Leopold Division Judgment

First of all, sorry for the wait. That apology goes to those in the battle and to Dirks. I’d planned to get these done immediately when I returned from vacation, but I didn’t plan on getting sick. Fun stuff.

Anyway, I’ll be honest with you guys. Even in the first couple of posts from each of you, I knew who the winner would be. It really had nothing to do with writing skill, but rather how the player approached this battle. Keep in mind, now, that just because you don’t win doesn’t mean that you’re eliminated. There will be runners up, and I have a strong belief that at least one of them will come from this division. Should that be true, read through my comments and, where necessary, the battle, and get a better idea of just what is expected.





Saxon

Continuity – This category may have been better had the battle been more complete. As it was, I was left with several loose ends and nothing with which to time them together. Also, don’t expect me to know much about your army coming in; you have to write this as if the reader knows nothing about your situation. Your first post was long, but I didn’t feel like the information you gave me was pointed in the right direction. 5/15

Setting – Good on areas that you touch, but very incomplete. I got a good image of your environment, but no vision at all of what your army actually looks like. Remember, you’re part of the setting. Also, dog tags didn’t strike me as being consistent with the time period. 4/10

Pacing – You did well with what you had. Any problems in this area were faults in the system, not faults in your writing. 5/10

Action – What action? It seemed like your end of the story just never quite came to fruition. Don’t focus on the rising action at the expense of the climax. Gisela is a battle, after all. I expect to see people dying and stuff, but all I saw in your posts was preparation. 4/15

Persona – I like the fact that your main character shows signs of flaws. While Althanian writers usually don’t try to model their characters after perfection, it’s still rare that actual flaws show up. 6/10

Dialogue – Well done here. You added a lot of emotion into the characters’ words when appropriate. 7/10

Mechanics – I’ll be honest with you; this category impedes your writing more than anything else. You have vast potential, but I see legions of grammatical errors in your writing that bring it down from the level it could be at. 4/10

Technique – Again, your grammatical errors bring this down. You have a tendency not to complete your similes and metaphors. I understand what you’re trying to say, but it’s distracting nonetheless. 4/10

Clarity – Your first posts passed by somewhat hazily to me. I read them a couple of times without understanding what was really going on. 4/10

Total: 43





RumpleGrumblePuss

Continuity – Good. I would have liked a little more in the way of description in your intro – just what your army is made up of, for example – but this was solid overall. In addition, the lack of completion in the battle didn’t leave you with the same loose ends that hampered Saxon’s performance. 9/15

Setting – Same thing as Saxon; you did well with the environment, but I didn’t really get a picture of your army. 4/10

Pacing – No complaints. Your posts lead logically into and out of the storyline. 5/10

Action – At least you and Thoracis had some conflict. That was good. I would have liked an explanation for the sudden cohesion that the Mandas and the DDP’s had in battle, though. It seemed like that cooperation just came out of nowhere when it was needed. 7/15

Persona – One of the prices of first-person writing is that it’s much harder to show personality unless you’re really in touch with your character. I didn’t see that so much here. The character seemed very wooden and flat to me. 4/10

Dialogue – I thought the Mandas were entertaining (and probably realistic :p). The interaction that they, in particular, had with each other and with other members of your army was great. 7/10

Mechanics – Minor typos and grammar mistakes spread here and there. Nothing serious. 6/10

Technique – The first-person style and the humor in the writing are both refreshing changes from the norm in this tournament. 7/10

Clarity – Well-written and clear. 8/10

Total Score: 57





Thoracis

Continuity – Very good. See Rumple’s comments for Continuity; they apply to you as well. 9/15

Setting – Great. Also, you gave yourself an inherent advantage here: in using the Althanian races in your army, you could get away with less description where your adversaries couldn’t. I don’t know what a Qaltha servitor looks like. I do know what a dark elf looks like. 6/10

Pacing – I thought you were strongest in this category out of everybody. Everything happened with a clear sense of ‘when’. Well done. 6/10

Action – Also strong. I would have loved to see your skirmish with RGP play out; there would have been high scores if it had. 9/15

Persona – You fell into the same trap that everybody has thus far: nobody seems to be able to gives their characters depth while maintaining the battle front. Saxon had personality, but less action. RGP had action, but less personality. You were similar to RGP in this way. 4/10

Dialogue – Very formal and to the point. There’s really only so much that I can say about it. Solid overall. 6/10

Mechanics – I caught three mistakes, I think, in your entire share of the battle. Great! 8/10

Technique – When I think of Gisela, this is what I think of. Remember, guys, that this is a battle tournament, not a quest – while armies are involved, the premise remains the same as a one-on-one: introduction, and then conflict. Story adds flavor, but the meat of a battle is just that: the battle. Your style in this battle was very direct, and everybody else could really learn a thing or two by reading exactly what you did here. Excellent. 8/10

Clarity – Well-written and clear. 8/10

Total Score: 64




Thoracis gains 2200 EXP and 500 GP. Thoracis automatically advances to the next round.

RumpleGrumblePuss gains 600 EXP and 150 GP.

Saxon gains 300 EXP and 150 GP.