Random Questions Thread

I Googled it all together, tyen in two pieces, and then in four pieces and couldn't find anything, so the possibility is that you came up with it yourself.

Also relating to yet another question i previously asked[1], does it make sense that despite sending their son away to relatives who live in Canada when the situation started going bad, Carter and his husband stayed in USA to make the preparations to move away officially/legally just before things went From Bad to Worse and caused them to be trapped in USA? What do you think USA's descent into a christofascist dictatorship could look like^note  starting from the current situation, or more importantly, how long do you think it would take?

Depends on what you mean. If you're asking about the Constitution being overthrown and a non-republican form of government taking it's place, I have trouble seeing that happening in less than 100 years, if ever. If you mean maintaining the appearance of constitutional democracy but with a de facto non-democratic governing system behind the scenes, that could happen very quickly in the face of a persistent national emergency (I mean one that lasts multiple years). Say if an even more deadly epidemic were to appear and no virus or treatment was available, or if ecological and economic collapse due to global warming happened sooner than expected. They will have to suborn both political parties to accomplish that, so that Republican vs. Democrat becomes a distinction without a difference (for this reason, I can't see it being a specifically Christian crypto-fascist state, there are too many anti-evangelicals out there). It would almost have to be a "Centrist-fascism" pretending to promote a "middle ground" between the extreme conservatives and "socialists". They will want to appear as moderate and reasonable, but while reserving the real levers of power for a well-connected class of billionaires behind the scenes. The basic ideology would have to be individualistic to have traction within the US, so it's a "Meritocratic-Fascist" ideology. Economic success=patriotism, basically. LGBT people would have their rights protected, but only if they register their sexual orientation (and agree to a number of other "reasonable compromises", such as restrictions on where they can live, work and shop).

Edited by DeMarquis on Jul 17th 2020 at 6:34:47 AM

hey, how do i. plan a story

like... this is probably the first time i'm actually setting things up instead of making them up on the fly. granted, i do enjoy it, but i am. afraid of Plot Holes

Do you have any ideas in mind?

yeah. i have a basic premise, how some things in the ending should go, a bunch of characters planned. the 'verse is already somewhat fleshed out due to my tendency to write Random Lore.

but its things like. planning?? as in, scenario.. things like that

Edited by Awe921 on Jul 18th 2020 at 3:00:37 AM

Yeah, that sounds like quite a bit more than what this thread is for. If you're looking to develop your story from the ground up, you might want to start a new thread and post the characters and concept you've already thought up, so that other posters could give input on the story elements you need help with.

Standard caveat applies: if you're planning to publish your story for pay, remember to avoid posting all of it on this forum. See the Advice for Protecting Your Publication Rights for details.

@Awe 921: It occurs to me to note: while planning may be of use to you, don't feel that it's necessary for any writer working on a large-enough story. Some writers thrive on the structure of a plan; others thrive with everything pantsed; still others may take other positions regarding planning.

You say that you're afraid of plot holes: if I may ask, has that been a problem in your writing up to this point? (If so, then fair enough, planning might well be a good way to deal with that!)

Wait does that (Tvtropes lisencing my stuff to itself) also apply to the characters, basic concepts, and other bits mentioned in this thread or the character critique threads?

Edited by Nukeli on Jul 18th 2020 at 3:04:54 PM

See this. Talking about your work is fine. Posting the work itself could be problematic.

Edited by Fighteer on Jul 18th 2020 at 8:04:21 AM

I did read it, but it was left unclear to me whether it applies to plots mentioned in Random Questions thread or characters mentioned in Character Critique Threads.

Edited by Nukeli on Jul 18th 2020 at 3:08:10 PM

We cannot protect your ideas if you post them here. However, unless you post the actual content of your work, you are not at risk of running into "prior publication" issues.

@Awe: It's not clear to me what you need. Do you have a plot in mind, have you designed your protagonist and antagonist, or are you at the very initial stages of story building?

There are a lot of resources online to help beginning authors. Have you seen these resources?

Write A Story

Writer's Toolbox

Writers Resources

If you need more help, let us know.

Edited by DeMarquis on Jul 18th 2020 at 11:44:48 AM

i have a plot in mind, the protagonist and the antagonist ready.. but i want to learn how to plan for stories. what do i do, what do i not do.. etc. i think i have a fairly decent grasp thanks to me wasting my time reading around this site, but i want to be certain, in case i need to do some planning.

Edited by Awe921 on Jul 19th 2020 at 8:12:20 AM

Hmm. Maybe you will find this helpful.

I'm trying to apply Blue-and-Orange Morality to the dark elves of my story, but I'm worried it just comes off as cold and sociopathic.

Dark elves believe that death is for the weak, and no matter how loved or respected you were in life, the instant you die you're just another weakling who didn't have what it takes to stay alive. If a great hero sacrifices their life to defend a city of people, they're just seen as an idiot for getting themself killed, with no gratitude from the people they saved. If a child gets killed, the parents don't grieve, but instead are ashamed for having such a weak child. If you go to war, it doesn't matter how many enemies you killed, the moment you die in battle, you're a disgrace.

At first I thought this would be an interesting way to apply Blue-and-Orange Morality, but looking back I realized I essentially created an entire race of Voldemorts. Are there any other methods I can try to make it clear that dark elves are different without turning them all into cold, unfeeling, ungrateful assholes?

Edited by DelphineTheDelphox on Jul 19th 2020 at 7:42:48 AM

If you wind up leaving them as-is, I think it'll go a long way toward keeping them from coming across as evil if they only exhibit that belief towards other dark elves, or just their own society/societies of dark elves that believe that, and don't subject, say, humans or other races not part of their culture to that. (Cultural variation within fantasy races is a good thing!) Maybe because they recognize that humans and most other races are designed to expire and are within their rights to do whatever they can to work with that, while the dark elf race is not and so individuals should also be doing whatever they can to take full advantage of their possibly indefinite lifespans? Now that'd be a fun little Not So Different moment.

Given that you didn't mention their thoughts on the elderly dying of old age, I'm assuming that your dark elves are of The Ageless variety of immortality- they can't die of simple old age or its associated complications, or maybe not even natural causes like illness or congenital disorders, but can still die to violence. If that's not the case and they do, in fact, have finite lifespans, then I'd love to know how they treat their elders when they start having trouble caring for themselves, or their perspective on medical care. Most societies have traditionally valued and respected their elders because in the days before modern medicine, you generally didn't reach that age without being very tough and accumulating a lot of valuable knowledge along the way that the young'uns are probably going to want to know. A society that actively doesn't value its elders would definitely be a departure from human societies.

I don't think the base idea of "dead = weak" necessarily has to lead to Voldy- or Hitler/Nazi-esque social Darwinism. In order to wind up with anything resembling those sorts, they would have to be applying those beliefs to currently living individuals. I would think your dark elves would have to also be actively seeking out "weak" individuals to exterminate, or deeming certain categories of individuals in their societies weak or deserving of weakness, and thus death. That would be immoral, and lead to individuals fearing for their lives and seeking asylum elsewhere. But treating the dead as people too weak to avoid death could instead lead to their society seeking ways to avoid and counteract weakness.

Perhaps their society is super-militarized- everybody learns self-defense, combat, and threat-detection starting in childhood, and they always have a weapon at arm's length. Perhaps they work to develop medication, medical techniques, and health practices to prevent their people from dying of stupid, easily preventable things- maybe they'd be tearing us real-world humans a new one over the COVID-19 pandemic for not washing our hands or wearing PPE. If their medical science develops far enough, I could see a dark elven couple pragmatically deciding against having children or splitting up altogether just because they're genetic carriers of a horrible congenital disorder and don't want to bring weak children into the world. Perhaps the way they react to death isn't with cold indifference, but anger because they didn't do this or that to be stronger. A dark elf watches their best friend, lover, child, parent, or other loved one get a fatal wound, and they cry Berserker Tears while chewing out their dying loved one for being an idiot. Funerals are less about grieving the fallen and more about figuring out how they died so somebody else doesn't make that mistake again.

To answer a few things, all elves, including dark elves, have naturally long lifespans. On average they hit puberty around 25, are considered adults at 40, and generally live to be 200, unless they meditate for an hour every day, which temporarily halts the aging process. Generally if an elf gets old, it's for one of three reasons; 1) they were irresponsible and neglected their meditation, 2) they have very busy lives and don't have time to meditate, or 3) they chose to get older for whatever reason.

Elves are immune to all infectious and contagious diseases, and wood elves specifically are even immune to poisoning (a trait inherited from their ancestors, the goblins), but are still susceptible to other diseases, especially genetic ones. Cancer in particular is an issue.

Dark elves still think other species, besides elves, have no excuse for dying, as there are other methods of living forever.

• There are four categories of mortality:
  • Mortal: has a beginning and end, and will inevitably die. Includes most life.
  • Semimortal: has the potential to halt aging via meditation, but can still die violently or to some form of disease. Includes elves, fairies, and a few other species.
  • Unmortal: was once mortal or semimortal, but has since achieved true eternal youth and immunity to all disease, but can still die violently. Includes vampires and anyone who has "killed" an immortal. (See below)
  • Immortal: has no beginning and no end, as they have always existed and always will. If an immortal is "killed" by mortal or semimortal, they absorb the immortal's soul and become unmortal. When the host dies, the immortal freed. Includes demons and gods.

The advice you gave certainly helps, though! Thanks!

Okay, so there's this story I want to write and I will readily admit it's a Self-Insert Fic (except it's an original story and not a fanfiction) but it's not the standard Mary Sue one. It's actually kind of turned into a way for me to explore some traumatic things that happened to me. I do fear though, that I'll end up making the deuteragonist the Mary Sue, as their personality is the kind of friend that I would like to have. Is therapeutic writing inherently bad? If not, is there a way it can be done correctly?

Theraputic writing is fine, although I dont know if there is a "correct" way to do it. I think it's subject to the exact same critical standards as any other work—try to avoid one dimensional characters, and make sure the protagonist has to struggle to overcome their internal conflicts (and maybe they never do, entirely).

Can the heroic traits of a character actually become flaws in certain situations? I think so, but I'm not sure.

Chronic Hero Syndrome

Edited by DelphineTheDelphox on Jul 20th 2020 at 8:15:57 AM

I don't know how to make my characters likable. I've laid out personalities but I want actions that make the audience want to care about them.

How do I do this?

@Mroh: Historically, I've been of the opinion that if you're writing something purely for yourself, and you intend to have anyone else read it, then the main thing you should do is make it clear to your readers that that's what's going on.

If they're applied without regard to context, I could see something like that being the case. For example, someone who boldly and loudly opposes uncouth behaviour... doing so in a movie theatre, to a theatre-goer who's merely talking over the movie. (As opposed to doing so more quietly.)

Whether the "heroic traits" actually become flaws or whether they're still heroic but misapplied I won't judge, but they can become problematic in this way, at least.

Ultimately, you don't control how the audience reacts; and some traits or behaviours that endear a character to one audience-member may repel another.

You can perhaps have your characters behave in ways that are commonly-liked, but I'd suggest that this may have an impact on their characterisation.

Rather, I might suggest writing the characters such that you care about them: not only are you likely to be more invested, but it seems likely that others who perceive similarly to you will be inclined to like them, too.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jul 21st 2020 at 12:20:02 PM

Never try to make your characters "likable" to the audience, make them interesting instead. It's a good idea to try to make them relatable, by giving them characteristics, including flaws, that are shared by many people. Or by giving them experiences that anyone could relate to (having the protag try to ask their crush out but stammers due to nervousness, or flub an important test during their training sequence, or misunderstand someone due to a pre-existing bias or anything else like that). Complex, relatable characters keep audiences reading, not likable ones.