Random Questions Thread

That might be kind of like how we Americans can mix up Bronx and Boston accents.

Okay, I'm glad. Well, kinda glad. Glad that it can actually physically happen. Still feel a bit bad for this character because he does not deserve to die like this at all. But hey, it's not about what's fair it's about what's right for the story.

As for description I'm not going to go too much into it in my prose so that I don't cause too much Squick, but I am going to make it clear that what's left of his jaw is hanging only by some muscle fiber on his face. That should be enough to make the audience know how gruesome things are without expounding too much detail.

When writing a story about superheroes, should the first chapter be like an action-packed opener or a more introspective look at one hero in particular? I'm writing the first chapter right now and so far it's the latter, but I'm thinking I should make that the next chapter instead of the first. What do you think?

she's stuck inside the body of some girl that release her actually. so chances are, it takes place in modern japan.

Ok so, is it "half-demon" as in an offspring of a demon or as in has a demon inside?
Does the demon bring it's own katana or did she have to get one by regular means? (note: you will need to go research the law regulations about sword ownership in the latter case) Also why did she have to get it.

There is a lot of material on the internet about daily life in real modern Japan so you have some research easily accessible.

Keep in mind that in Japan (and a lot of Asia in general) consider demons to be more of The Fair Folk than the Christian type of demons.

via possession and possibly either maybe getting a licence or just summoning it.

also, I'm kinda aware of that.

edited 29th Nov '16 3:37:53 AM by ewolf2015

@UltimateLazer, this is a matter of whether the first chapter can hook the viewer on the premise. If your introspective look at a character provides enough insight in his/her life and world to make them interesting, then you don't necessarily have to start with an action-punch. Action would probably hook the reader better, but if it leaves the reader asking "what's going on?" "who are those people?", "who should win?" and, most of all, "why should I care?", then you might want to start with the introspection.

Would the concept of health insurance existing in a fantasy setting be too anachronistic? It's not even a really major point in the chapter, but if it seems too out of place I might want to rethink a line or two.

Accident insurance goes back to the late 18th century, for the record. Cargo insurance is already discussed in the 3750 years old Codex Hammurabi.

Thanks dude. Google utterly failed me and was only giving me results for the history of health care in the United States, which was not helpful at all.

Health insurance is something of a different beast before modern healthcare was available, though. Since the risk of dying to disease was very high, and doctors' efficacy uncertain, there might not be a way for it to be commercially viable.

In a fantasy setting, I assume it depends on how much fantasy plays a role in making it different from the real world. I mean, you said fantasy setting, which can go from medieval fantasy to urban fantasy to science fantasy to whatever, just in the temporal axis. You could have princes and princesses from different nations carrying each their own portable crystal ball and sending crystal-messages to each other, surfing the crystal-net and playing Crystalmon Go.

True. It's really a question of economics: is effective healthcare common and cheap enough for business dedicating to insuring, not just administering it, to be profitable? And can those businesses achieve economies of scale (requiring large enough populations), handle the administrative paperwork (requiring literate clerks), deal with money inflow and expense (requiring an effective financial system), et cetera? In terms of technology there's not a particular lot involved directly, but in terms of organizational development, we're talking about a pretty complex venture—one that relies on a lot of other underlying infrastructure to work.

edited 30th Nov '16 4:44:12 PM by SabresEdge

Or, alternatively, you could decide whether you want it or not, then think about how to make it work if you do.

How do people feel about Equal-Opportunity Evil?

I feel like it's necessary to have this trope in certain settings because while an organization might be evil, they're not prejudiced. This a parallel to the heroes being a multinational team. I've been developing my Nebulous Evil Organization Mist, the antagonists of Protectors, and already their top brass includes:

• A Frenchwoman.
• A Romanian who is also a woman.
• An undead Portuguese man.
• A heavily scarred Caucasian-American.

More to come as I write and develop. But I was wondering what people think of the trope in action? I think adds an extra shade to the whole thing, but I've heard people complain about the trope because it seems "unrealistic" how an evil organization can be forward-thinking. Of course, I don't think being evil and prejudiced are mutually exclusive. When done right, it makes things very interesting to me. What is your stance on the trope?

edited 30th Nov '16 7:15:50 PM by UltimateLazer

I don't really mind the concept on its own, as long as the writer doesn't do something dumb like having the narrative get all self-righteous about how diverse the villains are.

Technically, I use it without thinking about it too much, but I run with a very loose definition of 'hero' and 'villain' in my stories to begin with.

edited 30th Nov '16 7:29:50 PM by CrystalGlacia

In my stories the bad guys are bad, in part, because they are extremely prejudiced and paranoid. Like the Italian Mafia, they only trust their own.

Depends on the type of villain they are. For plenty, prejudice may be the main motive of their whole thing, so those would of course be maintaining purity.

On the other hand, we have a practical sort, who can take in anybody capable, regardless of their status in regular society - they are already outnumbered by the law and turning away capable people for impractical reasons is a loss of opportunities. There still may be prejudiced attitude (depending on the general setting) but they'd dial it down for the sake of reaching their goals.

Yeah, good point. Some villains have their prejudice as their main motivation, so it makes sense they wouldn't be equal opportunity. For others, it would make less sense. My organization Mist for example is a large terrorist organization that operates on a worldwide scale, and involves highly dangerous people armed with either special powers/abilities or unique skills and weapons, and as such they cannot afford to be picky about who they induct and who they work with.

edited 1st Dec '16 4:09:19 AM by UltimateLazer

Yep, those sound like they would be hiring anybody strong enough.

Although if they operate in a world that still has prejudices in, especially prejudices widespread in some areas, they still can have operatives that hate other operatives' guts on the sole bigotry basis. They'll just be held in check by higher orders placing completing the mission above all - and if there is any opportunity to act unchecked, they likely will. Or perhaps they'd just be all too happy to engage missions that target those they hate.

How do you do a script for a fighting game with the dialogue like a visual novel? Examples being the original Melty Blood's story mode and the Blaz Blue series?

edited 1st Dec '16 8:14:18 AM by HallowHawk

I hate to barge in but is there a quicker and easy way to get your work review without no paying, no waiting in turns and no convoluted ways to get it reviewed?

Yes, join a local writing group.

In continuing my topic of fairness and equal-opportunity, how much more socially accepted do you think homosexuality would be by the 2050s?

Asking this because my story contains a lesbian relationship (well, technically one is bi). The fact that they're both women isn't a problem at all with anyone, in fact it's barely even mentioned. I figured that over forty years after gay marriage was made legal everywhere in the United States, the whole idea of being attracted to the same sex will have lost almost all of its homophobic stigma. With two generations of people growing up in this time, it's easy to imagine that it would be completely acceptable to them.

Of course, there will always be homophobic people, just as how racism still exists today. It's just much less accepted to have that stance and is far smaller and more isolated compared to what it used to be.

Do you think that sounds believable? Similar to how I wanted to have interracial relationships without making a big deal out of it, I also want same-sex relationships without it being central to the plot and characters. Just like real people, the characters choose who they want to be with, and that's that.

edited 1st Dec '16 5:02:30 PM by UltimateLazer

Your society could treat same-sex marriage or marriage involving people of non-cis/non-binary genders like how our society overall treats interracial marriage. People who have a problem with somebody else's sexuality might been seen as something akin to the Racist Grandma trope- something eliciting ridicule or reactions akin to 'dude, seriously?'