Riyah404
I'll be happy to swap :)
Here's mine: https://www.webnovel.com/book/rattus-rex_19524654305541205
Winterwisps
- May 14, 2021
- Joined Apr 26, 2021
kpthe1
Haha yes! Another victim falls into the trap :DYour friendly, locally sourced nitpicker is back to provide commentary that may--or may not--result in eye-roll-induced injury to anyone generous enough to offer me an opportunity to nag.
Or perhaps you'd simply like a chance to reciprocate in kind?
My work is overdue a ripping into, so come take your best shot at: https://www.webnovel.com/book/rattus-rex_19524654305541205In all seriousness, I'll tell you what I think, but I'm not going to review bomb anyone :).
PGODofficial
I've been offline for a while, so I'm sorry for the slow reply. I'd love to take a look! :)Hiwaga
Sorry it took so long, but I finally got around to it! You don't have to throw a review back, since I was so tardy :). Good luck!I'll be sure to look at it in the morning!
Roger that, Mate. :D
Yes, gladly :D
meixiaolian
Hi there, up for another swap?
https://www.webnovel.com/book/rattus-rex_19524654305541205I can't sleep, so I'm reviewing instead. Anyone interested in the thoughts of an insomniac; just let me know and I'll get right on it.
Hello. I would like to offer in-depth reviews and commentary to anyone willing to do the same in return. I'm confident that I provide constructive feedback on any story, and I'm excited to see what flaws there is to uncover in my own, so I expect any reviewer of mine to be as nitpicky as possible.
If you're interested in taking up the challenge, let me know.
My story:
https://www.webnovel.com/book/rattus-rex_19524654305541205Mel_Aniv
Sure thing!Yulainei
Hi! We're about the same amount of chapters in, would you like to swap with me? :)My story is here: https://www.webnovel.com/book/rattus-rex_19524654305541205
- Edited
Here's my shameless self-promotion
Rattus Rex
This a recently published fantasy story with a reincarnation device. The race of the MC is inspired by the skaven from warhammer lore, but the story takes place in an original world, which is why I named them the vexen instead, to avoid confusion. Instead of a human turning into a monster, I tried going the other way, turning a monster into a human. I thought it'd be an interesting project, and I'd very much like some feedback on my work.
Synopsis
In an attempt to change the fate of the vexen, Halifax, lord of the undercity Scree, seeks to ally himself with humanity's saintess, with whom he made a promise long ago. However, the plan fails, and both he and the saintess dies, and with them, the dream they shared.
Only, it was not the end. To his horror, Halifax wakes up in the body of a human, now living in an entirely different world from the one he knew. Reborn as the youngest son of a minor lord, and given the name Hamelin, the former vexen overlord seeks to regain his former power and discover the truth about his second chance.SrtaA
You've said in short what I couldn't manage in lengthy paragraphs - excellent!Tea_Tae
I see your point in all of those examples, and I think I'd agree -- especially Pain, but my issue was more that he dealt out a lot of meaningful deaths around him, only to reverse it all and making all that emotional investment meaningless when you think about it.However, I do think there's a way to make those antagonists work, even as their motives shift, but it requires a lot of subtle effort, I'd say. Pain does have a backstory that supports a belief in friendship (as far as I remember it -- been a while since watched Naruto). He even uses the dead bodies of his old friend in a mockery of comraderie, which suggests he holds on to those emotions in his own twisted way.
Where I think it falls flat in that case, and I agree with you that it does, is when the shift is too sudden. As I said it's been a while, so I'm working from memory here, and I might get the deatils wrong, but In Pain's case, it might have worked if we had seen a 'crack-in-the-armor' incident before the big fight that ultimately turns him to 'the good side'. What I mean by that is a moment where his mock-friendship is pointed out, or maybe that his ideals are challenged in a way that forms a crack in his fundational beliefs. In that case there are only two options for him, take out the flaw by taking out Naruto and his village who embodies the flaw, or allow his foundational beliefs to crumble.
But, as you said, a thousand years of anguish does not just go away in a talk, which is why the 'crack' that forces him to act, must be suficciently deep to warrent such a desperate action, and I don't think it ever was.
Similarly, I think the love-turn can work as well, although I am not familiar with your example, so I'll just speak in general terms with the variables you set out. I would agree that it's a bit jarring to just see love=change, but it is an emotion which can be a strong motivator, and therefore I think it's workable, again, as long as the proper subtlety has been established.
If we've got a character with a thousand years of backstory, there should, as you said, have been instances where someone would have gotten at least a little close. I guess there are configurations in which the antagonists rarely see anyone, and therefore the likelyhood of them meeting someone special is zilch, but I'm going to assume that isn't the case. Once an incedent has been established that cements the antagonist's belief that love is pointless, like a betrayal or simple disillusionment on the side of the partner, then you need the same 'crack-in-the-armor' incident to precede the actual change.
It might be something as simple as the antagonist creating a bond with a child, seeing them grow up and find love and talking with the antagonist about its virtues. The antagonist might be dismissive, but watching the young couple there might be some lingering longing which they themselves do not fully understand. Then maybe years later, they themselves get to experience what their young friend talked about.
That's one way I think would work, but I absolutely agree that it can deflate a badass antagonist if it comes off as arbitrary or something needed for the plot to work.
In short, I agree, but with caveats x)
- Edited
Greetings fellow newcomer
I assume you're one if you've entered here, but everyone is welcome. I've been trying to locate a thread where fledglings such as myself can share our stories and support one another, since the hardest part as a writer is usually just getting a foot in the door. When I couldn't find one such thread, I decided to make my own.
I want to make it clear up front that this is not meant as a thread where we advertise our novels, or asks for review swaps -- there are dedicated threads for that. Instead, it is meant as a thread to help us all get rid of the dreaded zero in our valid readership, as well as motivate each other to keep up the good work.
Here's what I propose
- Introduce your story briefly in a post (name, genre, male- or female lead, and what makes your story unique)
** No covers or synopsis, please. Go to the dedicated thread to advertise your story. - Take your pick among the others who has posted
- Go read their first chapter (Even if it's a genre you don't like, you can always read one chapter)
- Greet the author in the comments as a fellow newcomer, so they know how you found them
- Comment on one thing you found interesting or good about their story, and point out one thing you think could be improved (constructively, as you yourself would like to receive criticism)
- Repeat for as many of the other posts you like (Except for the introducing-your-own-story part, of course. Don't spam :))
The point to this is that there is no need to make arrangements with one another, or commit ourselves to reading a lot of stories. If the story isn't your cup of tea, it's perfectly fine to leave after giving some brief feedback on the first chapter. There's no pressure to do it more than once either, although I propose you do one for each newcomer who visits your own first chapter. If you've only got time to do it once, then that's fine too. No pressure and no expectations.
If you're game, then let's help each other out!
Here's my story:
Rattus Rex
Fantasy genre, with a reincarnation device. Main character is male. The story is about a rat-man (skaven inspired) who dies and is reborn as a human. It can be a bit brutal at times, but the first chapter is not so bad -- outside of the MC dying, of course :D.Veronica8
I love me some Brandon Sanderson. The man's an absolute genius :D.Thanks for the tip - I'll be sure to check it out!
SrtaA
I like the concrete examples - thumbs up!As you say, there's plenty of variations, and many valid ones which makes perfect sense. These are what I think of as gradients of logic when I try to generalize; from a small-time thug who's just trying to get by, to a powerful king who has worked hard to secure his realm, and will use any means possible to keep it together. I think what differentiate these are the circumstances --which will always be relative, and therefore difficult to generalize-- and then their extention into future time.
What I mean by that is that some antagonistic logic is mostly useful in the short term, like say the necessity-driven logic we discussed before. In that case, you can only extend the logic for as far as the necessity is maintained, meaning you'd have to use the pent-up momentum, story-wise, the moment the need is just about to be fulfilled, or right after. Of course you can extend the need, but then you lose the element of desperation that is so compelling.
On the other hand, you can have your king archetype whose goals and schemes extends so far into the future that there might be elements where the protagonist and the antagonists mid-way goals align completely, but their end-goals remain entirely different.
I don't want to imply that one is better than the other, simply that their utility is different, as well as their pay-off. I'm also sure there are specific examples which does not adhere to this box I'm trying to fit antagonists into, which is what makes it so interesting!
Veronica8
Very true. I know I've encountered examples of antagonists where this element is missing, and the antagonist is just going after the protagonist because it's the protagonist, and then what's the point?I think you've hit on something crucial, I did not fully appreciate. I've been focused on the origin of logic and its consistency, but of course this has to extend into the future as well, and indeed to the goals the antagonist is trying to achieve. If these do not align, then it just seems arbitrary.
- Edited
fantasybliss30
Agreed. The greek and norse mythologies, which I am most familiar with, are like that, at least. I think it plays into what @Tea_Tae says about the antagonists reliability. They might not always be villains, but they're there to show a different angle to the protanoginst, or indeed the reader in some cases. A likeable antagonist with a very good point to their actions can completely change the dynamics of a story, as well as invite a difficult inner struggle in the protagonist.Tea_Tae
I really like the way you put that. Indeed, the antagonist is not neccessarily a villain, and their point of view goes to show that the protagonist is not always right, just because theirs is the perspective we're following. That's only when it works, however; when it fails, the mirror of the antagonists just seems pointless. What I'm interested to know is why does it sometimes fail and create a weak antagonist (in the literary sense).It may be useful to look at situations where it doesn't work. I'll be speaking in general terms, since I don't see the need to throw shade around. A theme I've come across a lot is the schism between poor and rich, which can be a good one. What I find jarring, however, is when the antagonist (usually the rich one) only justifies themselves through circular reasoning like, "I'm right because i'm rich, and I'm rich because I'm right" - or something like that.
In that case, I don't believe they are providing a proper mirror image of the case against the protagonist, but are simply there to be disliked by a reader, which I think is a cop-out. I believe the reason why it fails to be logic.Umbridge is logically consistent because she's a beaurocrat; someone who believes in procedure and is adept at sidestepping responsibility. She's also been given a mission to reign in what appears to be a constant source of chaos at Hogwarts, which is a thorn in the side of the government (If I remember correctly. It's been a while since I read HP, and might have gotten the nuance wrong). In that case, her opposition to Harry, and her showing him there's a perfectly consistent worldview which holds him to be nothing more than a child throwing a tantrum, is perfectly reliable, which makes it powerful.
If she had just shown up out of the blue and told the students they no longer needed to know how to properly defend themselves, without there being any logical root to her argument, I believe it would have seemed arbitrary and pointless to the readers.
I guess this was a long way of saying that I think logic gives birth to reliability :).