Character Development Thread--Discussion

Oh, the "Suggested Guidelines for Enjoyment" have needed updating for ages, especially that ridiculous bit requiring 12-15 sentences (the intention is good, but the attempt to quantify what makes a good post is just silly) and the bit about sticking to one character, which is not only out of date but written in a rather gratuitously snobbish way. I've never considered it a priority, though, because I'm not sure if anyone reads it in the first place. (daird, as our newest member to stick around, any feedback you could provide on this issue would be nice.)

I'm not sure where you're getting that take on CDT OPs from, though. Archipelago and Inn didn't have anything nearly that demanding.

Well, you really need to update it. Desperately. At the very least, cut the minimum sentence recommendation. I don't think I've come close to it, save for Joan's introductory post, and I've gotten some good stuff to work with for her regardless. I do agree that it sounds snobby, and that definitely could turn people off.

edited 29th Aug '14 8:06:37 PM by daird

Yeah, I was thinking that; a few of us who have been around longer remember who wrote it. I rarely hit the sentence requirement (that's taking only material written for one location, not the entire post) and my posts with half the requirement still advance things. And I remember saying this in opposition to that 'policy', three and a half years ago- sometimes, there just isn't a whole lot to say or think about, even if a post does advance the plot. And posts are totally capable of being long without advancing the plot or having much in the way of content.

So, I meant revising the OPs to add something like

I know the OPs don't actually state that you must be here to do writing work, but I've always felt that that's what they and the trope page have insinuated.

Will anyone miss the folders of good and bad examples of posting? I always felt that those seemed snobby, too. I remember the intentions behind their creation, but that's not the way I would have gone about it, to say the least.

edited 29th Aug '14 8:26:26 PM by CrystalGlacia

I certainly wouldn't mind losing those folders. As with the sentence limit, the basic idea of encouraging people to put more into their posts is good, but using specific examples seems at best kind of patronizing.

I do think, though, that the idea that the threads are chiefly a writing exercise is kind of an important one. I mean, it's really the only reason why these are in Writer's Block instead of the Role Playing forum; while I've always objected to treating the CDTs as a forum RP (mostly because of the way so many forum RPs seem founded on RPGs Equal Combat), mechanically that's exactly what they are. And as much as I'd like to see more stories in and maybe especially between the threads, I feel like past attempts to explicitly prioritize story have been at the expense of providing a useful environment for working on characters.

So while I sympathize with the desire to not pressure people into feeling they have to get something writing-related out of the CDTs (particularly given Night's recent statement that he never has), I don't want us to go too far in deemphasizing their nature as a writing tool.

I think if people glance at the older threads/ posts already in the current thread they'll already have some idea of how to start, so the examples folders and sentence requirement are kind of patronizing, yeah. Could we replace them with something like "If someone makes posts that you feel are subpar, check with another experienced participant via PM and send that person a friendly PM with some pointers" or would that sound intimidating as well? Kind of like we're always waaaatching.

edited 29th Aug '14 9:01:38 PM by SnowyFoxes

Maybe just tell people to offer some pointers, or make an umbrella guideline of 'don't be afraid to ask someone who's more knowledgeable in the CDTs, whether by PM or in the discussion'. Subpar writing is subpar no matter where it happens, right?

On the subject of the good/bad post folders, one of my posts, way back when in Character Carnival, was actually put in there. Which one, I have no idea, especially since it was removed before the most recent wiki page history purge and is now possibly lost to time, but if you actually bother to go back into Carnival and look, you're going to find a lot of possible candidates. I'll admit, I wrote a lot of choppy-ass posts there, owing at least partially to my character being hazily defined in addition to not thinking when he spoke, and my own overall inexperience with writing, but... ugh.

The simple fact that participating in the threads requires that you write prose fiction means that you're also getting writing practice no matter why you came. And who knows, you might learn something in the process. That's a good thing to add.

edited 29th Aug '14 9:56:21 PM by CrystalGlacia

To revisit an earlier topic, I'm glad my worries vis-a-vis the free-for-all threads aren't only my own. In retrospect, City did very little for my writing because of its free-for-all nature. Whether it's something inherent in the free-for-all style, my writing style, my personal nature, or whatever, when things get chaotic... really, the only "character" of mine to ever benefit from that, in terms of becoming more fleshed out, is the Eyes and Teeth. And its tendency to overshadow and stubborn refusal to be solved with mere firepower seems to annoy as often as work effectively, so best to nix that.

So worst case scenario, I currently intend to pull my characters out when things get too messy; no point joining in the mayhem. Possibly after letting them hold the line for a bit with an evac portal for others who would do likewise. I can see a way I could throw Teethy into the morass, but probably just won't.

But yes, small scale chaos is absolutely cool. Even fistfights, police chases, et cetera. Life can get messy and complicated fast, and lots of fun ensues. I'm just talking about apocalyptic mayhem... which, I confess, I am guilty of helping along far too often. So if you see me doing that, PM me or something, tell me to cut it out.

EDIT: Also, axing the good/bad post folders? Yeah, I got no qualms with it. The theory is okay, but some writers are more terse than others, and while taking time to describe your character's inner thoughts is generally a good idea, sometimes a writer can choose to hide their characters' thoughts in order to keep them an enigma or make sure characters don't use knowledge they shouldn't actually have.

edited 30th Aug '14 10:32:07 AM by KillerClowns

Yeah, god-level shitstorms was not what I was endorsing at all. Sorry I wasn't clear enough.

Anyways, I forgot that Doctor Who starts at nine tonight, not eight, so I've started work on the page- the good/bad post folders have been axed, and the contents of the guidelines folder have been moved to a sandbox here.

I've made a few tonal changes — all of which are absolutely up for debate — just to smooth out the flow of the rules' writing. As for actual alterations I'd suggest:

1. Axe the "two/three paragraphs rule" down to just one. That's still a bit higher than the actual usual minimum, but it honestly wouldn't hurt to aim higher.
2. Replace "Try to stick to writing one character at a time" with "don't write more characters than you have time for." We've all done well juggling multiple characters during summer breaks, but when we've got things on our plate at both school/work and home, one is probably best to stick with.

edited 30th Aug '14 6:10:18 PM by KillerClowns

I've spent the last hour trying to figure out ways to phrase those two things.

I'm also thinking of mentioning our policies on Breaking the Fourth Wall (allowed, but don't be surprised if characters from stories that don't do this believe your character is a loon) and killing or otherwise incapacitating other people's characters for at least the duration of the thread (talk it over first, whether in the discussion or a PM; it's also not permanent).

I've always viewed Breaking the Fourth Wall as "strongly discouraged" more than "allowed". Dunno if that's personal or general preference, though.

While we're at it, I have a weird itch to axe the WMG page. No particular reason I can put my finger on, it just feels like a good idea.

I'd advise against it. It might look like vandalism, and while outdated, it's not like the page is doing any actual harm.

My main argument against keeping the WMG page is that for the moment, it's pointless at best because we, the participants, are the only people who edit our wiki pages and it's self-indulgent at worst, since all of the current WMGs were added by writers, written about themselves. And if we're trying to clean ourselves up, that page isn't helping. I vote to chop it, and if someone else comes along later and decides they want to add something, we have a fresh start.

I don't see any problem with Breaking the Fourth Wall as long as it doesn't actually change anything beyond the characters themselves. The characters attempting to consult the audience or remarking on the forum UI is okay so long as meatspace does not actually interfere. The writer themselves, a pseudo-audience member, or other meatspace element making an actual appearance and changing the course of things with methods not possible otherwise (such as having a copy of the author's notes) is not allowed.

And I advocate that we take the fourth wall into consideration because there are works where the fourth wall is acknowledged and where the characters know they're fictional and everything and where that stuff is important and has an impact on the work. I personally would not ever make the fourth wall to any of my works anything less than completely solid and imperceptible to the story, but we shouldn't exclude those who do choose to go down that path, especially because the wall becoming solid to them as they walk over into CDT-land would take them out of their comfort zone and could result in development as they try to work without it.

I've added a draft of the point on that subject to the sandbox page. It's pretty long, so if you have any ideas for trimming it down and/or improving it in other ways, be my guest.

edited 30th Aug '14 8:58:22 PM by CrystalGlacia

I certainly won't miss the WMG page, but I'm not sure if we'll be allowed to put it on the cutlist or not. I remember when I tried to put one of my ancient pages on there because I was ashamed of that project, and they told me they couldn't do it because now that it's on the wiki my wishes as the creator don't... really matter anymore? Or something to that effect. My memory is fuzzy; it's been a while.

But you know what might be kind of fun? If we let each other put our headcanons about other writer's characters on there. With permission, of course. If you don't want people to do that don't put your name there. I liked it when my beta readers did this for me, though, so I was wondering if others might find it interesting.

edited 30th Aug '14 8:55:27 PM by SnowyFoxes

Creators have no special control over trope pages for their works, correct. That's why I'm concerned it would be perceived as vandalism.

As for Breaking the Fourth Wall, I'll repeat my reasoning from the last time someone asked me for it: I think putting characters with no fourth wall and characters with one together is inherently trivializing for the latter. I have no objection to things getting meta in a lot of ways (heck, my story's based on it), but when you bring in a character with an explicit in-universe awareness that s/he's a fictional character, it inherently makes all other characters have to be fictional in-universe as well.

edited 30th Aug '14 8:59:50 PM by nrjxll

@ Snowy: That use of the WMG pages is something I could get behind, actually, and could even assist writers that have been given WMGs as a sort-of preview of the implications one's characters and world might be giving to the audience.

@ Nrj: Other characters don't have to believe them. If someone came up to me and told me that I was fictional, I would assume they were insane. But it's certainly possible that some might, or that this character's behavior and remarks could also spark an in-story existential discussion with the potential to derail other parts of the thread. Metafiction in general seems rare around these parts, and we've only gotten one full case (that I can remember) of breaking the fourth wall, back in University when a character complimented a meatspace writer's forum signature, and it came up a second time when someone asked about bringing a character from the PPC to Dig Site. I suppose I do have a fallacy in assuming that such cases will stay rare and nonconcurrent per thread, in which case the policy would have to account for how a meeting between characters of two different works of metafiction should be handled.

If potentially derailing the thread is our main threat, what do we do if a metafiction writer who has woven the fourth wall and Medium Awareness into their setting comes around? Do we exclude them, force them to alter their characters so that they ignore the fourth wall, or what?

edited 30th Aug '14 9:33:41 PM by CrystalGlacia

Again, I'd be in favor of strongly discouraging characters with no fourth wall from joining the threads. It's the total reverse of my normal policy that we should never prohibit any types of characters from joining the CDTs, but even if they don't cause problems, I still feel their mere presence is inherently demeaning to all of the other characters.

RE: the WMG: I wasn't gonna just blank it — might as well tape a "BAN ME" sign on my back — merely add it to the cut list as no longer maintained and completely out of date. And I think, as I consider the source of my feelings, I'm worried that it's more like a magnet for vandalism than anything else. It serves no purpose and represents a non-zero (albeit very minor) risk. Seems as good a reason as any to thus cut list.

RE: the fourth wall. "Strongly discouraged" seems too, well, strong. But I've already got a few contingencies for characters dealing with being informed they're fictional, most of them philosophical rejoinders. I think a fair compromise is "the first rule of metafictional characters is that they do not talk about being metafictional." The metafictional character would be free to think about it, of course. (Telepaths, if present and able to read these thoughts, may either assume them mad, pick up a discomforting static, or not take it too well, at the telepath's author's discretion.)

Handled properly, there are development opportunities to be had for medium-aware characters who are torn from their comfort zones, which in theory would be one of the only types of plot for such a character to explore- if we assume the metafictional elements are integral parts of their lives -making a CDT run sustainable only in the short term for them as they run out of ways to squeeze writing exploration out of such a plot from thread to thread without letting their characters move too far down a path away from their original work.

I do see the drawbacks of a metafiction writer coming here- Nrj sees them impacting the rest of the thread, I see them impacting the writer themselves, both of which could be grounds for a full metafiction ban. But I figure this would be a good time to let others chime in.

edited 30th Aug '14 10:02:46 PM by CrystalGlacia

I like it when characters do a bit of Leaning on the Fourth Wall , myself... As for outright breaking it, I don't have much of a problem with that, either. No strong feelings either way, but I'm against banning "meta" stuff altogether, and "strongly" recommending against it seems like a bit much.

Also, are we really worrying that such characters might not get much out of these threads? Surely that's something for their author(s) to worry about, not us? If they have a meta character that they want to try out and develop here, shouldn't we let them try?

I remember reading that page with the good post/bad post examples before joining Dig Site. At first I thought "Gosh, these guys must have really high standards." Then I actually looked in the thread...

Joking aside, I seem to recall it was a bit intimidating. Can someone post a link to the page we're talking about? I can't seem to find it.

I'm guessing this? CG linked to it further up the page, but it wasn't very noticeable.

Edit: While I'm here, I'm going to say that for now I don't have much of an opinion about anything, apart from that I mostly agree with KC on the current matters (though I do like Snowy's idea about the WMG page).

edited 30th Aug '14 10:50:36 PM by Yomegami

@fourth wall issues: Let me just get a stupid suggestion out of the way - Why not suggest to the author to pull a Refugee from TV Land with their fourth wall breaking characters. That way they can still claim they're a fictional character without other characters being affected.

I'm generally inclined against Fourth Wall-breakage. The only meta character I have is a universe-jumper with a near-perfect understanding of causality, and she still has no idea she's fictional.

Which rather conveniently segues into my next point. Is there even a way for a character to tell if they are fictional or not? Because if the answer is no, then for all intents and purposes any metafictionality they might bring into the thread is a personal quirk rather than a mind-shattering revelation about the true nature of the universe.

That might have just been me sort-of playing devil's advocate and noting that if a writer makes the decision to weave metafictional elements tightly into their story to the point of making them part of life for the characters, those characters are likely going to be hit very hard upon losing them as they walk into a CDT. Depending on why the characters would break the fourth wall, it would be a very fundamental change for them to deal with. While useful plots could certainly be made from this, it wouldn't be sustainable for the writer in the long term for reasons I said in my previous posts.

So metafiction characters originate from a metafictional Show Within a Show? That seems needlessly complicated.

I don't ever plan on having any, and I don't plan on ever writing metafiction- I brought the subject up in the first place for the sake of metafiction writers who may just happen to need characterization help.

Thank you, this is what I've been trying to say- as long as the metafiction isn't actually allowed to let meatspace interfere with the in-thread events (ergo the fourth wall breaking character can no longer expect to be able to receive an answer if he tries to consult the audience) it becomes a character trait even if they have received confirmation that they're fictional or whatnot. Albeit one that could derail things if there happens to be a character whose attention would logically be caught by such things being said, an outcome that's no more likely to be caused by this than... any other sufficiently odd or unignorable yet non-metafictional trait.

I think I like what KC and Gault have said on this subject the most. That being said, are we going to have a policy, or not, and what will it be?

edited 31st Aug '14 7:15:35 PM by CrystalGlacia