Oops No Magic System: What Writers Can Learn from Stranger Things (and D&D)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июн 2024
- Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC: clcr.me/Local and get a special starter pack with an Epic champion Jotun 💥 Join a special Valentine’s Day-themed adventure ❤️ raidlovequest.plarium.com ❤️ with the Raid Love Quest to win some fantastic in-game and real life prizes 🎁
Promo codes:
✅ Use the Promo Code RAIDRONDA to get a bunch of helpful stuff. Available to ALL users: New and Old by February 28
✅ Use the Promo Code READY4RAID to get great pre-anniversary bonuses. Available for New users only by February 28
*Note that only 1 Promo code can be used within 24hours
PATREON!!!
patreon.com/Local187?...
KO-FI!!!
ko-fi.com/localscriptman
208X!!!
• 208X
CONTENTS!!!
0:00 - Unprompted Existential Rant
1:30 - Raid: Shadow Legends
3:26 - Season 1
6:24 - Season 2
11:31 - Season 3
13:27 - Season 4
16:40 - Season 5
17:26 - On Architects and Gardners
19:11 - On Overthinking Magic Systems
20:44 - Dumb Gents & Drag Queens
25:33 - Final Thoughts
27:10 - Patrons + Outro
Raid: Shadow Legends “Raid Love Quest” Prize Promotion. Entry is Open to legal residents of THE 50 UNITED STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (EXCLUDING NEW YORK AND FLORIDA), who are 18 years or older. VOID WHERE PROHIBITED. Open only to NEW users with a valid Player ID that downloaded Raid: Shadow Legends and opened a Game Account after January 1st, 2023. To install Raid: Shadow Legends for Free, click here clcr.me/Local Downloading Raid: Shadow Legends is subject to Plarium Terms of Use [plarium.com/en/legal/terms-of...] and Privacy Policy (plarium.com/en/legal/privacy-... ). In-game purchases are available. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY TO ENTER OR TO WIN A PRIZE. A PURCHASE DOES NOT IMPROVE YOUR CHANCES OF WINNING A PRIZE. Prizes: in-game items or Amazon.com Gift Cards, in the value and number as described in the Promotion Official Rules raidlovequest.plarium.com . ONLY ONE ENTRY IS PERMITTED PER PERSON. Additional Terms may apply on Amazon.com Gift Cards as set forth here: amazon.com/gc-legal. Prizes will be rewarded randomly and subject to eligibility requirement set forth in the Promotion Official Rules. Promotion Period: February 14th at 00:01 - March 14th at 23:59. Sponsor: Plarium Global Ltd. Administrator: BRAME AG. Personal Data will be processed in accordance with the Privacy Notice raidlovequest.plarium.com 
Развлечения
Install Raid for Free ✅ IOS/ANDROID/PC: clcr.me/Local and get a special starter pack with an Epic champion Jotun 💥 Join a special Valentine’s Day-themed adventure ❤ raidlovequest.plarium.com ❤ with the Raid Love Quest to win some fantastic in-game and real life prizes 🎁
Promo codes:
✅ Use the Promo Code RAIDRONDA to get a bunch of helpful stuff. Available to ALL users: New and Old by February 28
✅ Use the Promo Code READY4RAID to get great pre-anniversary bonuses. Available for New users only by February 28
*Note that only 1 Promo code can be used within 24hours
Damn you got raided
I thought it was a joke at first. Then I watched the whole ad without laughing once and felt immense satisfaction. Thank you RUclips Channel for these foreign emotions
Bro said he will not make money with this channel, next vid he has a Raid Sponsor 💀
I recommend to you "Emesis Blue" on RUclips. I also recommend to share it with anyone spread awareness.
I can almost always tell which approach a story was written with, the writing style is reflected in the final experience in some or another. No matter how well written it is, an architect story always has some claustrophobia associated with it to me and in the hands of any lesser author also less creativity.
in the first season, the Demogorgon isn't an evil villan, its a *shark*. A force of nature. An animal whose only goal is to feed itself and survive. The government fucked around and accidentally invited it into our world. The CIA literally spent millions of dollars around that time irl testing people for psychic powers. That's why I loved the first season, it made so much sense yet had so much mystery
Then every season after that made it less and less interesting
Season 3 & 4's villains don’t even feel like they’re from stranger things
@@YodaOnABender the mind flayer made it less interesting?
@@Luke_SkywaIker it made it feel way less grounded than season 1
@@Luke_SkywaIker yes. It definitely felt like a DnD villan. This evil, old being who has been one step ahead the whole time and orchestrating the whole thing. It's really cliché and although I understand it's made with love for DnD I liked it a lot less than the Force of Nature aspect
Ah I see where you’re both are getting at, and I can definitely respect that. While I think we can all agree that season 1 had the tightest narrative, I personally loved the cosmic horror element the Mind Flayer introduced. The idea that the Upside Down is really just one massive superorganism, controlled by a malevolent entity is so mind boggling to me. It makes the government involvement even more f*cked when you realize they angered a sleeping giant, which has no other goal but to spread and grow beyond his borders.
However, I can see how the _absence_ of a “sinister presence” is equally horrifying in itself. Like being lost in an uncharted void of space. The fact that there is no water, no sunlight, no sentient life aside from vastly intelligent predators - with extraordinary powers….the Upside Down is not a place you would want to be poking around.
I wanted Will to develop psychic powers like Eleven through the Mindflayer to bring the whole Wizard Will motif into manifest
I genuinely suspect he actually does, which is why the Demogorgon and the Mindflayer have originally targeted him- it's just it hasn't been fully developed/unlocked like Eleven's.
I mean, El is the party’s Mage, and Mages are born with their powers or get it from their parents (Brenner) While Wizards, like Will, get their powers through study
I kinda wish that all the characters had some kind of connection to their “classes” besides the very weak ones that Max & Mike have
@@Driedleavesontrees Sorcerers but I get what you mean
@@izzisart He is not going to get any more development, the producers even forgot about his birthday, he is the punching bag of the series, thats it lol
@@DajuSar I don't know about that. I feel they were actually putting quite a bit of focus on him in the last series, like they're building up to more development. Forgetting the birthday is one thing- that's just a randomly selected date that gets easily lost when trying to keep track of plotlines. I reckon there is something in the works- it's the best and most obvious way to round up the series.
Internally consistent logic is something I see disregarded in so much of modern media, it’s nice to see someone breaking down WHY it’s bad rather than just pointing at it and saying “writing bad” like every ragetuber who’s cropped up in the last few years
I try not to be a ragetuber
it's also refreshingly non-grating to see criticism of writing with inconsistent logic coming from someone who knows how to write well enough that he can put together full sentences, and doesn't just get by with baby-food-tier aphorisms thanks to the fact that they have a UK or aussie accent 🙏
@@johncra8982 Critical drinker shade lmao
@@ovahlord1451 Drinker generally has pretty cogent arguments as to why something doesn't work or why certain patterns in Hollywood writing are corrosive to good storytelling. He's a published novelist himself and isn't just limited to pithy low hanging fruit critiques. He also praises stuff that generally deserves the praise, but critiques it where it deserves it. He likes the Last of Us show, but explains in decent detail why the relationship between Joel and Ellie seems reversed from the games, making Pedro's Joel a much more passive character than he should be.
@@ovahlord1451 he's the go-to example for such people, but I don't think it's warranted. He actually does know how to explain what is wrong with writing. He may not always go into thorough detail, but he isn't wrong more often than not. I think you can better tell he generally knows what he's talking about when he talks about things he likes and explains why they're good.
In season 3 I thought the Soviets were trying to use the gate as a wormhole between the US and Russia and that’s why Hopper ended up there.
Yeah that would have made a tad more sense
Yeah, before Season 4 that’s what I thought too.
@@localscriptman i thought they were trying to do that but it failed. And hopper just managed to get taken by escaping soviets
I thought maybe he jumped into the portal and ended up in Russia or the upside down. Him simply being taken by the russians when everyone within a certain radius was evaporated was a weirdly boring choice.
@@Trashgriffin Yeah, I was expecting a whole story where he jumps into the Upside-Down in an effort to escape, and then we get a whole plotline about him surviving there, sort of like a fleshed out version of Will being stuck there in season 1. Then he either finds another, unknown gate out (Which turns out to be one secretly opened by the Russians)or the Russians themselves find him and drag him out. I genuinely feel like they had a series worth of content there on that base idea.
As a gardener writer that just recently started working with a stricter structure: I've suffered for so long i will never stop planing now. I find that outlining the plot and gardening the more emotional scenes works great.
There definitely needs to be balance. You can't srltructure too much or it feels rigid and I organic with no room for new and potentially better ideas that come along, but you also can't garden into Infinity because otherwise you'll just turn your story into a never ending rabbit hole with no clear outcome in mind. Your advice to have a loose structure that you Alcan fiddle around with in the spaces between is excellent.
If I plan, I plan, if I don't plan I don't -- but in either case the plan itself must be unplanned otherwise you get stuck in an infinite regress, so ultimately the architect and the gardener are the same. The difference is really a splitting of hairs.
@@amanofnoreputation2164 Absolutely. Even gardening you have to tie sticks to the plant to help it grow straight.
Yeah writing off of some else's outline for a kind commissioned thing has made me realize, "oh shit, structure is HELPFUL" so I'm definitely more team structure now. The nice thing is that you can still be loose with an outline and just throw idea around or follow random musings, except you can do that in a manner of paragraphs instead of 10k words before you realize you actually want to add a new element.
That’s a good way to do it: gardening for emotional scenes makes them way more real. Architect helps your plot points be logical.
the key to writing your supernatural systems in a way that makes sense and feels convincing for the audience is to make sure you cast really attractive people. if your project is full of waifus, everything in it will work and make sense (no I do not know anything about weeb stuff and I do not care)
Real
honestly, yeah
As a weeb myself, trust me, weebs either don't give a fuck or are some of the most obsessed cunts possible when It comes to logical world building and systems within.
Pointing at the general direction of the Nasuverse (VNs and stuff from author Kinoku Nasu and Friends) there is surely the gacha game obsessed coomer player base, but there is also the shitty nerds like me that are into the *everything else*.
That being said, this is a bad example probably because the general feeling of many of us is "We have accepted that Nasu costantly reworks stuff. We are on the ride with him to see whatever new crazy ideas he wasn't stopped from using".
YESSS
Finally, someone that understands.
I feel like a YT creator has graduated to a different level when they have a raid shadow legends sponsor
That’s certainly how it feels
A different level ... of annoying
@@jamesw3413 I’m just paying the bills man
@@localscriptman correct, by being annoying.
@@localscriptman the hooker on the street in the bad part of town says the same thing that don't make it any less disgusting.
Everything I adore about this channel:
1. Literally the advice I really wanted to learn
2. All of the points are clear
3. There are alot of jokes for me to listen to and its put in a sarcastic way that is honestly something I would watch even if I didnt like screenwriting
4. Perfect for listening as a podcast at times
5. I have more but I forgot.
Thank you, I really appreciate that
so true
your profile pic reminds me of RazzleDazzleHD's profile pic
@@Jzphh oh dang. Could send me a link to his channel?
@@Jzphh nvm I found it. That's some pretty obscure stuff man. Cool too
Magic is a wild beast for me. I only write short storys/novels but the philosophy is the same: magic/fantasy elements are not tools for the characters to solve problems but tools for me to create problems for the characters. For instanse one of my characters has a nightmare that crawls out of his ear and appears to be a bug with the head of a baby. That lets me confront the character with his missbeliefs about fatherhood/masculinity/trauma and only gets resolved if he is willing to grow.
tldr: the characters don't use magic, the magic uses them.
Ohhh damn that’s good
This is interally consistent, just of a different way. It's not something that follows the scientific method, or something that follows a DnD-like ruleset, but it follows *metaphorical* and narrative rules. It would only become a problem if the bug suddenly stopped acting as a metaphor for fatherhood etc and started to act according to a different set of rules. The problem is never so much whether something is "realistic" or "hard" magic vs "soft" magic, it's whether the rules you use support the story you're telling.
If you set a magical element up as something that in the story is an understood science with clear rules, it will undercut your own message if the world bends to make characters succeed. If you set up magic as something on the level of metaphor for a character's internal struggles, it will undercut your story's themes if the magic problem is defeated by some kind of scientific gadget instead of the character's growth.
This feels junji ito-esque
so, a more fantastic realism approach?
@@fulana_de_tal Yes like that. Didn't notice in the first place but maybe i stole this way of doing fantasy from Borges or Cortazar.
As someone who uses the architect method and has trouble writing, when I see my friends using the gardener method I realize that a big benefit to their approach is that they can more readily get moving on aspects of the story they are passionate about.
Knowing when to stop planning and just write is a skill, and one that I struggle with as someone who values planned out stories and characters.
What is the architect method and gardener method?
@@landmindssoul4636 In the context of writing, the architect is methodical, they make plans, build solid foundations, know where they're going, all before they start actually writing. On the other hand, the gardener jumps straight to writing, and lets the story develop as they go (which often involves rewriting earlier stuff). One approach is more logical, the other is more instinctive.
Those are generalities, of course. I imagine that most writers land somewhere on a spectrum between the two.
@@Darkprosper thxs dude!!
@@Darkprosper that is such a dumb allegory. The person who invented it knows nothing about how real life gardening works
Yea that pretty much sums it up. The architect method has a tonne of overhead and is the reason why a lot of critically aclaimed single author series like ASOIAF or Hunter x Hunter are basically on perma-hiatus. On the other hand, something like One Piece basically exemplifies the gardener method and is still raking in the millions after 20+ years.
1:20 "I'm not about negativity, I not about positivity, I'm about productivity" what a dialogue! I think I'm gonna add that to my next script.
A theory I heard is that Will's actually the one with the world duplication powers and that's why the demogorgon got him and didn't kill him. I think makes sense
That would be a masterstroke of retconning. Honestly hope it’s true
The Demogorgon got him but didn't kill him because that's not what the demogorgon does. The demogorgon uses humans as hosts to reproduce. Barb wasn't killed by the demogorgon, she was killed by dehydration while baby demogorgons grew up inside her stomach.
@@bable6314 I’d never thought of that but that makes so much sense
You explain things in such a confusing and yet understandable way, i love it
Brother, you are in for one hell of a ride. D&D takes pulp fiction stories from screenplay to live theater.
Also, Shakespeare is the best gardener alive. he knows if it's comedy or tragedy based on the last scene he wants (marriages or memorial services). From there he is really just vibing scene to scene. The plot action is based on recounting either a historical or folkloric tale. This structured approach frees him up to give the audience his sublime dialogue and wordplay. In short, gardeners have structure, but they are less interested in the macro plot elements, as they are in giving people the good stuff. This is how the tragedy Macbeth is freed up to introduce knock-knock jokes to the English cannon. Structured Vibes.
I like it more every time I play it
@@localscriptman Definitely stick with being a player if you want to savor the story. It is so fun to stop and consider how your character might frame and address a problem you often encounter. It sounds weird, but for me, that sort of thinking is where I find the best story beats to write down.
Macbeth has an entire scene that's just a soliloquy about the effects of alcohol on horniness and it's so random and entirely pointless to the plot, but also really insightful and plain funny
@@localscriptman as a writer, dnd completely transformed the way I conceptualizd characters, tropes, and storytelling as a whole. in writing, characters are not people, like you say, but in rpgs it's very special and satisfying to BE a character in a story you're also helping to tell. the live decision-making process during a session really makes everything make sense. logic 100 forreal
Bestie I have some bad news for you about one William Shakespeare's health...
I'm a mix between a gardener and an architect (I'll explain in a minute). Here's my take on the merits of the former approach:
The benefit of the architectural approach is exactly as you described it: you get a consistent, clean canon on the macrolevel that allows for foreshadowing and payoffs and a coherent structure. However, it does have some weaknesses: mainly, character. It's one thing to outline a beautifully meaningful character arc, but actually making it work in the moment-to-moment of the story is a completely different beast. In the same way that Gardening risks (but doesn't guarantee) leaving your story in knots, the Architect approach risks hollow character choices, unintended implications, and the specific sort of plot hole that arises when the writer is so laser-focused on their brilliant plan for the story that they didn't even think of the consequences that might arise from specific scenes.
Most egregiously, a _purely_ Architectural approach can limit problem-solving. If you've planned your story out perfectly, but while writing it included a small detail about your character (say, that they are afraid of spiders) that wasn't in your outline, you're left with a factor that you didn't plan for that could upset your entire plan. Either you need to make the detail irrelevant (which clutters things unnecessarily), revise your entire plan to account for it (which can break other, unrelated elements), or omit the detail altogether (which risks removing depth from your writing). It's why often in stories you'll get characters who make decisions that make NO sense--I'd wager (some of the time) that it _did_ make sense in the outline, but fell apart once more detail and context was added later on.
I'll give an example of how my hybrid Gardener-Architect approach fixes this problem. (Specifically this is for a novel, but should apply to every medium.)
I have this one character who's exploring a far-away land, and I have a basic outline of "here are some things that need to happen, but I don't have all the details yet." So I start writing, trying to get her to my first major planned "big moment." Early on, she carelessly loses some protective gear, which informed me about her character. However, this results in her getting badly injured as she runs away from a scary creature, which is something I completely hadn't planned for. All of a sudden she now has to deal with an infection as she's stranded in the wilderness, which is something I hadn't considered _at all_ in my brainstorming. It _should_ have been on my mind, but it's little things like that which don't even occur to me until I'm in the scene, writing mimetically instead of just diegetically. With this information I returned to my outline and updated my plan to account for this. I went back to writing, and suddenly encountered some internal conflict regarding an element of her backstory I hadn't considered in my outline. It radically shifted the overall emotional trajectory of the story, but I liked this direction a lot better, so I returned to my outline and updated it accordingly. So on and so forth, back and forth, back and forth. Ultimately, I realized one of my major plot points that I was building towards was no longer compatible with my revised vision for the story, so I cut it rather than trying to force it in there. Just because a scene looks good from a thousand feet in the air doesn't mean it will work when you're in the weeds of the actual storytelling.
These are some extreme examples, but even for stories where I outline more extensively to begin with, I often incorporate this method. The benefit is that, well, it's really fun, results in a far more compelling (and unique) story, and radically increases the available creativity by removing the burden of figuring out all the major plot points before I can even get started. The main drawback is that it's really, really slow. I'll spends weeks outlining, then weeks writing, then weeks more outlining. It's endless revision, literally: remaking my vision for the story constantly. It requires a lot of time to mentally readjust my outlook, to ruminate on moment-to-moment details and find ways to make them meaningful and relevant to the story. But every single time I do it, I'm left with a story that's far more human and powerful to actual relatable experiences than any of my "planned" stories. I'm just not sure I can recommend this approach to anybody looking to do this professionally--it's more of a hobby for me, and thus it taking a long time doesn't matter so much.
Ultimately, there's no real difference between the Architect and the Gardener other than an order of operations. The Architect prefers to get the creativity and problem-solving out of the way first in order to focus on the presentation later, while the Gardener prefers to explore ideas with as much logicality as possible, and worry about the big picture later on. One strategy results in a very strong plot but potentially weaker characters, while the other results in a very engaging story in the moment-to-moment but risks its own cohesiveness later on (not unlike how most people live their lives, come to think of it).
Like you said, neither system "guarantees" various issues, but they increase the risk.
Most storytellers use a blend. Brandon Sanderson, for example, extensively plots the stories but gardens his characters. Terry Pratchett thought of it like woodcarving, where you have a plan but, if you come across a knot in the wood, you alter your plan to accommodate it. It all depends on what works best for you, both in terms of results and, uh, time. And no matter what, you'll always need to revise.
Hopefully this helped!
Thanks for this - I definitely need to be clinical in my approach so as to not lose my mind, but I understand your method. I will say that I mainly critiqued the Gardner method through the lens of multiple-installment stories. Not just one book that you can go back and rewrite - like doing a TV show episode by episode, no overarching plan
Good write up. What I notice a lot with stories written by purely “architect” authors is that, while they have a good structure and are more internally consistent, they can often seem very clinical and robotic and like the author is just going through the motions. They might be mechanically “almost perfect” but that also makes them a lot less unique and interesting a lot of the time.
Stories by purely “gardener” authors may have more inconsistencies or structural issues when looked at as a whole but I find them usually much more engaging on the moment to moment level. They are more “human” in a way.
A combined approach definitely leads to the best results in my opinion and experience even if it is more difficult to pull off.
Both approaches are basically needed for best results. As you so eloquently pointed out, Gardening is really good for character and motivation but can utterly destroy the intended plan of the architecture. Architecture without any plants is going to be quite dull. The biggest thing I'd say as advice to others is that no matter how great your outline is, you are likely to find problems in it when you go to put in those plants. Ones that either you didn't think of (as you mentioned, because of perspective) or that didn't exist when the characters were less fleshed out and the outline more empty.
I poured a ton of time/effort into an outline for a story at one point, started putting in the plants with great enthusiasm... and then stumbled upon a massive problem which would derail the entire thing. I was left with major reworking of everything from that point, trying to write around it, or making up an excuse to ignore it. I ended up taking the lesson that pouring in so much time to so much blueprinting without putting in some plants to let me look closer over individual rooms was a mistake. I shelved the story entirely because I wanted to always remember exactly this bad habit of mine so I could avoid it.
When it comes to writing multiple discrete stories meant to connect properly (So, multiple books/movies/episodes/etc.) I think you have to blueprint it all first and accept that on some level, cool plants you realize would look great in that room are going to break the theme of that floor, so you have to leave them out. If you are doing a one off, then you are more open to throw in whatever comes to mind in your gardening. That being said, there is a fascinating amount of creativity that is produced from having to make more rooms on a blueprint not originally designed to have more rooms. If you know what I mean, the restrictions themselves fuel creativity because now you are problem solving within more limits than where you started.
Example: The music in old video games (like, 8-32 bit eras) had to be built on really good melodies because of the technical limitations of the time. The result were some of the most memorable tracks in videogames, nearly all of which a single person can preform easily. (even whistling for example.) CD quality sound put an end to the limitations, and the practice of doing that mostly went away.
That really got weird as I wrote it, maybe I need to blueprint these comments more?
@@Sorain1 Oh my goodness, I LOVE the way you took the metaphor. The image of an architectural building with plants in it to give it life is a PERFECT description: neither a overgrown jungle nor a clinical dystopia, but the best beauty we can make in this world. Absolutely brilliant, and this is probably going to be the way I think about it from now on!
Funny story, I've been writing similar to this for years. My method involves opening a document and jotting down only vague details, for example, the three climaxes of each act, and then using those as anchoring points; I garden my story and let it go where it wants to go, but I also keep those points as goals to work towards. Sometimes I encounter the same issue where my story strays too far from my initial vision, at which point I continue gardening, and then revisit it later and edit/restructure the story into something more comprehensive. I'll edit foreshadowing details into previous paragraphs and add details that give the illusion of an architects work, and remove details that don't go anywhere or clutter the story.
-First off… my boy DRIPPED out
-honestly your animated recap was pretty funny. I could listen to you cynically retell the storylines to a movie or show anytime.
-Idk if it’s a Gen Z thing but your format and method to teach writing technics really works for me.
-you inject opportunistic comedy into your videos and that’s my favorite kind of comedy personally.
-I feel like something you have built on several times throughout your videos is having a structured skeleton to your story. Making sure everything is logical and makes sense within the world you have created.
-keep making content dude
I’m exactly 1minute and 36 seconds through and omg. The existential rant, the structure and magic, we are all about the PRODUCTIVITY, and then that abrupt and fluid transition to add was hilarious. Where have you been?
Thank you! I have been making RUclips videos
The most impactful writing is frequently born in those moments where you surrender your preconceptions and allow the story and characters to surprise you. Gardening seeks to emphasize this by eliminating the obstruction posed by rigid scaffolding. It often makes a beautiful mess, however... but that's what editing is for. It's often easier to superimpose structure on a surprising narrative than manufacture surprise in a scripted structure. Usually, I have loose objectives or images intended for a story or scene and garden my way toward them, backfilling with echoes and consistency as needed.
YES. THIS. Beautifully put.
this was legit the funniest raid shadow legends sponsorship ive ever seen.
The downside to being an architect is character. Easiest example is the How I Met Your Mother finale. They had it all planned out, exactly how it’d end, and then the characters naturally outgrew that ending. But it still ended that way anyway, leaving a lot of viewers unfulfilled
I cannot understate how helpful you have been to clearing up my writing process, so glad you are finally getting compensated for you work
DnD is a great reference for storytelling in fatasy. For instance, my main issue with Galadriel in the RoP show was the mechanics. She wields a longsword and wears heavy armor, but also fast and highly acrobatic. It's like the DM let their gf join the campaign and make a character sheet with no limitations.
DMing a dnd game has been such a formative experience for my storytelling. Taking what the players hand me in terms of backstory and turning it over in my head and thinking "what would logically come next," throwing it at them and seeing what sticks is a process that I've developed that seems tied to what you talk about in your videos. If I'm wrong about the story beat, my players won't connect with it. If I'm right, they'll take it and run with it - doing a lot of the heavy lifting for me. Engaging in collaborative storytelling within this framework is so amazing.
I wrote a novel in 2017 using the gardener method, and it was such a meandering mess that, re-reading it, I got too depressed by how bad it was to actually edit the thing. Now I use outlines, and the shit that I write is comprehensible and compelling enough that I can actually edit it into something good.
The author of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure admits that he has an ending in mind when he writes (Possibly lying) and makes things up as he goes along and it always works out with his Gardner method. It always works because he set down the rules of his Magic system in Part 3 and future parts never contradict or break the rules he established.
So I guess if you gonna write a story from nothing in a fantasy world then maybe come up with the basic rules of the magic system at the start before you start writing
Yup I guess that's a perfectly viable way of doing it - never seen Jojo
The author who straight up decided there isn't enough potential in the initial magic system so he just added another one.
Bold writing move, really paid off.
That sounds like how Brandon Sanderson writes. He always lays out intricate, logical magic systems before he begins writing, leading to consistent and well-utilized abilities.
@@andrewgreeb916 And he even brought back the old system in the form of the spin
It's incredibly interesting to hear your perspective on fights in stories because I have heard the exact opposite perspective, and both are well-thought out and communicated.
Who said the opposite ? I am curius to hear the other version
@@davidegaruti2582 I can't remember exactly. I do know it was in a video about Star Wars. How a big problem with the prequels is that a lot of the fights just exist to pad the runtime and that they don't actually tell a story.
I hadn’t heard of “gardener” and “architect” writers before, that’s really interesting! I suppose that the approach you take will work best depending on the genre. Slice of life based stories will thrive with gardeners, and intricate fantasy plots with magic systems will benefit from architects. Both methods have their merit, it just depends on where you apply them. Great video btw!
Brandon Sanderson often uses very detailed magic systems in his novels that allow for fantastic fight scenes. The magic is often flashy and high stakes, but I think the real reason it works within his stories is because most fights end with one character coming up with a solution to a problem using magic we already know about in new creative way. I also noticed after watching this video that even though fight scenes are prevalent in his books, they are always built around character motivations and plot beats.
That's hard magic systems for you. They are remarkably difficult to construct without holes that would completely break your worldbuilding. However the satisfaction in "understanding" and having the reader and/or character realize a trick that doesn't break the "rules" is worth the effort, assuming you can do it. A lot of the time, magic in media is a soft system pretending to have internal consistency, might get past most but when it's exposed it can sour the story hard. In many cases, just going along with the absurdity is a better way, like Terry Pratchett
The shift from screenwriting breakdown to DnD was a fun surprise. As a DM I bend rules in favor of the organic narrative progression, the rules are a structure to work with not necessarily law. Which is the same as gardening. Look at Evangelion for a gardening example, it feels like it develops as we go, (because it really does) and there’s added depth to it.
Another writing lesson from local that i'm going to watch start from end( i have never read a single line of script in my life)
I was so upset with the reveal of the Henry backstory because I liked the antagonists being an unnatural force with no clear intention other than conquering the town. Its less scary and more frustrating to watch when it's just 1 guy who happened to be born with telekinesis and low morality. I also thought the way he killed people was kinda lame compared to the horrific meat monster of season 3. I feel like in previous seasons the monsters got scarier as they found out more information but Henry just got harder to take seriously
When he posts 2 times in 1 week>>>
As someone in between a gardener and an architect, I find that gardening lets me make much more creative ideas in the early stages. When I allow myself to write free-flow, the ideas are generate are more strange and visceral than when I plan everything out exactly. Usually I have to then rewrite everything architect style, but I think both forms have equal advantages.
I haven't heard of you, or seen anything you've ever done, but this was the best thing I've seen all day. This is some great stuff.
Thanks for stopping by!
I feel like everybody at this point is familiar with Brandon Sanderson’s rules for magic systems. But my favorite point about them is limitations allowing for opportunities for problem solving, which can be interesting.
Honestly, with the “these spells aren’t even named” aspect of the Voldemort v Dumbledore battle, with the exception of maybe the fire snake those just look like souped up versions of named spells. Dumbledore’s orb of water is just super-Aguamenti, the spell to move water. The spell that breaks glass is probably a form of Bombarda. Floating the glass and using it as shrapnel is a variation of Wingardium Leviosa. Turning those shards into sand is a form of Transfiguration (here the spell isn’t named but the type of spell is obvious). This fight works not only in the ways you mentioned, but because these are all things that have been done before, just not with the same level of power and skill. Even the fire snake could be one of the darker fire spells, maybe a less wild form of Fiendfyre. It’s all stuff that has already been established as possible, just taken up to eleven. (Heh.)
I'm a gardener writer, but I do have specifics that I have to stick too. I have an entry gate, and an exit gate at least within the first act. I have definite stepping stones in the plot of the story. What gets written in between those definite scenes (the stepping stones) is more intuitively made paragraph to paragraph page to page. I don't know why, but I must write the story linearly. The most out of sequence I can get is to write a scene ahead of time then slip it into it's draft when the time is right.
I wouldn't say being a gardener is better than being an architect, or even that this that and the other aspects are better, for me this seems to be the method I need to use for making a story happen. I have tried outlining scene to scene, I've tried outlining with sticky notes, but unfortunately my interest in the project just seeps right out of me, like I've some how spoiled the story for myself. It's odd though because even with my stepping stones I know what the ending will be, so in that sense I've "spoiled" it, but I don't think it's the same mechanism. In short brains are strange and writing is hard, so however you find yourself needing to get the words out do that, just edit vigorous.
I totally hear you about Will season 2 I wanted him to have that arc very much. Great vid Local!
Hayley ^_^
That makes sense to me. It's akin to a platforming puzzle in a game. You know where you are, you know where you want to go, and you know what you can do. It then flows from there logically, step by step, how to get from A to B using C. Of course, being writing you can add or adjust options to C. Provided changes to C don't make previous steps nonsense in the process. (Or you deliberately incorporate that, or find a reason to disallow a new C option from bypassing the other steps.)
The D&D Movie does follow that internal system by the way! A lot of the major fights can be broken down into 6 second "rounds" which is what each round is in D&D.
Local "I'm not gonna add another shiny side hustle to the mix...this is gonna be an inconsistent upload schedule"
Also Local, here's a ton of new uploads
A most welcome surprise
This video reflects my own thoughts on magic systems a lot. They scare me, and my approach to them is always to limit them, and root a character's unique abilities to something that reflects their individual story. Have it be something for the character to overcome and understand, a source of identity and internal conflict, rather than a general plot device to create action. I always prefer a setting where there is no fundamental base of magic or power that everyone can use, because it often results in scaling or continuity issues in longer stories. Anime is a good example of this, where it often feels like a story will lose touch with what the power/magic system was intended for or represented in the first place, because they keep having to amp it up to represent the characters growth.
That had to have been the greatest segue into a Raid Shadow Legends ad ever
As someone who has only seriously written for about a year, I have learned how to mix the architect with the gardener. I used to garden with a vague idea. Now I have more structure, but still try to let the story surprise me. It's definitely better.
The thing with gardenning is that your garden isn't your final draft. The garden is the outline. The crop still needs to be picked, cleaned, and prepared before it can be served. A good gardener still has a plan, they still have a meal they want to prepare, but the precise ingredients, while presictable, have a bit of variability because no 2 plants grow alike. Gardening allows people to not rely on tropes, gives exploratory people a chance to experiment. And sometimes you get volunteer plants that just show up and now you have to deal with them.
But the meal still gets prepared.
In short. The garden is the drafing process not the final piece.
i mean, even with gardening, there needs to be some form of preparation. you need to make sure that you’re growing plants in the right environment, and you need to know how to take care of their individual needs to get the results you want. plants die sometimes, which is obviously not something you want, but being a gardener isn’t just *randomly throwing something together and hoping it’ll grow,* there’s a certain amount of intuition and care that’s needed, as well as a general understanding of your soil conditions, humidity, geography, and sunlight :)
He's has ads now
Yes!!😀 definitely deserved
Thank you for your support!
The gardener method is what made works like Homestuck. Homestuck's story was absolutely influenced by the heavy restrictions, leading to all sorts of Weird Plot Shit, but that's one of the reasons I really like it. A work with 800k words that took 7 full years to be finished will absolutely have an unbelievely complex magic system if made with the gardener method, but it somehow is still internally consistent, and still allows for tons of interpretation.
There are multiple objects that have timelines spanning multiple universes that somehow have no loose ends, that all have important roles in the plot.
The D&D / RPG game discussion makes a lot of since. Im nearing the end of my 1st draft of my first book and it all came to be what it is from my dream video game I've been blueprinting for nearly 5 years. So when I think of things in the book I automatically ask if it would make sense or be balanced in the game. This has made the whole writing process extremely straight forward conpared to most people's first time writing a book. I started in May 2023 and only got serious about daily word count minimums etc around October 2023, it's now April 2024 and I'm over 100K words and about to tie up the climax.
Usually when I play the gardener I find that my characters are stronger, because I let them develop naturally instead of trying to figure out how they can get from point A to point B
I'm mostly an architect, but I do leave various spaces open for flexibility, because I've seen that something the architect planning can more easily do than a gardener approach is restrict the story so much its plot feels more like a checklist rather than an organic development. Of course you can develop an eye for those kind of bad plot points in your planning, but the fact that you have to develop a separate skill I think proves the point regardless.
That transition to your sponsorship was seamless 👌 10/10
👽👽👽
I'm a gardener and it works extraordinarily well for me. Here's why: I only start prepping book 1 for publication when I'm done with book 2, etc. (I'm almost done with book 6 in a 6 book series with a finished prequel.) As I get further into the series, I realize payoffs that I could have set up better in the previous book, so I can make those edits as I write the next book. That method definitely won't work for everyone, but it lets me write payoffs several books into the future sometimes and it feels really good
sponsor transition was chefs kisd
It made me audibly laugh. 😄
18:50 - The gardener just goes back and edits Chapter 11 to allow the thing in Chapter 47 to work even though it contradicts Chapter 11 pre-edits.
If you write a serial that is actually fixed in place, yes, it is much much harder to manage a coherent Installment 3 without having done prep work back in Installment 1. But that's true for Architects and Gardeners alike.
Gardener advantage: surprising developments that come from a piece of your mind you don’t necessarily have conscious access to. The modality of discovery has a thrilling energy to it that cannot be faked or duplicated, so when you as the writer are surprising yourself with what comes out of your pen, you can be sure that your audience will feel that same emotional high, as well. Consider the sprawling social events towards the end of Raymond Chandler’s The Long Goodbye vs the much more sprawling but also rather dreary world-building of JRR Tolkien’s LotR series. I know ya boi Chandler holds my attention as a reader infinitely more readily out of the two, even as I can recognize and acknowledge the genius of Tolkien’s work.
It is a testament to your expertise in entrainment that I never feel the urge to skip your promotional segments.
I play D&D myself. I sometimes like using XP but not for story reasons, rather for game reasons. If you have a player who puts in no effort and/or a player who puts in lots of effort about thinking what their character would do in a given situation, XP lets you incentivize that kind of effort. I totally agree that milestones make more sense from a story POV but my biggest criticism of D&D is that it's not just gardener style story-telling (which for me is bad enough) but it effectively does the story-telling by committee because each player decides what their individual character does.
I love season 3 because of the character growth. The mall set is flawless too because it adds perfect vibes and really captures the feeling of summer in the 80s.
I think the reason that I prefer being a gardener is the freedom it gives you when your charecters are making choices. It allows them to influence the plot in unexpected ways. The trade off is with editing but that is an aspect of writing that I really enjoy so I don't mind. If you are writing for a longer series I think you can still be a gardener you just have to have a really robust world and strong charecters. I know that gardeners often have an issue with endings but as mentioned by others those can be planned in advance, never lock yourself to one style.
I'm a gardener and I don't struggle with endings, I struggle with introductions. I guess every person has different talents, and I dare to state that writing endings and introductions can be considered as a special talent that not everyone has.
I'd say if your taking the gardener approach, you need to be making the outline as you go along. You write a scene, then you put it in context. If something doesn't work, you think it over and either the scene or the outline changes until it fits. The biggest problem gardeners exhibit in my experience is a lack of notes, a lack of memory about what came before, or a lack of reflection on how the new thing fits in with the older things.
The go to example I tend to point out is Harry Potter and the Age Line. If such a thing exists, why didn't it get used in book 1? A simple look back over what was already established would have seen the problem, and it can easily be fixed with a quick and dirty excuse such as 'newly invented' or 'recently rediscovered' dropped in dialogue to establish why it wasn't there. Or you could use this as part of a bigger plot about why it wasn't used from character. (say, Dumbledore didn't trust it to work, establishing him as distrusting of newer developments, or Dumbledore deliberately didn't allow the use of one for any number of reasons, sinister or otherwise.)
As long as you keep your notes on what you've already done (and or want to do later) and check the scene/idea over so it all can work, you will avoid or at least mitigate this issue.
Those first 40 seconds, when listened to at 11:25 PM, were philosophical
Whenever I am writing a story I always make sure that any future parts I have planned for my story follow the same consistency as the original. Planning everything out is just extremely helpful down to the smallest detail.
Ok but updates on this DnD world or just more DnD talk in general and how it relates to good storytelling would be a really cool idea
Writing needs to be a mix of architecture and gardening. You have to build the flowerbed first (basic plot points, the vague idea of where you want to take the story, and important magic systems that will flow throughout your story) THEN you let the gardening happen with their characters and emotional arcs. You may have to adjust the walls of the flowerbed as you go, but it’s better than spending forever building a pot that won’t let flowers grow, or planting your flowers in bare earth and try to build around them, killing them in the process.
I think the advantage of the gardner are 2 things: character consistency and entertainment. You grow your story according with what the characters would do at that moment, with the knowledge that they have and the mental and emotional state that they are at the moment. Usually that means that instead of your character running of point a to point b, they would actually decide to go for point c, something that you DIDN'T planned beforehand but turns out to be a more satisfying/entertaining solution that the one you had planned. I usually have some sticks of a structure, like a list of the story beats kinda thing, but the structure is always subject to the character. Sometimes, according with their characteristics, some character would react in the situation by saying x thing or observation to character b- because don't doing so would made them out of character- wich can prompt character b to had an completely new idea of how to try a solution- because if the character b didn't have this idea, they would act out of character, and this idea is COMPLETELY out of what you were planning, but feels more natural. You can choose to have other character shut the idea down (please character b, this wont work because x, y and z) and keep the structure you were planning or just go for what the character suggested if it is more interesting for the story.
Some other people have kind of already presented it but it feels like the biggest benefit to gardening is that you don’t close of your story from new ideas as you develop. Several stories have massively changed direction for the better because the writer changed and grew as a person. That kind of opportunity doesn’t exist if your story is made from day 1. That being said being able to plan ahead is also really valuable so maybe the best writing practices comes from a mix of gardening and architecture at different moments, having plans and end goals but keeping them flexible enough where you can steer your story to new interesting ideas that come up
3:30 inside this world there is a girl named A LEMON.
a lemon
🍋
19:02 the thing with the two design approaches is really just how you go about creating a story. An architect can try and have everything make sense and it still comes out boring. Stories with plot holes can still have immense cultural significance.
Your ad reads are legendary. Also "I'm not about negativity, I'm not about positivity, I'm about productivity" is a brilliant line
Local doing the raid shadow legends ad was cold af for some reason
I feel like a real RUclipsr now
@@localscriptman you made it bro
I literally rewatched the ad drop, I laughed so hard, great delivery
the gate breaking scene was a flashback in soviet russa, from my understanding, they needed to open the gate in the same town it was originaly made in.
Might be the first time I've rolled my eyes before realizing it's a raid ad, then smiled after. Good job making that work, can't be easy.
10:54 Because he got that DOG in him.
Real
Behold, and rejoice:
Two Local videos in less than a week
I was under the impression that will spit out all the bag foot soldiers, and dart was just like the 10th one, which is why will was so nonchalant about spitting up a little goober at the end of season 1
From what i understood this is the current kind of powers that are present: illusion generation: this power allows the user to project images and sounds into the target mind, users: Vecna, number 8; telekinesis: this power allows to remotely interact with phisical objects, users: 11, Vecna; telephaty/perception: this power allows the user to go outside of his body to comunicate with/percieve a target, users: Vecna, 11; portal opening: this power allows to open portals to other dimentions, users: 11, later Vecna.
About portals there are two kind of them: wounds, portals opened from only one side, that close spontaneously, examples are the portal that 11 opened in the 70s, the portals the first demogorgon opened and the russian portal of s3, that needed to be constantly opened by the machine, the other kind is gates, opened by making contact with a person (or a creature with a mind) from another dimension, examples are the gate opened in 83 and the one in s4.
About Hopper surviving in s3 was likely planned already, there was an american in a gulag, and the russian scientists killed by the malfunction were melt, but there was no trace of Hopper's molten body, he likely survived because he threw the soviet soldier in the machine causing a power leak: the part of the machine he was close to was underpowered because of this, so he survived the blast.
About s4, i think is maybe the best close to the first, that explained or corrected many weird bits (will seeing the mind flayer was likely an illusion, not in a portal) and making a cohesive plan of the Vecna, Mind Flayer actions, still has a huge unexplained point that is the vanishing of Will: how the demogorgon lost their power? How was Upside Down made a copy of real world? Why Will was spared but Barbara killed?
In my amateur opinion, "gardening" helps most when mapping out character personalities and quirks or putting other such events in a story in the first place, to keep my brain interested in the subject and on track to finish what I've started. That said, even gardens need some kinda structure, otherwise that's a messy lawn, and letting to much just develop without foresight can force you to go back and restructure (or worst case on-the-fly restructure) a *_lot_* of shit. That's great for, say, passion projects and/or collaborative efforts with no real schedule, but not so much for something like a TV show that can't spend (theoretically) forever cooking and perfecting itself.
The best example I can come up with is a world I'm building with friends of mine(edit: similar to the D&D example brought up in the video lol). He's the person who has all the ideas for the world and what it aims to accomplish, one of his friends maps out stories in that world, and I'm the guy who finds the inconsistencies in its cultures or structure or asks questions which could compromise its consistency if unaddressed. Even if I don't always come up with the solutions to fix those problems, I still find myself cataloguing those solutions into my memory (or a document) for posterity. Without doing something like that . . . well, it'd likely never see a concrete form. It's one of the few kinds of projects I can think of that "pure gardening" could theoretically facilitate, but with a little bit of "architecture" here and there I see it growing in a much more productive direction.
i prefer the gardener method just because its more fun for me and if it gets bad i can go back and change stuff
Only to play Devil's Advocate, one advantage gardener might have over architect is that architect can fall into the trapping of overthinking their story. This, off the top of my head, can become either a situation of there being too much going on, and so much to keep track of that the audience feels like the writer is giving them a lecture on theoretical physics, OR, and this happens I imagine WAY more often, the story never comes to fruition in any form because the writer overwhelms themselves in the writing process, or, even worse, before the writing process has even begun. Taking on the challenge of being a story architect is a big endeavor for longer form stories, and I think we can all admit that there are stories out there that we love in spite of their plot holes, or even plot holes and all.
As a primarily gardener writer, I want to say this first - you don't just let your garden go wild and grow with weeds. You need to prune it, water it. By using this method, you have to understand that you'll most likely have to rewrite the beginning of the story to take into account what you now know about the characters towards the end, and can better set up those trials to make it seem like you had planned it all along. You'll need to employ some narrative folding and combine multiple one note background characters into one of the more vivid ones, to further cement them into the story and punch up the drama. This is inevitable once the first draft is done - but in my opinion, that first draft is much more interesting to write.
The reason why I personally use the gardener approach is simple - whatever outline I write, I find that the characters being true to themselves creates new scenarios I could never predict in the outline phase. It may be because I've been DMing PnP RPGs for a decade prior to sitting down and writing a novel, so this approach may just be anchored in my players ALWAYS doing things I myself did not expect, and committing too much to a story and ignoring their actions would make the whole thing feel deeply unsatisfying. The players would feel like their actions don't matter, and I find it distasteful to just force the plot on them. Instead, I've always preferred to set the scene, set the key figures in the scene and give a small background description of what's going on in the world at large. And then, I give them a simple inciting incident and let them to go at it. When writing, I essentially roleplay the characters themselves, think what would they naturally do based on the traits I've given them and the things I know about them, and see how it tracks.
The problem with being an architect is that, while it certainly makes a more consistent story from the outset, it also makes the characters more bland as a consequence. They are no longer so much people as actors, and while it tracks with certain kinds of dutybound characters that'll do what needs to be done, it absolutely sucks for characters that are more independent or critical to the status quo. Likewise, from an outline, you don't really have the characters. You have roles your story needs to fill, and you're then auditioning characters in the writing process. It can be serviceable and is a decent way to write quick, but that doesn't mean you'll get the best results.
I'll give an example from my novel. My outline had a wizard get robbed as the inciting incident, and his bodyguard, the main character, launch an investigation. The robbers plot a two-pronged approach - staging a kidnapping of the wizard's young protege to cause chaos, to then use that commotion to get a chest of treasure, their real prize. One of the robbers was this young woman whom I gave the role of just providing a general expository insight into the culture of the robbers and their religion. But as I wrote the scene of the young woman robber interacting with the protege, I had a thought. Why would this young woman do this? What's the motivation, why is she leading this young girl protege around the town, pretending she's kidnapped while her crew steals the real prize? And so I considered that the most likely person leading such a life of crime is an orphan - but one that still has memories of her parents, as she feels guilt for doing this kidnapping. Okay, so what happened to the parents? Well, there was a war, and the main character, the bodyguard, participated in the war. So what if this man is in fact the cause for this young girl's downfall and life of crime? What if he discovers this down the road, and the young woman has a skill the wizard then requires and the two have to work together?
All of a sudden, without prior plan of this happening, I have three major emotional beats, three sources of conflict. The young woman sees herself as the terrible influence upon the wizard's protege by lying to her and kidnapping her. The bodyguard realizes that his past has visible consequences and is inclined to try and seek amends beyond his duty. The young woman despises the bodyguard for what he did, but has no choice because the wizard requires her skills and will pardon her should she work for him. And then I stick them on a boat as they pursue the bad guy that staged the robbery in the first place as planned, and it writes itself from there.
I could continue, but I think I made my point. My outline was "wizard gets robbed - bodyguard goes after robbers, finds links to bad guy - bodyguard pursues bad guy, wins", but it'd have been quite dull. Yes, there is still the plot on the nature of the wizard's treasure, and what it means for the fate of the world, and it's super duper important but would the reader care? The architecture is solid enough, the three acts are there, there's plenty of room for suspense and battles and worldbuilding is serviceable. But without the character moments, without the emotional throughline, there really isn't much to it besides foiling a heist and stopping a rival wizard from their goal. It's serviceable, it's not with plot holes, it's pretty straightforward - but the story also doesn't really have anything to say.
In summary, gardener approach allows you to get some of the ripest, best character moments imaginable that feel truly natural - because this approach gives them full agency, and whatever the actions they take, the stakes are much more authentic feeling because everything that happens is a result of their character. You get the best results by still having some general idea, some plot construction, and you need to do some editing afterwards, but the editing will be much easier and the rewritten chapters truly hook the reader, because by the end, you'll know those characters intimately and will have figured out the best way to present them.
When it comes to the architect/gardener dichotomy, I wouldn't say one is better than the other. Its about the writer, and how they process the story. What affects the quality of one over the other is the "followthrough", if you will. Its basically a question of when and how you edit.
Gardeners, at least how they have described their process to me, can't plan a story, because the story is outside of them. It pours out of them, and they find out what happens as they type (or write), and are as moved by the story as it happens as you would be reading it. Outlining to them is akin to forcing a story to happen, and it comes out disingenuous and flaccid. Instead, they experience the story, write it down as they do, and then in revisions shape it into something more structured. Stephen King is probably the best example I can think of here, and his Dark Tower series is a perfect example. If you read the author's notes at the end (and sometimes beginning) of the books, its a window into how he experiences the stories. Further, his book "On Writing" is an excellent read on its own, but also into the mindset of a Gardener. The result is stories that are _thematically_ structured, and take turns that I don't expect and are refreshingly unpredictable, but captivating and engaging without breaking internal logic. Again with the Dark Tower series, arguably the weakest books are the ones he wrote in rapid succession (when he had taken decades long breaks in between the previous books)--not because he had the story to write, but because he had a near-death experience and felt strongly that the story needed to be finished, not that it was ready to be finished.
I'm sure you've already seen them, but in the chance that you haven't, I'd recommend going through Brandon Sanderson's BYU lectures on writing. They're on his channel. He goes in depth on how to make both Architect and Gardiner writing work.
As far as world consistency, I'd say that inconsistency or lack of continuity is a byproduct of bad editing. Not living in your world, or for Gardiners this often is a byproduct of trying to force a story.
Further, the difference between the two styles can be a narrow one. Most writers are a blend between the two styles. Even Stephen King knew the general direction of the plot of the books, and how many volumes would be in the Dark Tower by the second book (and he famously derides outlining). Similarly, I don't think most Architects outline and outline until there is nothing left to do but apply proper sentence structure to their point form notes (though these people do exist). There is the free form writing in connecting the dots.
My thoughts on the subject, at any rate.
I was surprised this notification wasn't a Brandon Sanderson related video considering the title and my subscriptions
Who is this Brandon fellow
@@localscriptman He is the reigning king of Magic Systems, scifi/fantasy author
@@ethanmulvihill7177 I’ll check him out
i kind of realised that a lot of my magic ideas appear as one of two things, magic powers that are tied to the theme (e.g. a story about working to improve yourself has a system where people have unique powers relavent to them in some way, where the main characters have put in the work to develop their powers into threats, and deal with opponents who got a good power and to some extent, coasted on those powers) or magic powers utterly devoid of story opportunities, like one where being concious creates magic, breaking conserveration of energy, which people use to do wacky science. but apart from a snapshot into what that world would look like, there is no available plot there.
When I was younger. I let things flow, it was messy, but I told what I wanted to. While I do plan more now, sometimes when I'm stuck, I allow myself to flow freely then fix it after analyzing as if I were any number of the analysis/critic/writer yters I watch. As a chronic over thinking simply doing is my only way forward sometimes.
You my friend are clearly a master of ms paint. Chefs kiss 😙👌
Thank you I do commissions
Phenomenal work as always! Verisimilitude is missing in some big properties these days! Thank you for explaining the storytelling tactics we can extract and learn from!
Keep up the good work🎉
That transition to the ad was absolutely hilarious…I almost didn’t skip ahead to when the video started
Gun to my head and I have to pick one, I'm an architect, but the gardener wins in organic human interactions and plot flow. As an architect, I have to remind myself not to get too attached to where I want the story to go or else I'm forcing characters and situations to match my end goals. Gardeners have space to change course on a dime if it makes sense.
oh my god you actually did make a video talking about dnd. this is the best day of my life thank you
I'd love to hear you talk more on magic systems. Here's a suggestion as to why I love hard magic systems so much.
In video games, there are different kind of incentives different games offer with different experiences. E.g., pass time, teamwork, escapism/wish fulfilment, mastery, etc... Sit-coms can be a kind of pass time media. Fantasy & sci-fi usually gets simplified to just escapism but I find hard magic systems & deep complex lore offer the dual possibility for simple enjoyment of the story--but also offer nerds a chance to experience mastery in the world. I can feel the thrill of being an expert of a book's history and magic (which is much easier than becoming an expert in real life history or science--but many nerds also find enjoyment in this kind of mastery to!) similar to how you get a thrill at being really skilled in a video game.
I agree with your worry of overthinking magic systems (like worldbuilder's disease) can easily become overwhelming and limiting to your story--but its only a problem considering your goals. Hard magic systems & super deep lore can be an aspect of your story you want to be awesome, unique, and interesting even in isolation--even better if you find an awesome way to link it into the story. E.g., the plot or character motivation is intrinsically linked with historical-political events in your world. And your able to convey character intelligence & personality by showing how they know and use your unique magic system.
This is an entire "artform" unto itself which makes it hard trying to juggle with the artform of storytelling. Though if you want it go for it! Best of luck! I do to!
I personally also like hard systems that are fun to just think about in abstract (of course this is secondary to what you talk about) but just like how I like to think about the themes of a story long after experiencing it, I love living in the minds of the characters & imagining the complexities of the magic and thinking of ways to play with it and understand it.
Even just watching this video it’s apparent how good of a writer you are and how seriously you take the craft. Although not a narrative per se, the writing for your videos is so informative, tight, and straightforward. It makes 28 and a half minutes feel like 10. Keep up the awesome work! 👏
14:02 You could tell a stranger that this is Steve from Minecraft and people would still believe you
That first part of your video really was a strange thing
I’ve seen stranger
this is a certified hood classic
omg its the guy from the thing
When I write poetry (particularly, narrative poetry) and other narratives (mainly, short stories, novels and/or fan fictions), I usually go with the Architect method mixed with certain Gardener flows. The irony is that my studied professions are Architecture and Landscape Architecture. 😂✌🏼
Gardner vs Archetect
I suspect the underlying reason we choose gardening is brain chemistry. The other way would be faster, but we're searching for emotional resonance with our story, and this is how we find it. This is how we come to a story worth writing, but that isn't an objective declaration. It's brain chemistry, and a notebook of ideas doesn't give us that high.
I'm a garderner writer , and honestly ? I don't plan everything out because I tend to come up with my best ideas on accident? Like if I have a plan, I stick to it. But when I'm writing without planning anything I end up getting way more ideas and filling in plotholes.
My biggest problem is that I love worldbuilding (establishing, countries, governments, social practices, languages, cultural groups, etc) and I love writing small slice of life scenes, but I just can't do plot...I don't know. I've been working on one story for I think 10 years now? (jesus.) and I've polish and repolished and perfected the main characters, the world, the backstory, all the character arcs, the emotional beats. But I don't...actually have a plot. Like. There's not really a beginning middle and end.
I've recently come to the conclusion that instead of the epic fantasy adventure I've been pretending I can write, I should probably scale way down to the mundane fantasy. The concept is fascinating to me. A fantasy world with a magic system but the focus isn't on the epic quest. Just a couple people doing their best.
I think they're making Will look weak but in the end he will show he has powers and fight back this time. Not done watching the video I'll write a big comment when it's over lol.
You done yet?
@@Jake28 Yeah i finished it awhile ago i forgot to write what i wanted to write now i forgot
Also, regading the "gardner vs architect" thing, I'm barely a writer, and most likely even a bad one, but I feel like a hybrid approach works the best for me. Lay out the scaffolding, the beats and arcs, then let stuff naturally and logically grow over that. It helps that I'm making a webcomic instead of a film screenplay though.
Creating a magic system is really fun. I did created one for my comic and I love how goddamn dangerous the fallout of this magic is and how it's connected to my main character. You're absolutely right. It must have a reason to be there. I don't need to explain the details. It can be loose, maybe incoherent to a certain degree. It just has to serve its purpose to show how it affects the world and the destiny of our characters.