It was writtin with the intent of two things.
1) Showing he has researched some of what he is speaking about.
2) That he is discussing his findings.
The challanging factor in his work as he write it is not a chronological issue, but an issue as he begins to lose the stability of his senses and fall further and further into the darkness he is only trying to discover. The different voices of the piece was on purpose. It intent was to not make perfect sense and the hold on his mind slips further and further along, faster than he thought it would. In the beginning he states that he will go to whatever ends to get this knowledge and that it is more intriguing than he would like to admit.Go to Comment
Lots of interesting bits in this sub. Could use more of them. It feels 2/3rds done to me, though i like all the information shared! Would also have loved to see more on the "true" origins/meanings of necromancy. As with other "Mancies", necromancy originally entailed predicting the future, as in "divining the future by/through speaking/interacting with the dead." In closing, I think you will make a worthy leader for your gruesome guild! Thumb up!
(spell check)Go to Comment
You just made exactly my point yet you say it is not chronological issue-are you just making fun of me? GIving me a hard time?. ;)
You write an "as begins to lose stability", thus you are describing a process a start and finish and how his perception will change on the journey. That is what chronology is referring to, it is not referring to specific dates but the journey the character is on. Relative, Chronology, or the passage of time, or the journey of the character..whatever you want to call it is exactly what your talking about when you write stuff like "fall further and further into the darkness". I really like every piece of this and I like what you doing with. I respect you so much for doing it as writer. This work/sub is not a case of a fanboy listing cool "facts" or neat one liners. But you are telling story, a story I am interested in and now invested in.
I am just trying to suggest one or two little things that think could make it a lot clearer. I could gleen this from the post, that divinity was written in different state of mind than summoning. But the state of the character's mind was not clearly communicated cause it was written in past tense and without defined breaks in the action we must assume it was all written at once. This view of one writing was particularly enforced by the retro-spective foreshadowing in the first section. "What he didn't know is how far I would be willing to go to gain this information. " The reader should be given a tool by the narrator to separate the different vignettes contextually or at have reason to keep them separate not to try and unify the perspective.Go to Comment
This is of course something I was writing for my gamers to explain some of the odd items and weapons they were finding, sure they were magical in some aspect. This of course is not an end all to all metals used and is definitely not scientific in its prose but just something I made to make mundane weapons and armor not so normal and boring without throwing magic item after magic item on the table. All numerical bonuses and actual game mechanic numbers were removed in the idea of Strolen's and the GM who uses them to alter them as they see fit.
And this of course is more for my game system as e old timers know, and is not all encompassing for every system out there use and alter as you wish.Go to Comment