[Yellow]

If you don't want to use names, fair enough (though I'm really not sure why not--none of the successful queries I've seen were trying to shy away from names). Try a two-paragraph version, at least. See how it runs.

This post has been edited by Yellow: 01 July 2009 - 06:11 AM

[Sixty]

I tried writing it as multiple paragraphs and didn't like what I ended up with. Instead, I rewrote it with specific names in place:

Quote

In the wake of a monumental decree by the emperor, a theocratic organization dubbed the Enlightened has revolted and repelled initial retaliation. Two years later, a hidden sect comprised of the few despised users of magic have made a failed assassination attempt upon the Stephen Connault, the Enlightened's messianic leader. Convinced different motives and a different target lay behind the assassination, a long-dormant killer has chosen to begin anew by murdering the very same messiah. The emperor has assembled another army to crush the rebellion, and a crusade mounts in response. But as the fervor escalates, Stephen’s daughter and successor approaches apostasy...and the sect executes its own century-old plots.

[Fist Gamet]

Okey dokey. I tend to just jot down what I am thinking as I read so don't think I am gazing too deep into this. That said, I am just trying to put myself in the reader's head and what I might think if I was lying in bed reading this book.

Ch One

I am getting the strong feeling about Redin’s disenchantment with the new way of things. For some reason I thought that Connault’s rebellion was a change in social order, whereas there are some clear religious undertones here as well. Is he seen as a Messiah? Does he bring a religious message? Or did he overthrow the power of the nobility?
I don’t know, but a little bit of history might help to shed some light on just how things have reached this point. There are many interesting hints but a little hard evidence helps to balance that, imho.
Presumably Connault is a classic case of “absolute power corrupts absolutely”? Rose to power on the popularity of the common man, began to indulge himself in riches and trinkets, and is now starting to see conspiracy everywhere.
I am just finding it a little hard to believe at this point that Connault is a messianic figure.

The first half of the fight with the assassins was very good but I think maybe you lost the energy once the second one went down.

Redin’s reaction when Connault tells him he thinks Elrik has sent people seems excessive. The urgency level in the writing shot up about five notches but Redin strikes me as being a much cooler character than that.

I was a little confused when Redin was examining the assassins – not sure about all the names and the hints (more hints) of Redin’s past.

I like the analogies you throw into your writing, they always seem very appropriate and strong. The one about the salmon was very cool.

Um, Redin stormed out the chamber, straight to his room but when he gets there he is confronted by Connault’s daughter – how does she know already?

Ch Two

“…slammed the replaced door shut…” I really like that line, it says an awful lot, suggests much and yet is in itself insignificant. Very succinct and clever.

I think I am getting a bit confused as to what is happening in the fist few pages. From the Prologue I gather that Derrick Schwann was sent by the Emperor Elrik to put down a rebellion led by Stephen Connault – which Connault promptly, resoundingly, won. Sir Treidin’s betrayal helped in this.

So now, in Chapter One, Elrik is amassing another force (invasion?) to crush Connault?
So when the Emperor tried to force reforms on his empire, moving from one where nobles have power and they remain in the top tiers of society, to a meritocracy, the opposition led to this rebellion? I am still a bit hazy on the achievements of the Empire and the bits of social history you are telling me about.
Why is Elrik making a mistake?

“…The antagonist possessed immutable control, a suitable imitation of omniscience. As that control was wrested away, vulnerability pervaded. But greater dangers elicited greater trepidation. The looming monstrosity, it seemed, had finally closed the gap…”
Sheesh, you really love this flowery stuff, don’t you Okay, you know my feelings on this so I won’t labour the point.

Connault’s rule isn’t making life better or safer for the common man, is it? This was well described in what Redin observes. Are you adding to what you have told us in Ch One, or repeating it?

I am beginning to like Redin – he has great potential, imho. I loved the meeting with Feyl and how you introduced a little bit of ethics into it. Definitely a grey character!

Are Koltar and Cahshim actual nationalities or are they both names for specific types of assassins? What about Andis? Are they magical types? I like the mention of them but wonder about the virtue of giving me just a little more about them to further my interest. I am no clearer about them now than from Ch One.

I am not sure I can believe that Fehl would tell Redin that he is planning to kill Stephen when he knows Redin is close to Stephen. Especially as he hasn’t seem him for over a year. Even more so when he discovers that Redin himself killed the assassins!
If Redin really just wants out, why does he tell Fehl he needs to find the Speaker? Why not just uncover what Fehl wants (assassination of Stephen) and make the offer he makes in the end?

I wonder if there are questions you raised in Ch One you could have answered (or expanded upon) in Ch Two. I feel as this point that I would want more revealed about Redin’s past. You have made it clear he has had a very colourful and interesting life before now but I want more detail.

I still think your dialogue is your strongest point and the point of this chapter and the direction of the story is pretty clear by the end of the chapter.
I like that you do not tell me too much or explain too much right away, and I think you leave just the right length of time before you come back to the point a little later on. You know what I mean, I believe, as you can only do this on purpose. SOOOOOO much better than an infodump! My only complaint is that you could tell me a little more. I want to ask the questions, but I also want a bit more light shed on it.

Chapter wasn’t too long, but felt oddly lop-sided, as though too much was written about Redin and Fehl, and not enough about Redin and Stephen. I gather that Stephen at least is a major political and historical figure and I might like to leave with my first impression of him as being quite awesome! It is almost a shame to create a colourful character in Redin whilst leaving Stephen as a virtual cliché.

The pace is quite frenetic, which is good if you can keep that up! An awful lot has happened in just two chapters so at least you can be sure I am never going to get bored! I feel that I cannot skim-read at all because if I miss a sentence I will become lost or miss something important. Is this something you decided upon intentionally? Is this what you consider your style? I am just curious.

[Sixty]

Thanks for the comments and compliments!

The idea is that the empire was once rather fractured (that is, the emperor's power was fairly nominal--the local rulers were under no legal obligation to follow his orders). And then when Elrik chooses to consolidate his own power by replacing the nobles with his own governors, there's a lot of uproar. And Connault seizes this opportunity by taking it a step further--by seizing not only the nobles' power, but their wealth as well. And while taking this wealth and using it to build up the Enlightened. The idea is the basic "serve the god, be rewarded in the afterlife" sort of spiel. I think I expand upon this later from Fehl's PoV.

The general impression I'm trying to create (throughout the entire book) is that:
-Stephen's made a religion that expands upon worship that's already reasonably common (that is, almost like the stuff where in WoT almost everyone sort of believes in the main "god")
-Stephen is a devout believer
-There are other genuine believers, and they (in tandem with the opportunistic ones who go along with it to gain power) force the majority into following
-Those who are either zealots or those who abuse the system gain power/wealth; the rest wallow in greater poverty than before since the Enlightened's seized a major facet of the economy (the farming) by taking control of and regulating the food supply.

Again, I expand upon this a lot throughout the book.

If it seems a bit too convoluted I think I might lessen the religious overtones; during rereads I feel like a get a little preachy and that's one thing I do NOT want to get anywhere near.

As for the names...I do kind of fling them around, and I want to avoid confusion whenever possible. To clarify, they are:
Koltar - the general underground organization controlled by the people with Raat (although it has other agents who mainly act as informants).
Andis - the leaders in the Koltar, who can use Raat
Cahshim - a particular section of the Koltar who act as the assassins/spies. I loosely based these off the hashashins (sp?), who from what I understand in tandem with Wikipedia would plant themselves inside important peoples' households and use both fear (leaving a knife by their bedside) and general assassinations to influence politics. This is sort of like that in that they're planted in key locations.
Inquisits - another particular section of the Koltar who specialize in interrogation (hence inquisit might be a little uncreative there) and information-gathering

And then there's
The Aahb - the dictatorial leader of the Koltar
The High Council - the Aahb's advisors.

Oh, and Elrik's making a mistake because...well, part of that is revealed later on. But another part is that the Yramians (another nation) to the north has rebelled, and the war going on up there has been continuing for 2.5+ years as of this point in the plot.

And as for Redin's convo with Fehl...I see what you mean. The way I thought of it as I wrote was that Redin initially intended to work things out on his own--and he wanted to know the Speaker's connection with the Koltar assassins. And then he realizes that he can cut a deal with Fehl so that Fehl's resources (all of his men, being the rebel leader and all) can get him away discreetly (he doesn't want the Koltar to be able to track him).

As for the pace...it slows down a little bit midway through for a couple chapters, and then it picks back up again. I originally had it slower...the same amount of plot in ~175,000 words. I've since cut it down to 117,000.

Thanks again. Off to read the rest of your chapter now. Go ahead and send me chapter 1 whenever.

edit: oh, and Stephen's not as important as you think (I do expand upon him in the next chapter from his pov)--his daughter, on the other hand...

This post has been edited by Sixty: 01 July 2009 - 01:50 PM

[Fist Gamet]

Sixty, on Jul 1 2009, 02:28 PM, said:

edit: oh, and Stephen's not as important as you think (I do expand upon him in the next chapter from his pov)--his daughter, on the other hand...

Swine! You even left your comments on a cliff-hangar!!!!!

[Sixty]

To clarify, though--his daughter is one of the main characters (doesn't really become important until chapter 4, though).

[Yellow]

Ok, had some time to read chapter 2.

This chapter moves the story on quite nicely, has to be said. The last section with the Rat and the deal was probably the best bit, and I can tell you were getting into your stride by this point. It really served to move the plot along, as now I have a firmer idea of what Redin's gripe is and what he's doing in the story.

The first section was a little confusing (I notice you brought some stuff in from chapter one, which may have added to the confusion for me, because I was having de ja vu all the way through ). It made me realise that I'm actually not sure who/what some of the major players are in the book.

Who is Leo? Is Elrik the emperor? I knew already that Elrik had led a rebellion in the past, but now I'm not sure who he is, and I don't think I've picked up on the emperor's name already. I'd also say that in chapter one, I didn't really pick up on the fact that Stephen wasn't the emperor (or at least not the king/whatever). Since reading the blurb you posted, I have come to realise that Stephen is some kind of religious leader, but this wasn't clear to me when I read chapter one. Chapter two starts to make this distinction more clear.

The Speaker who was acting as messenger in chapter one and two... does he turn out to be the Speaker Redin is looking for? The reason I ask is that you go out of your way to emphasise this man in both chapters, and it seems the obvious culprit... but then that would also feel a little too obvious as well. So I don't know if I've picked up on that by accident and it's a red herring or what.

The attention to detail worked well in this chapter - I particularly liked the bit about Stephen being freshly washed and shaved, as this makes him seem like a real person while he's sat on his throne up there. I was a little surprised that Redin would say things like, "Then you must be rather negligent" to him. I know Redin doesn't like him, but would Stephen just sit there and take that?

Other than that, not much to offer, really. There were a few typos throughout so keep an eye out for them, but other than that it was a good read

[Bauchelain the Evil]

Ok. here's my comments.
THe conversation you decided to move from Chapter 1 to 2( the one about Derrik and his army and all that) seemed rather awkard and I actualy prefered it in Chapter 1. And when he goes to the Rat of Trent I find it rather hard to believe that the Rat tells him of his assasination attempt right away. Sure he knows Redin and knows that he isn't truly a follower of Stephen but still, Redin could have changed over the years and accept Stephen philosophy.
On the othe hand: I liked how you make us know how people live under Stephen by using Redin's POV. You make it in a way that doesn't seem info-dumpish. I laughed at the "son of a bitch" bit. And I don't mind your prose nor your use of metaphors and similes since I too use the latter.

[Sixty]

Alright, thanks. The conversation-movement was a little bit of an experiment and I don't doubt it's been confusing.

@Yellow: Elrik is the emperor; I suppose I should emphasize this more. Leo is the Commandant (as stated in the first chapter , my writing doesn't leave room for missing a thing or two since I don't repeat facts often lol), the strategist/commander-in-chief of the Enlightened's army. I think I'll add something in chapter 1 to emphasize that Stephen is the religious leader as opposed to just a secular ruler. So I changed the following paragraph to this:

Quote

Stephen Connault, the Raetor, had crushed the ruling nobility. He had claimed wealth and power should belong to the Lord’s people instead of a select few, and he had fought to establish his own breed of government. A government emancipated of the oppressive aristocratic yoke, ruled by the pious faithful. But here he was, accoutered with more exorbitance than a king.

What do you think?


As for the Speaker, it's a bit of a red herring. The actual Speaker he's looking for is of less importance in my current draft than he is overall; I originally had a third chapter with Redin devising a plan with Fehl's agents (and arranging for the Speaker to be used as bait) but trashed it when I realized it didn't add much and just took up an extra 3k words.

As for Stephen, point taken...to me, Redin has a bit of a loose tongue with regard to snide insults/jibes; he's rather blunt, particularly in his appraisals of others. My thoughts when writing that passage were that Stephen's become accustomed to his lieutenant's sharp tongue, but I might tone it down a bit.

Thanks again.


edit:

Also, since I sent it out, I believe I changed a little bit of the second chapter. During the convo (I hope this clarifies things), I rewrote the mini-infodump to:

Quote

...Opposition was to be expected—welcomed, in fact, for it culled the plot’s fat. But none had allowed for outright rebellion…
Particularly from the very people it benefited most.
And in its wake, Stephen Connault claimed power. Accelerated the Elrik’s plot into the depths of extremism. The Enlightened was constructed, mounted upon the very foundations the Emperor had erected. An army was raised, equipped and inflamed by innumerable lies.

And to clarify the section where Fehl's cooperation feels odd:

Quote

“I don’t know,” Redin lied. “Stephen only told me the turncoat was involved.”
Fehl furrowed his brow. “If you want my help, then I need yours.”
“With what?”
“Ah, yes, well. Given your continued, happy employment under Stephen Connault…”
Redin frowned. “Fuck him. Fuck him and the Great Lord. Understand? I bloody hate the Raetor. Is that sufficient?”
A moment’s pause, and then Fehl nodded.
“Good. So what do you need?”
Fehl took a breath and set down his glass. “I had best start from the beginning. We have…reason to believe that Stephen is onto us. Three men I ensconced among Stephen’s ranks have been removed, so to speak.”

This post has been edited by Sixty: 04 July 2009 - 01:53 PM

[Yellow]

Have to agree with Bork that it did feel a little easy with the Rat. I like the bit you added - good bit of dialogue.

Be careful with the mini-infodumping, though... the more you put in, the less "mini" it feels I know this seems to go against what I said above, but I'm not sure my confusion was with a lack of information, just maybe lacking a sense of the difference between the Raetor (who definitely felt like an emperor), and the actual emperor.

[Sixty]

Hmm. Well, in a lot of ways, he's similar--I suppose that might be inevitable.
Stephen's come to power under the same philosophies the Emperor (Elrik) touted, only about 20x more extreme. And he's effectively a dictator, similar to the Emperor...both have advisors, but neither pay a lot of attention to them. D:

[Sixty]

I've sent out chapter 3 to the usual.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

SPOILERS

Ok. First I must say that the endig was stunning. I would have never thought you would have killed Stephen, or at leastnot so soon in the book.
However this chapter didn't convince me much. The whole audience scene seemed to be the way for you introduce a new character(I assume the mercenary becomes important later) and to make Stephen a sympatetic character and I believe you overstretched it a bit. Sure, it's clear that Stephen really believes that he's right and that he is doing good, but from what you have written so far I ,as reader, don't get this feeling. I liked the paranoia, most leaders who gained power with force are paranoid, yet this is in contrast with him letting Redin live so far, especially since you made us know that Stephen doesn't like his attitude in other people.

[Sixty]

Fair enough. And the mercenary's more to illustrate Stephen's character. The entire scene, in fact, was designed to give insight into Stephen--to give him some depth, so he doesn't die an utter cliche. I'm not sure what you mean--it's clear he believes he's right, but you don't get the feeling? True enough about Redin, but...bleh. The idea I was trying to insinuate was that Stephen tolerates Redin's attitude because he's effective; the revelation that his lieutenant has become a major danger is what precipitates his sudden urge to get rid of him.

Thanks for the comments.

This post has been edited by Sixty: 07 July 2009 - 09:32 AM

[Yellow]

I don't think you sent me chapter three (at least, I can't find it )

[Sixty]

I resent it earlier just in case.

[Sixty]

Nothing? D:

Did I somehow manage to epic fail with gmail here?

[Yellow]

I have it mate, but haven't had time to read it yet, sorry. I will disappear for a few weeks as of friday next week, so I'm going to read your chapter and the last one of Gamet's that I have, and that will be that until August from me, I'm afraid

[Sixty]

Sounds good.
I'm waiting on opinions from a couple close friends before I set into my final draft(s).

[Fist Gamet]

Chapter 3


Your descriptions of characters are particularly good. I really liked the pudgy guy that waddled like a duck.
I like Erland, you have painted a very strong and real character very quickly. Nice.

“…“It’s a flawed system. We should either educate or eradicate.”…” Nice line

Well I haven’t much to say because I thought chapter three was very good. The writing, imo, was much cleaner and tighter and the dialogue was impressive. I had no problems believing any of it and the characterisation was good. I actually feel that you have toned down the flowery writing just enough and struck a nice balance. Stephen’s paranoia and irritability with the injustice of his position was very well presented.