Mindfire
Istar
Mine are the "idiot ball" and "status quo is God".
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
What are your storytelling pet peeves?
- Thread starter Mindfire
- Start date
Addison
Auror
I'm not sure I understand your pet peeves. Idiot ball? Status quo is god?
Myth Weaver
Xaysai
Inkling
Overdone plotlines...
I was SHOCKED that Terry Goodkind, in Wizards First Rule *SPOILER ALERT STOP READING HERE* had the bad guy be the good guys father and Zedd the uncle (or grandfather, or w/e). I just don't even know if it gets any lamer than that.
Oh, and that time Terry Brooks completely ripped off Fellowship of the Ring to write "Sword of Shannara".
I was SHOCKED that Terry Goodkind, in Wizards First Rule *SPOILER ALERT STOP READING HERE* had the bad guy be the good guys father and Zedd the uncle (or grandfather, or w/e). I just don't even know if it gets any lamer than that.
Oh, and that time Terry Brooks completely ripped off Fellowship of the Ring to write "Sword of Shannara".
- Thread starter
- #5
Mindfire
Istar
Never read the Sword of Shannara. How is it a LOTR ripoff? I keep hearing it is, but what are the similarities?
Xaysai
Inkling
It's pretty much: the fate of the world depends on a half elf recovering an artifact of great power which can be used to stop the armies of the evil Warlock Lord from taking over the world. He bands together with elves, humans and dwarves. At some point, they all get split up and the story is told from the perspective of the different bands of characters. There is a wise, mysterious, powerful magic user (Allanon) who comes and goes, but acts as council for them and saves them when they need saving.
The half elf, seemingly lacking any physical prowess or magical ability, saves the day through mostly just courage, determination and sheer willpower.
- Thread starter
- #7
Mindfire
Istar
Wow, that's... that's pretty spot on. How on earth did Terry Brooks get away with that? At least Eragon changes the setting it's plot (*cough*Star Wars*cough*) takes place in.
Kit
Maester
It drives me nuts when people become warriors of awesome prowess overnight. That takes years and years of extreme butt-busting. You can't put some farm boy on the road with a retired palace guard who trains him for a couple hours a night after they walk all day, and by the time they get to wherever they're going, the hayseed is a master swordsman. 
oop:
oop:
wordwalker
Auror
The first thing that gets a chance to tick me off is just ordinary wording-- those sentences that just don't know their basics about how to make an impact, as if the "published novelist" had only been at this a few months.
That and gloom-and-doom with nothing to vary it. People struggling in the face of hopeless odds can be fun; people lying down and moaning for five chapters, not so much.
That and gloom-and-doom with nothing to vary it. People struggling in the face of hopeless odds can be fun; people lying down and moaning for five chapters, not so much.
Griffin
Minstrel
Particular stereotypes of female characters drive me up the wall. The spunky tomboy that says that she can take care of herself, but turns out to be completely worthless. Or the female character whose sole purpose is to fall in love with the hero. I prefer strong female characters, i.e. Ripley from the Alien series or Xena.
Also, I dislike the Gary Stu/Mary Sue complex. I once edited a manuscript for a guy and the piece was teeth grinding. The MC was a tormented soul who fought for the underdog, was extremely good looking, and a super genius. Every (I mean EVERY) female character fell in love with him. And do not get me started on the sex scenes.
Also, I dislike the Gary Stu/Mary Sue complex. I once edited a manuscript for a guy and the piece was teeth grinding. The MC was a tormented soul who fought for the underdog, was extremely good looking, and a super genius. Every (I mean EVERY) female character fell in love with him. And do not get me started on the sex scenes.
saellys
Inkling
Blunt foreshadowing trauma. (Side-eyeing you, GGK.)
Benjamin Clayborne
Auror
* Deus ex machina because the author has written himself into a corner
* Brutality/darkness just for the sake of making it darker/grittier, without any relevance to character or thematic development
* Deliberately hiding information from the reader which would be obvious if the reader was physically present in the scene (e.g. hiding the identity of a character from the reader when all the other characters present know who that character is). This one's not so bad if it's done in a very short scene and the mysterious character is a villain or will be revealed soon (e.g.: The Heroes have a discussion and leave; one other Side Character stays behind. A mysterious figure steps from the shadows and cackles evilly while the Side Character bows and fearfully stutters, "Y-yes, my lord..." Cut back to the oblivious Heroes.)
* Heroes who are incredibly lethal killing machines, forcing the author to invent implausibly powerful opponents
* Heroes who are more powerful than the villain, and can only fail because the author makes them do implausibly stupid things
* Villains who are one step behind the heroes for the majority of the story (villains should always be ahead of the heroes until the very end, when the hero triumphs -- unless it's a tragedy)
* Brutality/darkness just for the sake of making it darker/grittier, without any relevance to character or thematic development
* Deliberately hiding information from the reader which would be obvious if the reader was physically present in the scene (e.g. hiding the identity of a character from the reader when all the other characters present know who that character is). This one's not so bad if it's done in a very short scene and the mysterious character is a villain or will be revealed soon (e.g.: The Heroes have a discussion and leave; one other Side Character stays behind. A mysterious figure steps from the shadows and cackles evilly while the Side Character bows and fearfully stutters, "Y-yes, my lord..." Cut back to the oblivious Heroes.)
* Heroes who are incredibly lethal killing machines, forcing the author to invent implausibly powerful opponents
* Heroes who are more powerful than the villain, and can only fail because the author makes them do implausibly stupid things
* Villains who are one step behind the heroes for the majority of the story (villains should always be ahead of the heroes until the very end, when the hero triumphs -- unless it's a tragedy
)
Anders Ämting
Auror
I guess mine would be status quo and character who don't live up to their potential.
A good example of the later would be Draco Malfoy. Dude spends most of his series being a jackass bully, then gets some character development by being placed in a major moral conflict, and he's clearly torn between his loyalty to his family and the increasingly obvious fact that they've chosen the wrong side, and finally... nothing. He doesn't turn completely evil, he doesn't join the fight for good, he just keeps being the same morally weak and kinda cowarly guy he's always been. That, I think, was kind of a letdown.
Also, while on the subject of Harry Potter, another pet peeve I have is minor/supporting characters dying just because it's sad and because the writer wants to prove that "anyone can die." Character death should be important.
I also have a bit of a peeve against professional warriors or soldiers who are very conflicted about killing and/or have been rendered extremely cynical from too much violence. Not to say those people cannot exist, but I dislike the implication that a violent lifestyle will always mess you up emotionally. I like a warrior who is actually comfortable with himself, without necessarily being a psychopath.
I'll probably end up doing this with my current project. My heroine just doesn't have time to spend years training to catch up with everyone else. >_>
She's basically a genius, though, and even then it's not so much a matter of "instantly becoming the best fighter around" as much as "getting into fights with people way out of her league and somehow managing to stay alive."
Wait, how is this a problem? Normally, the complaint is that the heroes are so overpowered, the villains cannot actually put up a realistic fight without some kind of deus ex machina. (See: Superman, kryptonite.) But if the antagonists are legitimately powerful enough to still be a threat, that ought to be a good thing, right?
I mean, what is an "implausibly powerful opponent" in a fantasy setting, anyway?
A good example of the later would be Draco Malfoy. Dude spends most of his series being a jackass bully, then gets some character development by being placed in a major moral conflict, and he's clearly torn between his loyalty to his family and the increasingly obvious fact that they've chosen the wrong side, and finally... nothing. He doesn't turn completely evil, he doesn't join the fight for good, he just keeps being the same morally weak and kinda cowarly guy he's always been. That, I think, was kind of a letdown.
Also, while on the subject of Harry Potter, another pet peeve I have is minor/supporting characters dying just because it's sad and because the writer wants to prove that "anyone can die." Character death should be important.
I also have a bit of a peeve against professional warriors or soldiers who are very conflicted about killing and/or have been rendered extremely cynical from too much violence. Not to say those people cannot exist, but I dislike the implication that a violent lifestyle will always mess you up emotionally. I like a warrior who is actually comfortable with himself, without necessarily being a psychopath.
It drives me nuts when people become warriors of awesome prowess overnight. That takes years and years of extreme butt-busting. You can't put some farm boy on the road with a retired palace guard who trains him for a couple hours a night after they walk all day, and by the time they get to wherever they're going, the hayseed is a master swordsman.
I'll probably end up doing this with my current project. My heroine just doesn't have time to spend years training to catch up with everyone else. >_>
She's basically a genius, though, and even then it's not so much a matter of "instantly becoming the best fighter around" as much as "getting into fights with people way out of her league and somehow managing to stay alive."
Wait, how is this a problem? Normally, the complaint is that the heroes are so overpowered, the villains cannot actually put up a realistic fight without some kind of deus ex machina. (See: Superman, kryptonite.) But if the antagonists are legitimately powerful enough to still be a threat, that ought to be a good thing, right?
I mean, what is an "implausibly powerful opponent" in a fantasy setting, anyway?
Last edited:
Wanara009
Troubadour
Here's a list of what makes me angry:
- When Human encounter other sapient (anyone who uses 'sentient' in this case should be shot) species, they must be human in all aspect except for perhaps pointy ears, short stature, or at tail. And every single member of the said race conform to one stereotype . Also known as "Hats" method of race creation.
- When the hero is said to be an everyman yet is capable of feats only those with specialized training could perform. While I'm at it, heroes that don't work to get where they are (e.g.: He is a rich business man, yet the author never even mention him worrying about stock prices or his business)
- When every character the hero encountered fell in awe on the "Chosen One" status if he had one.
- To quote Yahtzee: "Supercilicous badass action girl showing off more flesh than a surgeon's convention." Also while I'm at it, impractical female armour that aim to show off skin rather than actually protect.
- Female characters conforming to one body type: model-thin with big boobs. Also while I'm at it, Female characters that don't serve any other purpose other than be paired off, suffer at the hand of the protagonist, need rescuing, or die.
- Sex scenes that blindside me with its abruptness and will be never mentioned again.
- Gary Stu/Mary Sue characters, especially if the antagonist is shown to be massively outgunned by them.
- Impossibly tragic back stories just to make us sympathize with your character. Especially if an author uses rape or sexual abuse for this purpose without showing the consequence of such events.
- Deus Ex Machina/Diabolus in any kind. While I'm at it, plot points that never have any foreshadowing.
- Exposition dump to explain your overall plot. While I'm at it, exposition dumps about things that the readers should be able to put together unless they are lobotomized and having a stroke.
- An Author that deliberately make his character do something stupid so s/he could further the plot AKA "Idiot Plot".
I still have a lot more but they invoke pity rather than anger. This is something that I acquire after my years of trawling through fictionpress .com and fanfiction .net
- When Human encounter other sapient (anyone who uses 'sentient' in this case should be shot) species, they must be human in all aspect except for perhaps pointy ears, short stature, or at tail. And every single member of the said race conform to one stereotype . Also known as "Hats" method of race creation.
- When the hero is said to be an everyman yet is capable of feats only those with specialized training could perform. While I'm at it, heroes that don't work to get where they are (e.g.: He is a rich business man, yet the author never even mention him worrying about stock prices or his business)
- When every character the hero encountered fell in awe on the "Chosen One" status if he had one.
- To quote Yahtzee: "Supercilicous badass action girl showing off more flesh than a surgeon's convention." Also while I'm at it, impractical female armour that aim to show off skin rather than actually protect.
- Female characters conforming to one body type: model-thin with big boobs. Also while I'm at it, Female characters that don't serve any other purpose other than be paired off, suffer at the hand of the protagonist, need rescuing, or die.
- Sex scenes that blindside me with its abruptness and will be never mentioned again.
- Gary Stu/Mary Sue characters, especially if the antagonist is shown to be massively outgunned by them.
- Impossibly tragic back stories just to make us sympathize with your character. Especially if an author uses rape or sexual abuse for this purpose without showing the consequence of such events.
- Deus Ex Machina/Diabolus in any kind. While I'm at it, plot points that never have any foreshadowing.
- Exposition dump to explain your overall plot. While I'm at it, exposition dumps about things that the readers should be able to put together unless they are lobotomized and having a stroke.
- An Author that deliberately make his character do something stupid so s/he could further the plot AKA "Idiot Plot".
I still have a lot more but they invoke pity rather than anger. This is something that I acquire after my years of trawling through fictionpress .com and fanfiction .net
Wanara, that's quite a list you've got there. Can't say I disagree with any of those. I especially hate tragic back stories, or as it is refered to in the writing circles my fiance is in, having something bad happen to the protagonist "for the feels". It's so transparent.
Addison
Auror
My pet peeve would have to be incomplete promises. When writing a story, especially in the beginning, you make promises to the reader. A promise of high adventure, great conflict, secrets and surprises. These promises we, as the writers, are obligated to keep. If I pick up a book and see a promise of the hero discovering something earth-shattering, or great on some scale, but find out the secret was just that he or she really does have a crush on someone, then I'm disappointed.
And as stated earlier with examples of "Sword of Shannara" and "Eragon", it would have to be lack of originality. Not saying that Eragon wasn't original, but if a writer takes a theme and outline of one thing (Star Wars, LotR, etc) and just puts in their own setting and cast of characters. something new and great would be, well, great.
And as stated earlier with examples of "Sword of Shannara" and "Eragon", it would have to be lack of originality. Not saying that Eragon wasn't original, but if a writer takes a theme and outline of one thing (Star Wars, LotR, etc) and just puts in their own setting and cast of characters. something new and great would be, well, great.
Anders Ämting
Auror
Well, to be fair, most of it is just bad writing. It sorta goes without saying, I think.
I kinda assumed this was about "things we can technically get away with, but which still kinda annoys us."
Similar threads
