Judgment Time! So, this is just a skeletal rubric we will be using later on in the tournament, just so that the opening registration threads will be done quickly and proficiently. That being said, this is also a way for you to understand what is expected of the full rubric and get a good feel. If you have any questions on how things work you are free to contact me at any time for assistance. I am also going to be putting in ‘general notes’ at the end of the judgment, with a post signifier [post number] so that you can go back and look over the part that I commented. This is for your convenience only, not something that all mods will do, and is not required, but something that I like to add in for further help. Just for reference, a 2.5 out of 5 is the pure median for a score, so don't worry, it's not like... 'epic fail'-ness. Haha.
Story (2.3/5)
~This section is most notably used for how well you did. In the full rubric it will be split into three different parts: Continuity, Setting, and Pacing. Continuity is the section regarding the background of who your character is and where they came from, without a good bit of reflection on your back story it’s difficult for the reader to understand most other categories that are also being looked over. Setting is the part of the judging that is pretty much self explanatory. A good setting not only shows the reader as well as the participants of the thread were you are and what’s around, but also involves the tactical and practical use of the setting your character is interacting with. Final section of Story is the Pacing. This is the most complex of parts to analyze, normally. However, in a battle the pacing of the story is the intent of the writer to keep the reader on the edge of their seats, build the suspense well, and let it dwindle correctly.~
~Kristopher: You gave enough continuity to explain that he was from another world, and part of a group called the XIX, but what else is there to him? Why did he come to the tournament? What was he like back in the other world? Things like that would help out with allowing the reader to better understand things as they read. With only one post, I’m sure you’d have continued on explaining things in the posts to follow though. Setting was alright, giving good use of metaphors like how the moon light was ‘fingers’ of the moon. But anything else? Other senses can be employed to give the reader the ‘feel’ of the setting not just the way it looked. As for pacing, it was a bit slow but that’s mostly due to the way you wrote the opening. Not bad, but the sentences are a little longer than usual. A good way to help the flow would to be to break up those sentences that are independent clauses followed by dependent clauses, and then another set of them. Take those sentences that can be split into two different ones and do so, one or two commas per sentence is normally a good way to gage the flow with your writing style (unless it’s necessary to do otherwise because you can’t split them up; i.e. multiple dependent clauses).
~Rensuko: I didn’t really get a deep background other than you were invited by Kristopher, which is all fine and dandy, but remember to continue into the next posts where he came from, a little of his past, and what the reader can gain to better understand the character. The setting wasn’t really prevalent, and because of that I had to go off Kristopher’s. The wind that you detailed at the beginning was a ‘light breeze’ that grew at a snail’s pace to a torrent, pretty much, and then died instantly. Unless you were walking really slowly, it probably wouldn’t have gotten so strong by the time you got to your partner. The pacing was fine, except for the way you phrase things threw it off a little, see mechanics below.
Character (2.6/5)
~This section is looked in regards to another three parts: Dialogue, Action, and Persona. Each of these is rather simple to explain, compared to the story section. Action is a matter of following actions and a direction that makes sense for your character. If your character is a powerhouse then his actions sulking and hiding wouldn’t make much sense, same goes for if your character is a spy or assassin, up front confrontation wouldn’t make sense either. Dialogue is self explanatory, what you say, but it is not just that simple either. Dialogue pertains to whether your character is speaking in ways that make sense. A quiet character wouldn’t talk a lot, but maybe have inner thoughts instead, a cocksure character might stop in the middle of a fight to talk a lot, or a character whose persona isn’t either probably wouldn’t pull away from conflict to give a long speech. Persona is how well you keep ‘in character’, it is not just a part controlled by what you say your character does, but how he performs actions and why he does so. This section is contributed to by dialogue, action, pacing, continuity, and to a degree setting.~
~Kristopher: I got a little bit of your persona, but not enough to clearly picture who the character was. Remember, even a little bit goes a long way, and since it was just an opening post I wouldn’t expect some detailed persona. Continuity helps create persona in the beginning though, whereas dialogue and action can further explain it later in a thread. No real dialogue, though you wrote your thoughts within the narrative aspect of the story. Inner dialogue can help spice things up just as well as spoken word, but without either I have nothing to go off of.
~Rensuko: Your dialogue was pretty well written, not just words thrown out there to force it either. It showed a little bit of your character and what the reader would expect between the two’s reactions. I suggest the same for you as I did for your partner though: continuity helps persona to begin with, and a little bit of background goes a long way for opening posts.
Writing Style (2.9/5)
~The final section is the compilation of the final three parts: Technique, Mechanics, and Clarity. Technique is the section that we delve into your personal style of writing, in regards to ‘advanced’ styles of writing. The use of alliteration, foreshadowing, and metaphors or similes are going to heighten this score. Of course, stylistic uses of technique that go against proper grammar are also goo ways to use Technique, and will not be counted against you in the next section. Mechanics is the grammatically correct part of the judgment. How many mistakes you made with spelling, punctuation, and other mistakes is how this section is scored. Clarity is by far the most simple to judge. Were all the other sections clear? Was the way you told the story clear? Was your writing clear? That is what the entire section of clarity is about~
~Kristopher: Your use of advanced techniques, such as the moon’s rays, was very well used. That’s what we like to see, keep it up post to post and you’ll do wonderful. However, don’t force it, because forcing them in will detract just as much as a good one helps. Grammatically I only saw a few things, which are noted below in the general notes. Just a little bit of present tense misuse which can be easily fixed by reading over the posts. A good rule of thumb is to write it, read over it, and then step away after putting it up to read it again. Your mind tends to make automatic corrections in the thread after you’ve JUST written the post, so that you don’t catch them. The posts were clear, though the comments I made about the pacing apply to the clarity, since longer sentences can be somewhat harder to follow at times. Especially if there are too many commas in them.
~Rensuko: Your writing style is, by it’s nature, a form of technique. However, there are a few things that I noted below that stuck out. Most of the issues I had with the style you write in was the way you phrased things, which can easily be corrected. The phrasing also played against your clarity, but not so much that I couldn’t understand what you were saying, simply caught me off guard as to how you said it. You also tend to capitalize certain words, like ‘It’ and ‘If’, which I wasn’t sure why they were capitalized in the middle of a sentence. Perhaps to add emphasis? If so bolding them or italicizing them (which is preferred) would also do just fine. Also, writing the entire thing in Italics detracts from the writing a little, since it’s normally reserved for inner dialogue to discern it from spoken word.
Total: (7.8/15)
General Notes
~ “Unusual indeed seeing as this particular forest is always bustling with activity during the nighttime, but not that night, it had to mean that something was going to happen.” [2]~ You used present tense in past tense writing. “Unusual indeed [since] the particular forest [was]…”
~”as if he were nothing but a ghost,” [2]~ “as if he [was] nothing but a ghost
~ “since Kristopher has seen his aura countless times” [2]~ “since Kristopher [had] seen his aura…”
~ “the shadows casted by the trees behind him;” [3]~ “the shadows [cast] by the trees…”
~ “Silent, it was, the harsh wind had come into an end.” [3]~ This is an example of the strange way you word things. It would look better as “Silent, as it was, the harsh winds…”
~ “Lost, the young man was, after hours of wandering he had no idea where he was…” [3]~ Another example of the strange way it’s written. It’d work better and be less choppy if it was: “The young man was lost, after hours…”
~ “he preffered staying back into his world” [3]~ “he [preferred] staying [in] his own world.”
~ “On a regular morning, a message was sent to him, the messengers being ravens” [3]~ “A message was sent to him on a regular morning, the messengers [were] ravens…” Another example of the phrasing.
Posting Permissions
Submit Thread for Judgment