Reviews for Tas'mar: A New Beginning
Patch72 chapter 5 . 7/15/2007
Well it's not exactly my cup of tea, but I'll give you created for it being so well written. Very interesting and original idea you've got going on here. And originality is rare now-a-days. (I would know. lol) So keep up the good work
Lccorp2 chapter 2 . 7/7/2007
Harr.

-Your beginning is pointless. Yes, seriously. No, I have no reason to care about the history of your world or its races right at the start. Don't give me crap about "providing background". You have no hook to entice readers to want to read more. Three sentences. That's how long the average browser will give you to catch their attention, according to Random House. Don't waste those three sentences on something completely pointless to the plot ATM. If my friend hadn't dared me to read this story, I'd be pressing the back button about now.

I don't need to know the eccentrities of the two-headed aliens from mars or the feeding habits of beetle-borgs. You have no characters for me to care about, no names for me to identify with, no personalities for me to build empathy with.

Beware the beginning. It’s the great victim of infodumpers. What better place, a fantasy author might reason, to tell her audience all about the world, story and characters than right in the beginning?

How about, “As it becomes necessary?”

The problem with using the start of a story as a landfill for information is that the beginning has other purposes to serve. It introduces the setting and characters in sheer detail (such as dialogue) as well as directly stated information. It’s your best chance to hook the reader. It needs to be indicative of the rest of the story, in tone, content, pace, or, ideally, all three. And it’s very easy to make clichéd.

Information is only part of the story, not the whole. Don’t make someone decide he’d rather be reading Todd Mccaffrey's latest horrible book because you can’t control the impulse to run on at the mouth and neatly pigeonhole all your races into happy little stereotypes which they never deviate from and individual personalities almost never shine through. Elves are always nature-loving and blah blah, dwarves live underground, beetle-borgs are all bad-tempered. Because no Elf seriously ever wanted to blow stuff up to make people's lives easier.

That's it for the "prologue". Now to move onto the nitty-gritty stuff.

-It's blatantly obvious that you never bothered to do any form of research whatsoever into weapons. Really. Want some proof?

"Eebon moved back to the weapons training area and called a challenge to another warrior, this one wielding a short sword and dagger, a lethal combination since they moved in so close to engage their enemies."

This sentence alone made me spray milk all over my computer screen. Some of the moves you depict are completely wrong and would only last on a movie screen; in real life they'd have left Eebon wide open to attack from his opponent. Just because things look cool in your mind's eye doesn't mean they go into the writing if you're trying to portay a skilled character- and when he gets away with it, the author behind the stage pulling the strings becomes all-too-obvious.

Do some basic research, please, I'm not asking you to go to the salvator fabris website to check up fencing moves or something of that depth. Lack of it will spoil your scene at the best, and at the worst make you look like an utter buffoon, especially if these are elite warriors you're trying to portray.

has plenty of resources on forging, maintaining and the practical use of many medieval weapons. Tactics and general notes for the layman can be found at l (dash) clausewitz 's livejournal.

-Info-dumping is a phenomenon in which an author stops the movement of the story for description, like so:

Insert character A. Insert character A’s description. Insert setting A. Insert setting A’s description. Insert character B. Insert character B’s description. Insert action sequence. Insert setting B. Insert setting B’s description. Insert character C. Et cetera.

Any writer worth his salt could tell you that this is a huge no-no. It keeps your story from having any kind of flow, it messes up your pacing, and can lead into purple prose.

Want an example of this?

Introduce character:

"In the dark of night, it was difficult to see very well, but Kraethor managed to glimpse a few dark figured moving silently about. He heard the twang of a few more bow strings followed by howls of pain. After a few more moments, five people came close enough to see, Kraethor could easily tell that they were Northland soldiers."

Insert description:

"One carried a heavy crossbow, and virtually no armor, only leather pads on his forearms. He also wore a black tabard marked with a silver shield. Three others were garbed as typical men at arms, they wore chain mail shirts, with steel gauntlets and shoulder guards. On one hip they carried a small quiver of arrows, on their other hip, two carried swords, the other had a single handed battleaxe, a black shield also marked with the silver shield and a bow were carried on their backs. Kraethor was surprised to see that the fifth was a female. She wore no armor at all, nor were there any marks or symbols on her black tunic, which was rimmed with blood red. Kraethor could see that she carried three daggers in her belt, and a single edged sword only slightly curved, which she held at her side."

Have you any idea what you've just done? You've just thrown away what little suspense and fast-pacing your action scene had by inserting a frickin' infodump. Break it up, slip it in, make it serve more than one purpose, do whatever- don't make it stick out like a sore thumb and smash the atmosphere of your scene into pices along with the flow.

Less is more, when it comes to description. Leaving things up to the reader’s imagination creates more intrigue and mystery, and doesn’t hinder the plot from moving forward.

-SHOW CHARACTER TRAITS AND ABILITIES, DON'T TELL. There are some things which should be shown, I agree. how LEET and POWAHFUL they are aren't one of them. I've seen to many characters being described as having "intelligent eyes" and acted like total dumbasses.

Tell neutral qualities and show them if you want to. Show moral ones. I don’t mind it when the author introduces me to a character like so: “A tall, brown-eyed man with a broadsword over his shoulder and an easy manner of moving walked into the inn.” It’s certainly possible to show those qualities as well, like having the character duck to avoid the too-low doorway, but even those mentions usually get a bit that explains why the character had to duck. That’s okay. Height, weight, what a character looks like, what they’re wearing, what they’re carrying, are often easier to tell than show. You mention it, you get it out of the way, you go on.

Moral qualities, those qualities we’re supposed to judge the character on or like her for, are something I prefer shown. I hate, hate, hate the two most common methods of telling them: the omniscient narrator who says something like, “Though she did not know it, Elena had a manner of speaking that revealed wisdom beyond her years,” and the overheard conversation between two characters where they just happen to praise the protagonist’s courage, wisdom, loyalty, goodness, et bloody cetera. The first comes across as a refusal to commit to demonstrating the quality; the author just wants me to think Elena is wise, when in practice she may be an airhead. The second has the problems of the first, plus that old chestnut that most overheard conversations are not going to be relevant to the person hearing them, nor good information about that person if they are, plus the rendering of minor or secondary characters as cheerleaders for the protagonist and no more than that.

Want me to look at your character? I have no problem with telling in that case. Want me to like her? You’ve got an even chance, but without showing, it feels like the author attempting to stack the deck, and I’m much more likely to go the other way out of sheer contrariness.

Don't cheat. Yes, you're cheating my having their mentor exclaim things like "“both your skills are improving well. Eebon, your skill with the long sword is admirable, but it is your agility that most often saves you, learn how to better control it and you will be greater still.”" and "you have chosen the heavy battleaxe as your weapon, and it is the most difficult to master. But your control over it is amazing, I dare say that you are strongest of all our blademasters. There is more to you than your weapon alone, however. And so for the next week you will train without any weapons.”" and then expect me to believe that. (No, given your sparring scenes, they show nothing of such skill).

Why, just because the mentor says so makes it true? Sorry, they are still your puppets on the stage of the story and you're cheating by claiming they're really that skilled because the mentor says so. Just because you type that the mentor says it doesn't make it true, for they say whatever you want them to say.

Harr.
Ember Swish chapter 3 . 7/7/2007
Liking this more and more...just be sure to be careful of starting sentaces with "And."

Update soon!
Ember Swish chapter 2 . 7/6/2007
Wow, when you said you promised satisfaction, you were right! This is one of the best stories I have read yet! Keep writing, watch capitalization, it wouldn't hurt to be a bit more desciptive, and update very, very ,soon! I'll be waiting.