DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Gamestar Mechanic Forum
HTML https://gamestarforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: C.S.T. Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 27370--------------------------------------------------
On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Zenwarrior54 Date: September 3, 2015, 7:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
CST battles are a tug of war between two or more writers. If
done correctly it makes a clean and entertaining duel where each
writer gives and takes from his own side, like this:
Person A vs Person B
(PA vs PB)
Person A
PA leapt at PB, sword drawn, and took the first swipe. PB dodged
it and drew his own sword, and the two met face-to-face.
Person B
They exchanged attacks, appearing to be evenly matched. At one
point PB saw an opening and scratched PA's arm, then jumped back
and took a better position.
[Advantage at this point is to PB. PA has a light scratch, but
his writer still has a lot of options to fight with.]
Person A
He continuously struck PB's defenses, trying to look for an
opening. He pushed through and landed a clean hit hit to PB's
leg, but when he stepped back he noticed a bigger cut to his
shoulder.
[PA and PB both have damage done to them. It's a relatively fair
exchange and tide turnings that become more and more intense
with each subsequent post. By the end, if PA wins, PB won't feel
cheated, and PA won't get too cocky about it, because in the end
the two users cooperated to create an even fight scene. A fight
between two characters isn't supposed to also be a battle
between two writers.]
Unfortunately, this is almost never the case. A cheap way to get
your character in the advantage is to cripple the opponent.
Common cheap tactics I've seen include using super speed to tie
the hands of your opponent or pinning them against the wall with
a wind barrier, or heck, I've even seen someone try to use SLEEP
DARTS. Even if it might make some sense, it doesn't change the
fact that it's just plain BAD WRITING. At the end of the day,
the other user will feel cheated out of a good fight, and you're
likely to get retconned.
The most cut-and-dry remedy to this is using Sanctum-Style
fights, which means both users creating extensive posts with
full control of each others characters, then submitting them to
a third party to decide the canon entry and, by extension, the
winner. This IS a battle of writers, in this case, and by doing
so will maximize the potential quality of the scene. Of course,
if the story demands it, a less talented writer might NEED to
win in order to move the story along, so his opponent should
keep that in mind, and a regular-format battle post might be
necessary.
This is a discussion thread, and I'd like everyone who reads
this to chip in. How do you think we can formulate a strategy to
improve our CSTs' battle quality?
#Post#: 27372--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Elephants4Ever Date: September 3, 2015, 8:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I definitely agree about the battle scenes. In writing, we call
an invulnerable, overly powerful character a mary-sue or
gary-stu... It's not good writing, and it doesn't make the story
fun to read or participate in, either--invincible characters
aren't compatible with csts, in my opinion. If you want to do it
in your personal writing, that's fine, but when you write with
others you're agreeing to give up a lot of control over the
plot.
I think a good rule of thumb is that if you wouldn't be okay
with your character being killed, you're doing something wrong.
XD For example, I have character arcs in my head for both Inghka
and Ellie that I'm excited to see play out. However, if either
enters a losing battle that they should die in, then they will.
Keep in mind that if you have an overarching plot idea that you
really want to push out, you should discuss it first with the
other writers. If it doesn't work with them, that's okay, just
save away the idea for a personal story. :)
I think it's good to keep in mind negatives--for example,
Inghka's gun is powerful but it doesn't really work well unless
she's close to someone. Inghka might be perceptive in some
cases, but often she's wrong, impatient, stubborn, and cranky,
too; obviously, she's nowhere near perfect. It makes it easier
for me to understand that parting with her may be necessary at
some point. XD
Keep in mind that characters are not people, they aren't your
children, and they aren't you, so an attack on a character isn't
an attack on you. In fact, dramatic and tragic deaths are fun to
write *evil smile*. Writing becomes really rewarding when you
recognize that none of your characters are indispensable. :D
#Post#: 27373--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Leaping-Deer Date: September 3, 2015, 8:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I have to say, I like the idea of a Sanctum-like approach to
dealing with these battle posts. It makes a more organized way
of dealing with these battles which subsequently results in less
retconning (which after recent events I 100% support). One
concern is that how shall we decide who the third party is?
#Post#: 27374--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Zenwarrior54 Date: September 3, 2015, 9:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps between the three admins. One of the admins judges the
battle. If two of the three admins have a battle, the third
judges.
#Post#: 27375--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Elephants4Ever Date: September 3, 2015, 9:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Maybe the GM should be the third party, unless the GM is
involved in the conflict, in which case control is ceded to a
global moderator that isn't involved? Zen's idea works also. :D
#Post#: 27376--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Zenwarrior54 Date: September 3, 2015, 9:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Also, here's a rule of thumb, which you guys may want to
critique:
Combat in Role Play (and Sanctum-Style) is Character vs
Character, Writer vs Writer working against each other.
Combat in CST is Character vs Character, and the two writers
working together to create an entertaining battle.
Please learn the difference.
#Post#: 27377--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: SierraRacer Date: September 3, 2015, 9:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree with this, and I have to admit, I do some things like
that... But at least other people that do this as well as me now
may realize that we did something that was kind of unfair to the
other charrie.
And Hannah, totally agree with the no killing thing (exception,
of course if you have permission to kill). It can ruin various
plans that may be coming. Now that Hannah mentioned plans, I
think that some things about plans if you want to keep them
suspenseful is to just talk with one or two people (not just
people like me, run them by the person who started the CST or
Iaa, Zen, or Nitrox) and if someone says no to your idea, it
doesn't mean that they don't like it, so people don't feel bad.
((Refusal of plans is to be expected, I checked with Leap for
something in IRL, but she said that couldn't happen))
Indestructible stuff has just been decided ((literally just now,
I was half way through typing that above part)) not really
allowed, so the word "indestructible" should basically be not
allowed for stuff, especially weapons. If someone says
indestructible in a post by mistake, I think that we should just
take it like it's HARD to defeat or something, but not
indestructible.
Something that I have seen that has irritated me a lot is that
some charries just know EVERY SINGLE DAMN THING that is going
on. When they are forced to make a guess, they make the RIGHT
decision no matter what. PLEASE keep in mind that what you know
as a writer about other charries, your charrie does NOT know
what other charries things are. Say another charrie makes your
charrie guess something, your charrie can't ALWAYS be right.
In battle, sort of like Zen said, always (or maybe with one or
two exceptions) have you write your OWN charrie getting hurt. It
can usually help the fight seem a little more fair. It should
also effect your charrie a little in his/her fighting style. If
it's just a tiny scratch, then that is as if nothing happened.
If it's a broken finger, then your charrie may need to adjust if
they are holding a weapon.
I do realize that I occasionally do one or two of these things
myself, and I just want you guys to understand the mistake and
tell me so that I can realize what I did wrong and fix it!
#Post#: 27378--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Elephants4Ever Date: September 3, 2015, 9:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree. :D I think a lot of times it's easy to forget that csts
are about the plot, while roleplays are about pushing your
character. In a cst, your character isn't a representation of
yourself, it's a plot device that you use. :D Think of it like
this: your character is like a gear in a machine. You have to
make sure it helps the machine as a whole, right? It might be a
really pretty, shiny gear, but in the end, if it's hurting the
machine it's no good. XD
((Also, Sierra, the idea was that it's okay to let your
character die--even if you had an idea planned out for them
before hand. In the end, that's the way life goes--people can
die without achieving their goals. Stories should flow
similarly))
#Post#: 27379--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: Zenwarrior54 Date: September 3, 2015, 9:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'd have to disagree with your last statement, Ele4. Remember,
we're writing stories, so if your subplot will make the plot
better, move it along or give it a deeper meaning, then it
should have some protection, given it has the GM's support.
#Post#: 27380--------------------------------------------------
Re: On the Issue of Battle Posts (STICKY)
By: nitrox116 Date: September 3, 2015, 9:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sanctum-Style
To be honest, I think that mixing Sanctum-style fight scenes and
normal interactive posting is something that might be a little
bit too weird. It would force long, drawn-out, detailed fights
when in reality a simple sniping shot might be more logical, and
the tone of Sanctum writing was very different from the tone of
CSTs. Zen's original fight scene was a good example – generally
have your character perform one action at a time.
One thing that we might want to try is, at the end of a fight
post, put how your character would react to various attacks –
what they're planning. If your character has some kind of
counter or dodge prepared, knowing that would let the other
writer go along with your plans while still being autonomous.
Killing
Killing really depends on the CST. To be honest (although
Leap's the GM), the one-protagonist, one-antagonist, relatively
comedic nature of IRL makes me think that character deaths won't
be too common there. However, in something like Sanctum/Divided
or the Maalum series, either the context or the number of
characters involved make deaths more common. The general rule
of etiquette is to ask the character owner before killing
someone (their permission is not required if they seem to be too
attached or something, although you shouldn't go around killing
characters for no reason), and to give the writer control over
the death scene.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page