then just correct them.

If you worry about people who are unable to enjoy something due to the perceived political message, you'll NEVER WRITE ANYTHING. Are you strongly opinionated about gun control yourself, or are you just worried about fags on the internet? Because it could be seen eitherway, depending on how you write it, and if written really well, seen as neutral. But if you don't give a fuck, and just want to write a funny story, just do it. If fags get offended, either way, they're probably idiots that would get offended no matter what.

I actually think it's best if you NEVER correct anyone. I'd love to make stuff with no one ever knowing where I am politically, because (as most discussions about comic writers here demonstrate) people judge your work off their personal feelings about you. Which is retarded. The work should speak for itself, even if you just have to write "the following story was all in fun" at the end. Because if people know about you, especially from you bothering to address raving idiots, they'll judge your work on YOU and not on its own merits. If you're really concerned, do it completely anonymously.

In short, don't worry about triggering crybabies, they will piss and moan regardless.

Yeah I later just realized why the hell should I give a shit about what other people think about it? If I want to write some wacky, violent adventure then no one is really stop me and if they get the wrong message, you can't control how everyone thinks on the net. You're right it would be best to not address them either. Personally I don't have a stance on gun control, I like guns but I'm not gonna make some big shit over it.