• Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Writers' Workshop General Chat Thread

I think the mistake shipping authors often make (Which, admittedly, is something that few of their fans will care about) is to treat the shipping name as enough in itself. Either the plot doesn't properly support it (With the wackier shippings it flat-out can't), or the shipping is supposed to be the plot in itself. In the latter case, it should really just be called romance, in my opinion. In any case, I never get the sense of a real relationship - or at least a real romance - from these, so much as half-hearted box ticking before the kissing scenes start.

And it better be kissing scenes, as the people writing these fics are most likely twelve-year-old girls that know nothing about sex beyond "insert rod A into slot B."
 
Shippers are, quite frankly, odd. I can understand shipping main characters and stuff, but I find it really weird when shippers put two completely random characters together (someone at work told me how much she loves Hermione/Marcus Flint ones....) and also expect their random ship to be acknowledged and respected.
See Crack Pairing. Frankly, I usually find them pretty hilarious, but sometimes they can be taken to a very... weird extent.

I hardly ever read pure romance works, but I actually quite like it when included in a story in addition to the main plot. Not just in fanfiction, but in original works as well. If done right, it can add quite a lot to the characters, and not only those involved in the relationship, but everyone around them as well. But, I agree with what Beth said, it's easy to have the romance either take over the story or become too systematic if the author isn't careful.
 
Romance being the main plot need not be a bad thing - you just can't cheap out on the characterisation just because you're writing canon characters. If you won't show me why they're falling for each other, I'm not going to care about reading them either
 
The few times I've tried reading fics about ships that I like I was sorely disappointed by how out of character everyone was. It kind of ruins the point when you have an unlikely pairing that the author forces to work by changing the personalities of the characters until it isn't unlikely anymore.

On being super specific in worldbuilding: I'm a firm believer in the school of thought that authors should have an idea of how everything works, even outside of the scope of the story itself. The author should know the characters' whole lives from birth to death, the history of the world, and maybe an idea of the world's future. Once you know all those details, you can zoom in on the story you want to tell. The extra details that creep through contribute hugely to immersion and realism.
 
The thoroughness does, however, make your story's world feel more complete, as one of my friends puts it.
Yes, absolutely. It's one thing that annoys me about a lot of writing, it doesn't feel like enough love is put into it most of the time. Granted, a lot of people are merely hobbyist writers with actual lives to tend to, whereas myself... I feel like I have all of the time in the world to dive into research and fabrication. Maybe that's why I'm so cynical towards others, I don't realize how little time other authors might have

What's your stance on Shrek X Shadow the Hedgehog crack pairings?
It's time for those pairings to be OGRE

On being super specific in worldbuilding: I'm a firm believer in the school of thought that authors should have an idea of how everything works, even outside of the scope of the story itself. The author should know the characters' whole lives from birth to death, the history of the world, and maybe an idea of the world's future. Once you know all those details, you can zoom in on the story you want to tell. The extra details that creep through contribute hugely to immersion and realism.
Oh god, you don't even want to see my notes for Storm Island, then. I've drafted up some ideas for regions that have absolutely nothing to do with the storyline, just so I can potentially cherry pick some insane detail that might come in useful in an inconsequential conversation.
 
On being super specific in worldbuilding: I'm a firm believer in the school of thought that authors should have an idea of how everything works, even outside of the scope of the story itself. The author should know the characters' whole lives from birth to death, the history of the world, and maybe an idea of the world's future. Once you know all those details, you can zoom in on the story you want to tell. The extra details that creep through contribute hugely to immersion and realism.

As usual, the late Terry Pratchett found a way to put it pithily. To paraphrase from The Art of Discworld: "I wanted to create the sense of a world that would keep going even if the story stopped."

I think once you have that principle in your head, a lot of good worldbuilding follows. Cities are the best barometer of whether this sense is in any given story. A city isn't just a bunch of buildings with a few tourist attractions here and there. It's a mass community where hundreds of thousands, millions of people live and work. That sounds obvious, but put it into practice. Even the most "boring" city has to have places for people to work, and those places will all be doing something that someone else needs. In the medieval-style city that means people baking bread, selling fish, making pins, cobbling shoes, tanning leather, carting shit, dying cloth, forging swords, selling beer, etc etc etc.

If you really want a sense of the diversity and complexity of life, especially urban life, try looking into what the poorest of the poor did to get by in Victorian Britain. Off the top of my head: Collecting cigar butts from bar room floors to sell the tobacco. Sweeping a street crossing free of horse shit. Collecting dog shit to sell to the tanneries. Collecting bones and other oddments at the riverside to sell to the fertiliser manufacturers. Carrying a lamp for a well-to-do gentlemen on their way home for the evening.
 
As usual, the late Terry Pratchett found a way to put it pithily. To paraphrase from The Art of Discworld: "I wanted to create the sense of a world that would keep going even if the story stopped."

I think once you have that principle in your head, a lot of good worldbuilding follows. Cities are the best barometer of whether this sense is in any given story. A city isn't just a bunch of buildings with a few tourist attractions here and there. It's a mass community where hundreds of thousands, millions of people live and work. That sounds obvious, but put it into practice. Even the most "boring" city has to have places for people to work, and those places will all be doing something that someone else needs. In the medieval-style city that means people baking bread, selling fish, making pins, cobbling shoes, tanning leather, carting shit, dying cloth, forging swords, selling beer, etc etc etc.

If you really want a sense of the diversity and complexity of life, especially urban life, try looking into what the poorest of the poor did to get by in Victorian Britain. Off the top of my head: Collecting cigar butts from bar room floors to sell the tobacco. Sweeping a street crossing free of horse shit. Collecting dog shit to sell to the tanneries. Collecting bones and other oddments at the riverside to sell to the fertiliser manufacturers. Carrying a lamp for a well-to-do gentlemen on their way home for the evening.

I find it really funny that you mention Terry Pratchett and Victorian Britain in the same past. Pratchett wrote a book titled Dodger which is set in Victorian London. The main character, somewhat loosely based off of Charles Dickens' Artful Dodger, is a tosher, a boy who makes a living scouring the sewers for anything of value that has been washed down. Through chance, he happens to become involved in some rather delicate politics, where his underworld contacts often come in handy. I bring this up because, although the story is set in London's past and even includes some real-life historical figures (including Dickens himself, if I remember correctly), Pratchett does an incredible job of creating his own world in the seedy side of London. Sometimes the fictional characters felt more real to me than those who actually existed.

There can be so many different sides to a city; I usually find them to be my favorite settings in stories when they're fleshed out and given some depth. The more undesirable parts of a city in particular can be quite powerful.
 
Yes, absolutely. It's one thing that annoys me about a lot of writing, it doesn't feel like enough love is put into it most of the time. Granted, a lot of people are merely hobbyist writers with actual lives to tend to, whereas myself... I feel like I have all of the time in the world to dive into research and fabrication. Maybe that's why I'm so cynical towards others, I don't realize how little time other authors might have

It took me three years to figure out what my main character in Survival Project was hiding. I didn't have time to write during those years in high school/early college, but I sure thought about things and imagined various scenarios before bed, during breaks, while eating, whatever. You don't need a computer or a book or a pen to dedicate time to writing. And though I'm well aware that no one cares about my stories even half as much as I do, I needed Survival Project to be told... so I found time.

I like to believe that others will pursue the time for writing if they need it, too.
 
Probably because it's easier to become part of the community. I feel like I can get closer to people here than on Serebii.
 
Phew. After two whirlwind sessions of brainstorming, I've increased the amount of Fakemon I have to work with from about 14 to a whopping 112. I get the feeling that 90+ of these will never show up in any of my writing, but it doesn't hurt to be prepared, I guess. If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing.

If anyone wants a few, I could share. They're mostly just names, types and broad ideas at the moment, nothing fancy like movesets, abilities, etc.

Edit: I should note that none of these are evolutionary relatives. Only thirteen of them are loosely related to each other, though a lot more are based off of similar animals.

I actually might have some use for this down the road. Hopefully without spoilers, I do plan on my writing to go to other regions outside those in the games, and them having at least a few unique mons to call their own could be helpful.

On being super specific in worldbuilding: I'm a firm believer in the school of thought that authors should have an idea of how everything works, even outside of the scope of the story itself. The author should know the characters' whole lives from birth to death, the history of the world, and maybe an idea of the world's future. Once you know all those details, you can zoom in on the story you want to tell. The extra details that creep through contribute hugely to immersion and realism.

I couldn't agree more. Honestly the most time consuming part of writing for me is the worldbuilding, making sure it all fits together and makes sense.
 
Just a reminder that it has been over two weeks since the Review Game last moved. Open to anyone who wants to take part! I'd highly recommend actively taking part in this now that the awards have changed: gotta start reading somewhere!
 
Back
Top Bottom