Writing good stories is hard

Stories and games, are the framework of reality that consists of a dream.

Why do you dream and sleep at night only to wake up to a different reality. It's a cycle like an incoming or outgoing tide.

Time is a framework for any dream. But when that dream ends and things become a memory, then what is time? You may have dreamt you lived an entire week, but you were only sleeping for one night. Time becomes a reference that can change.

What is Death, how do you know that Death isn't going to be like waking up into a new reality. How do you know death even exists when we have never died personally. What if old age is the effect of a time reference and that it is only symptoms of reality shifting.

What if death is simply the passing of time and change that moves us into different stories or games based on cycles of energy or frequency. When losing your memory with old age for example, are you really losing your memory or is your construction of reality shifting, are you hallucinating with a brain disease or is it a process of shifting into a different mode.

What is the human body, is it a material biological machine or is it a map of some sort that presents itself like an avatar that you can reference.

What if you could shapeshift into animals and you didn't even know it was possible because you didn't believe it.

What if your entire reality is based on faith and what you can and cannot do, from games and stories and experiences that you have encountered.

What if you could expand the potential by labeling reality as a dream and working within it that way.

"The right to be (overly) familiar" characterized the interaction from the start. If you want to admit to being a hypocrite and say it's a privilege much like being allowed to have an imagination or even hobbies, then that would be a real bit of progress were I talking to someone else. With you, that's a horse of another color. You alone have the right to grow tired of the interaction style YOU initiated, YOU steered, and YOU abandoned at will. I stopped being charitable, and you don't consider that my right. You never did, so that at least doesn't come as a surprise. What does is that you expected different results than you got, and have the gall to be pissed off that future promises are some sort of panacea for present slavery--especially when you are demonstrably unreliable on even the smallest courtesies to your slaves.

Then write bad ones, they seem to flow like water from the east river.

I wasn't asking what you want *now* but whether in having taken the things you did you had any purpose other than the sheer pleasure of taking them. It's not difficult to be candid.

If you're talking about exposition, no, that's not the way. That kind of stuff will bore a reader to tears. The lore, worldbuilding and so on should be revealed through the telling of the story, incidentally.

I didn't expect anything from you except what you have continued to demonstrate. Some version of a writer like you crops up anywhere. If it weren't you, it would be another. This is why you are still welcome in my thread.

When you misrepresent me you leave me few options. You demand effort from me to correct them, which is a loss for me, since you are a stranger and Anonymous, and we have no camaraderie between us.

I could, otherwise, leave you to represent me however you please, to whoever will read it. Yet I cant because I find that it's a form of insincerity to let others believe something untrue.

So I choose to continue to announce your "fictions" about me.

You don't get to fictionalize me. You don't have the right to disrespect me. There isn't anyone who has that right.

I don't deprive you of anything by not allowing you to disrespect me.

Do what GLP does then if writing stores are hard.

Just write short lies on a subject that's very subjective

and pretend to be an authority on it because of an experience

you had (aliens and buttholes always goes great at parties)

I am simply defending what is left of myself. I am right now writing a story that interests me, sublimates parts of that reality I live in, and is something that a niche audience would find engaging and interesting too. But it isn't the use others want me to have, and I know from bitter experience that they will nag until it is unenjoyable for me to do, and not stop what they are doing until they've managed to destroy it entirely. It frees up energy for them to take.

The objection here is these brainstorming sessions on show here. Whatever hypotheticals they start with, the middle managers inevitably show up along with the efficiency experts, the contract writers and so forth. That's where these conversations lead because those are the people they are had for. Whether you're a free agent in all this doesn't really matter, just like it doesn't matter if a person happens to be a non-combatant in an area his neighbors have chosen to make a warzone. Reacting in any other fashion to it would be gullible. Sorry.

It's not difficult to be candid to the ones who DESERVE it. You CERTAINLY don't. You misrepresented me, repeatedly, and never addressed it or took a route of reconciliation.

If you're anything like I expect you are, you will wait until you have exhausted all my patience and then take that moment as the chance to reconcile, then use that as evidence for your biased view of me to assure yourself that you were right.

Defending yourself I can accept. Misrepresenting me? While ranting about propaganda and ideology?

Calling ME a hypocrite?

Get real. You entered my thread. My thread didn't enter you.

You can play God if you like but you can't play God of me.

I'm not saying I won't let you. I'm saying you CANT.

Earlier, you had mentioned having been insincere. Candor is not a thing I expect from people generally. You defer it for those who "deserve it." I expect it from people for whom it is WARRANTED.

As for the type of person I am, I trust until I am crossed, then cut the person off and refuse to have anything to do with them. That is really unacceptable to a lot of people, and it gradually comes out that they think it is okay to take advantage of certain people and that I have no right to mistrust. There are those who do it, those who insist on reconciliation, and those who will openly advocate it. The rest just look the other way and are grateful it didn't happen to them. If society is the sole arbiter of which type you have the right to be, setting the terms and conditions for it in every case, then the conversation isn't about the imagination at all.

If I was going to create a story this is the process I would use.

1) I would take the best characters the most likeable ones, that already exist, and I would adopt them as my main character.

2) I would use the best most transformative experience I know of, and adopt that as my plot

3) I would take the most horrible experience and character as a vehicle for a villain opponent.

The formula is as follows. A starting point where the character is one way, a middle point where the character experiences the crisis or trouble, and then an end point where the character transforms and overcomes the villain character, leading into the end experience, which transforms them into the final version of the character that is most impressive.

This formula copies life in general like it were a map.

You have a thread title. It's a miniature elevator pitch. In admitting to insincerity, you admitted that it wasn't what it put itself out to be. The thread didn't even derail; it was a meta-conversation about creativity and interaction style is a part of it. I went in based on your title, and to that extent your thread did enter me. You advertised a product, did you not? I bought it by clicking the link and was dissatisfied. How is saying so playing God in your eyes?

Been reading colored webcomics more than books for a while....got a classic idea just like this:

A guy gets superpowers in society that's warring with creatures from some realm. He gets a card with a rank and has to increase his rank by fighting and increasing his abilities.

This is a common trope of Dungeon Hunting and super abilities and society based on strength.

The unique spin? The ones who control the creatures are a group of deities (not all on the same side) who are also the ones who grant the super abilities to the ones who fight the creatures.

No.

Just stop and go back to the D&D party.

These are not the realms you're looking for.

Damn. No wonder shit movies are coming out.

Rich kids with a script sucking off hollywood producers to get it made into a movie.

Notice the decline in good movies.

Bro you might be creative, but that little paragraph... ouch.
Doesn't seem that book writing is your thing. Actually anyone can write and it's not hard to be a best seller.

You just have to take your time unless you can crank them out like hotcakes in a meth addled writing spree like Stephen King did/does.

You just have to take your time unless you can crank them out like hotcakes in a meth addled writing spree like Stephen King did/does.

Maybe just create good characters and then systematically kill them. Worked for George R.R. Martin.

Writing is great distraction from reality though. I write too.

I wish someone I care about will read it