Solo Threads

[Hysteria]

I saw a thread in Scara Brae which said that Solo quests need to be a minimum of 10,000 words, or 10 posts. I was thinking that seems quite a bit. Is there a reason for it being so long?

I understand that it is easier to make a solo than a full on thread, is the only reason for making it so long just to not make it easier to do solos rather than questing with other people?

[Ulysses]

I don't think that's terribly long or anything...maybe a little bit on the long side for a short story, but not very much so. It doesn't *have* to be a full 10,000 words anyway, as it says (10 posts). So yeah that's pretty normal length for a short story. I don't know the reasoning behind the rule, but I don't think it's unreasonably difficult to achieve...

[Visla Eraclaire]

Nobody actually counts words until it seems like someone is just spamming out solo threads to abuse the system.

It's to keep people from writing one or two post vignettes which are difficult to score with the rubric.

[Taskmienster]

It's so we don't get threads that are little more than 1-5 posts, without anything really behind them. I've judged something here and there that wasn't at 10 posts or 10k words, but it was docked in rewards and it's hard to really write anything of substance without at least putting something into it.

[Ace_of_Spades]

I'm kinda glad I saw this when I saw it. I just made a solo quest and was unaware of the rule. I dunno I feel like if you really had an idea for a solo 'quest' it would be longer anyway, just to get what you want done. Otherwise its more like spamming, imo. No one wants to read 3 posts of anything when it says quest. quests are so supposed to be long and full of a journey. so 10000 words isn't that much to me.

especially considering in a really long quest of like 8-10 pages of a thread you and 2-4 other people probably respectively posted 10000 words easily if not 10000 more.

[Saxon]

I understand that it is easier to make a solo than a full on thread, is the only reason for making it so long just to not make it easier to do solos rather than questing with other people?

A) Not all threads are judged equal, so solos, for many reasons, are not typically viewed by every judge in the same manner and are sometimes cast in a negative light solely because you chose to write it yourself instead of with other people.

B) Length does not make a lick of difference in a thread in terms of displaying your ability or skill in creating a good thread or story. Some people have to write more and others less to convey the same ideas in a story.

C) Solos are not easy. The weight is entirely on you to plan and deliver the thread to completion, which is something a lot of people cannot or are not willing to do. So if you can write solo threads and do them well, feel proud.


I saw a thread in Scara Brae which said that Solo quests need to be a minimum of 10,000 words, or 10 posts. I was thinking that seems quite a bit. Is there a reason for it being so long?

No. There isn't a reason to write lengthy threads other then to apply to this rule which is outdated and hurts you more than if you would have just ended your thread a couple pages ago.

Why? I'll tell you the biggest thing that pissed me off as a judge. There were a lot of pet peeves, but what I disliked the most was having to trudge through 3-4+ page threads. Most threads don't need to go past 2 pages unless multiple people are involved, and typically, you can tell the difference when even reading casually about whether or not people are padding their threads with posts solely to boost their score. Why is this bad? You're not writing for the sake of the story, which is one of only a handful of things you should ever be writing for.

You're also wasting the time and energy of one of the biggest members of your audience that you should care about. The judge. And if its one thing a judge hates doing its having to tie up much of their free time reading your lengthy epic and scoring it. A judge has to sit there and read whatever it is you have to write and I know I'm not the only one here whose experienced it, but after awhile you start to get tunnel vision when reading long threads, especially as a judge. Which means I'll have to break up the reading of your thread over multiple sessions in order to be able to focus and read without skimming through it (which is something that most judges will do in this situation).

Think about that when you're writing and what you'd rather have at the end of the thread. First, you could have a judge who spends an hour or two reading your work and appreciating it for what it is and willing to give you some comprehensive commentary to help you better yourself, be more willing to approve whatever awards you may have, and though the experience systems and the amounts afforded to you are fixed, it is within a judges power to round up that last couple points you need to tackle that level you've been slaving over.

Or you could go in with the expectation of writing a novel-length thread, submit it and let a judge read it. After marching through your thread for about a
week, which is something he or she probably ends up skimming the majority of anyway, they are going to make you pay for it through the score (which they can and do). With those kinds of threads, judges will also usually write commentary based off of initial impressions and what little they read which rarely makes a lick of sense, and it also ends up radically affecting any experience, gold, or whatever spoils you might receive then if you could have just sucked it up and taken a couple points or listened to a rule nazi rant about how they won't judge something that doesn't apply to 10/10,000.

See the difference?

In terms of the 10 post/10,000 word thing, here's some advice that I'll give cost free. You can afford to take the hit to your score. This isn't a grade school english class where a teacher is looking to see if you can pull enough words together on paper, regardless of what they are, to show you have some kind of basic understanding of the english language. So not applying to every judge's whim to what they expect of you when you submit a thread isn't going to kill you, and I can tell you of only a handful of people I've ever known that'll bash players in their scores for rule's sake. You do judges and yourselves more of a favor by keeping your threads short, concise and consistent then playing to an arbitrary rule that doesn't represent everyone's best interests in most situations. It is that easy.

Just two cents from a former judge who has been there and done it. Take it for what its worth.



Tl;dr: Write for quality, not for length for length's sake. This isn't an english class and you can afford to take whatever minor hit you do for short quests, if any, then by invoking a judge's ire.

[Hysteria]

When I first started RPing, oh so long ago I was told to write posts over 2k characters. Some people on the site thought that it was silly, but I find that it forces you to examin your writing and improve on it. Adding necessary details, ensuring that anyone reading it knows what your doing, encouraging your to describe using more than just what things look like, etc.

I am finding that now trying to write my solo. I am structuring the quest more, trying to make sure the whole thing is interesting as well as having a clear and flowing plot... its hard.

Looking at the way that threads were scored, I figured the 10,000 word thing was more about the rubric than quality assurance.


I don't think that's terribly long or anything...maybe a little bit on the long side for a short story, but not very much so. It doesn't *have* to be a full 10,000 words anyway, as it says (10 posts). So yeah that's pretty normal length for a short story. I don't know the reasoning behind the rule, but I don't think it's unreasonably difficult to achieve...

I started writing without much of an idea of what was going to happen and got stuck at 4k words :(


I'm kinda glad I saw this when I saw it. I just made a solo quest and was unaware of the rule. I dunno I feel like if you really had an idea for a solo 'quest' it would be longer anyway, just to get what you want done. Otherwise its more like spamming, imo. No one wants to read 3 posts of anything when it says quest. quests are so supposed to be long and full of a journey. so 10000 words isn't that much to me.

My 'idea' is one of the employment opportunities in Scara Brae ;). All my ideas for solos are generally internally focused on character development or insights into how my character thinks/acts. He is a traveling street entertainer at the moment, but I haven't found much cause for him to actually do that in threads, but if I was going to make a solo with that as the main component it would be pretty dry. I would probably need to make him get mugged in order to make it slightly interesting and even then it would probably only be 5k.

I think I might just have to shift my idea of a solo thread somewhat.

[Ace_of_Spades]

well i'm working on my third post for my solo quest in berevar and when its done i'll be at 3000 words. so i dunno i find it kinda easy. 10000 words is really only like 20 pages. and if its a solo quest I see it as a short story, so i dunno, and that's 20 pages double spaced so its like 10. but i guess I understand the sort of conflict you're talking about.

if its just like this carnival idea then i'd do like a sort of traveling carnival visiting different palces through althanas just to arive back at the point of origin. i can see that taking a long time though, but effective in getting the 10000 words and even better 10+ pages.

[Visla Eraclaire]

Length does not make a lick of difference . . . Solos are not easy. The weight is entirely on . . . the biggest thing . . . and typically, you can tell the difference. . . You're also wasting the time and energy of one of the biggest members . . . over multiple sessions . . . and what you'd rather have at the end . . . isn't . . . that easy.

This post was too long so I only skimmed it. However, I disagree.

[Zook Murnig]

When I first started writing here, that 10,000 word rule terrified me. But then I realized that it doesn't have to be 10,000 words in at least 10 posts, but that the 10,000 words is if the thread is shorter than 10 posts. And even now, I can't understand why anyone would write 10,000 words and end up with less than 10 posts.

For example, I have three solos that I've done since starting here. My first was, like, eleven posts. Approximately 6000 words. My second was similar length in posts, and 4000 words. My third was just the same as the second in posts and wordcount. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I cannot imagine someone putting that much effort into their thread to get, say 8000 words, and then putting it into only seven posts. Further, those posts would be MASSIVE.

Saxon is right. As a judge, long posts terrify me. It's not so bad if you've got the style for it, but otherwise it's likely to just be a wall of text. Walls of text are bad. It's fluff, plain and simple, and a way to make your post look bigger without adding any real content. If you want to get on your judge's good side, avoid this at all costs.

[Amaril Torrun]

...


You're also wasting the time and energy of one of the biggest members of your audience that you should care about. The judge. And if its one thing a judge hates doing its having to tie up much of their free time reading your lengthy epic and scoring it. A judge has to sit there and read whatever it is you have to write and I know I'm not the only one here whose experienced it, but after awhile you start to get tunnel vision when reading long threads, especially as a judge. Which means I'll have to break up the reading of your thread over multiple sessions in order to be able to focus and read without skimming through it (which is something that most judges will do in this situation).

...

Or you could go in with the expectation of writing a novel-length thread, submit it and let a judge read it. After marching through your thread for about a
week, which is something he or she probably ends up skimming the majority of anyway, they are going to make you pay for it through the score (which they can and do). With those kinds of threads, judges will also usually write commentary based off of initial impressions and what little they read which rarely makes a lick of sense, ...




I almost took offense to this. Then I reminded myself that it is complete bull. That is your personal experience with judging, treated as though it were the norm for Althanas' current staff. If we hated what we were doing, we wouldn't be doing it anymore.

[Visla Eraclaire]

If we hated what we were doing, we wouldn't be doing it anymore.

Many aren't doing it anymore. Many more won't be doing it anymore in due time. See, e.g. judge turnover, see generally the number of former staff, c.f. revolving door staff and returning judges.

[Saxon]

I almost took offense to this. Then I reminded myself that it is complete bull. That is your personal experience with judging, treated as though it were the norm for Althanas' current staff. If we hated what we were doing, we wouldn't be doing it anymore.

Considering I knew multiple judges past and present who took similar things from it and shared some experiences with me that paint the same colors, it isn't bullshit. The fact that people keep dressing judges up as some kind of infallible demi-god is. I saw and heard about more fuck-ups and faux-pas admitted and committed by other judges behind the curtain then I did when I was out.

Judges skim. Judges knock people for petty bullshit. Some judges are shockingly biased. Some judges don't even read the threads they're fucking judging. Not all judges do it, and some have the integrity to at least do the job they applied for, but most either quit before they reach that point or continue to soldier on after they're burned out intermittently and attain higher positions within the hierarchy. And it isn't a fucking state secret either. You either are aware of this going on, have witnessed it, or are too stupid or enamored in the gloss of what it is to be a judge to see the big, significant flaws in how it is often carried out.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

EDIT:



If we hated what we were doing, we wouldn't be doing it anymore.


That's funny, because I know of many judges who quit for that very reason. Thankfully, as said above, most quit before they can do any significant damage to players they are judging. Honestly, I don't know how you can stomach it unless you believe its a god-given responsibility or a job that ought to be done. Though with high judge turnover and frequent new judges hires added to the mix, one could probably argue that the revolving door moves too fast for the site to become too displaced by it. But hey, who am I to talk? I worked here.

[Amaril Torrun]

No bubble bursted here. I'm not really looking for an argument. I just wanted to put it out there that you peeps reading this don't need to worry about your threads only being skimmed.

Anyways, I believe my last solo with Amaril only broke 9000 with 12 posts, so yeah, the 10000 word rule is more of a guideline.

[Tshael]

I don't think this thread was about judges.

In my opinion, you shouldn't be worried about that rule! I've never paid attention to my word count, and trust me, even with a simple story it's easy to get to ten posts! :) Even in a solo, where you don't have other people's posts bulking up your thread, sometimes you'll stop and see where you've gotten and go, "Holy crud! I didn't think I wrote that much..." :3 So just go for it and don't worry about the numbers!

[Saxon]

No bubble bursted here.

I guess not. Call me when it does.



I just wanted to put it out there that you peeps reading this don't need to worry about your threads only being skimmed.


Read me what part of that sentence you probably should've omitted. Hint: I bolded it for you.


Anyways, I believe my last solo with Amaril only broke 9000 with 12 posts, so yeah, the 10000 word rule is more of a guideline.

Hello. I see you haven't read my post in its entirety OR have a comprehensive understanding of the rule in question. *shakes hand* Thanks for proving my point. *poses for newspaper photo*

[Amaril Torrun]

I never said I disagreed with that part of your point. In fact, I was agreeing with you on that area and you found a way to verbally attack it.

EDIT: This last post of mine obviously shows that I don't have anything new to add to the OPs questions so I'll be departing from this thread until that changes. I'm willing to try to clear this up through PMs if you'd like.

[Saxon]

I never said I disagreed with that part of your point. In fact, I was agreeing with you on that area and you found a way to verbally attack it.

What?

[Hysteria]

@Saxon: Oops, I was writing my respone and posted it without seeing yours.

I agree, quality is better than quanitity, but the two arnt exclusive. I think the key point of the rule when it was created (regardless of if it is no longer in use) is that you need to have equal parts of both. A really good poem, of say 200 words, cannot be compared with a long story, and the rubric is all about comparing.

I understand that long posts can bore people, I also understand that a really long thread can turn the judge into a brain dead simpleton for a few hours afterwards. However, if the 10k limit isn't enforced, then surely a 10k thread of good quality should be judged higher than a 5k thread of the same quality?


When I first started writing here, that 10,000 word rule terrified me. But then I realized that it doesn't have to be 10,000 words in at least 10 posts, but that the 10,000 words is if the thread is shorter than 10 posts. And even now, I can't understand why anyone would write 10,000 words and end up with less than 10 posts.

I don't understand why they would write that you needed to do 10k words if you could just plit your posts up and do half that... When I write I put my own little breaks in the posts, so I don't feel inclined to post again everytime there is a change of scene.

[Visla Eraclaire]

I don't understand why they would write that you needed to do 10k words if you could just plit your posts up and do half that... When I write I put my own little breaks in the posts, so I don't feel inclined to post again everytime there is a change of scene.

Nonsensical rules? On MY Althanas? It's more likely than you think.

[Hysteria]

I take too long to post responses. Meh.


Nonsensical rules? On MY Althanas? It's more likely than you think.

Thats what I was looking for.

[Saxon]

I don't understand why they would write that you needed to do 10k words if you could just plit your posts up and do half that... When I write I put my own little breaks in the posts, so I don't feel inclined to post again everytime there is a change of scene.

Because. The rule was originally initiated to keep people from farming threads for levels, spoils, experience and gold by making one-post threads and submitting them for judgment, making it viable for them to attain high levels and power quickly for meanial work. That was its original purpose.

Remember that the rule also states that your thread needs to be 10 posts, and if it isn't, then it needs to be 10,000 words or more in order to be judged. This is often confused by people who think that a thread needs to be 10 posts and 10,000+ words in order to qualify for a judgment. Which isn't true at all.

This is in fact a rule that supports the gaming element of Althanas culture, and proves time after time that a writing workshop and a game don't mesh well together at all. This is because one requires interpretation of the work at hand and the other needs black-white rules in order to function properly, and when either of these wires get crossed, shit starts to contradict.

Though, for the sake of argument, this could be easily resolved if this rule was suspended in favor of putting the qualifying thread submission for judgment at a judge's discretion with some kind of oversight. But, from what I've mentioned earlier of self-serving judging practices, would you trust that kind of rule being initiated?

Me neither.

The point of this is to show that Althanas is bad as a game and a writer's workshop, and until one of these is decided to be the focus of the site and the other is eventually phased out, these enigmatic problems will keep cropping up. Not to say either side doesn't have their own share of problems, but generally when you try to apply the betterment of writing and some sort of arbitrary rule structure dedicated to quantifying or exploiting it around it, things do not match up.



However, if the 10k limit isn't enforced, then surely a 10k thread of good quality should be judged higher than a 5k thread of the same quality?


It can't. You cannot hold pieces of differing lengths to different standards and expect them to be of the same quality because its impossible to do. Everyone has their own level of skill with writing, so what might be good for somebody to write a 1,200+ word short story and get their point across might be significantly harder for somebody to do who needs 4,000-5,000+ words to do it.

This myth of standardized judging needs to be dismissed. Judges are human, which means everyone views everything differently and because writing is open to interpretation, not everyone is going to feel about the piece in the same way which factors into whether one person would give this thread's persona a 5 and another would give it a 7. The same could be said about art. Its really hard to quantify how you feel about it without breaking it down like the rubric does, and even then everyone has a different answer to it. And since this is a volunteer job with very little practical training and education behind it, you have to factor in personal skill level, personal education level, callousness, integrity and their willingness to pick apart your thread and point out some of the ways you could do better when considering individual judges, so that makes it exponentially harder to factor in.

Judging is done by people and people aren't machines so its impossible to expect everyone to view everything the same way, especially when we're talking about a job that asks a person to interpret or critique someone else's literary work from their own point of view.

[Christoph]

It's so we don't get threads that are little more than 1-5 posts, without anything really behind them. I've judged something here and there that wasn't at 10 posts or 10k words, but it was docked in rewards and it's hard to really write anything of substance without at least putting something into it.

Actually, it's very easy to write a good story in 4,000 words or less. Most fantasy literary magazines prefer 1,000 to 6,000 words, in fact. And really most 10,000+ pieces just have a bunch of fluff and should be shorter -- it took me months to break myself of that habit. That's really the problem with this silly rule. It either encourages members to pad their writing (thus making their writing suffer), or it forces them to make tiny posts, even if it means splitting their scenes, for which most judges would dock points (which is stupid).

Naturally, many threads have large stories that SHOULD be a decent length (or very long, in some instances), but that shouldn't be required.



However, if the 10k limit isn't enforced, then surely a 10k thread of good quality should be judged higher than a 5k thread of the same quality?

If they're the same quality, they should have the same score regardless of length; some stories need more or fewer words to tell than others. The longer one, ideally, would get more EXP, of course, because it took more work to write.

Incidentally, if the EXP formula were actually effective and balanced, this wouldn't be an issue. Right now, the shorter the thread, the more EXP per post it's worth. That's why they have the silly ten-post rule. So I would say: fix the EXP formula, so that threads of less than ten posts don't get more than a proportionally fair chunk of EXP.

[Atzar]

The point of this is to show that Althanas is bad as a game and a writer's workshop...

Wait... so if you don't like it as a game, and you don't like it as a writer's workshop, then why are you here? Just to be contrary and negative? Or to take shots at the staff and the system over a matter that's really not related to the topic?

If my observations are incorrect, then I apologize. But you don't seem to enjoy the game, you don't enjoy the workshop aspect of the site, you don't seem to like the people - or else you're just sucking on some very sour grapes where the staff is concerned. So if Althanas is so bad, I don't understand why you waste your time here - unless, of course, you're just trying to pass off exaggerated opinion as undeniable fact in order to create controversy.



As for the original topic... I was actually on the wrong end of the rule once - my first quest on this site was nine posts long and didn't get a real judgment because of it. I was actually pretty irritated at the time. I didn't get my requested spoils and I only got a fraction of the EXP/GP I would have had I just split one of my posts in half. I definitely didn't feel like the effort I put into the thread was reflected in the rewards.

I'd be in favor of seeing the rule removed - I really think length has no bearing on the quality of a thread. A thread should only be refused a judgment it actually can't be judged for some reason, be it incompletion or whatever else. If a thread is short to the point that it hurts the story, then just score it low - such a flaw would likely have a negative effect on nearly every category on the rubric. Refusing judgment just strikes me as an over-the-top penalty based on a rule that exists, to me, more for the sake of having a rule than out of any real need for it.

[Hysteria]

Remember that the rule also states that your thread needs to be 10 posts, and if it isn't, then it needs to be 10,000 words or more in order to be judged. This is often confused by people who think that a thread needs to be 10 posts and 10,000+ words in order to qualify for a judgment. Which isn't true at all.

I understand, my point is that the two variables on either side of the or are not equal. Maybe instead, 15 posts or 10,000 words, or 10 posts or 5k words, just so the two are closer together.


This is in fact a rule that supports the gaming element of Althanas culture, and proves time after time that a writing workshop and a game don't mesh well together at all. This is because one requires interpretation of the work at hand and the other needs black-white rules in order to function properly, and when either of these wires get crossed, shit starts to contradict.

Most rping games are open to interpretation unless it is a computer game. For example D&D, Warhammer, Dungeon Master, etc all preach flexability in the rules to maximise fun. Why can't it be the same here? I think like most things in life, its about finding a balance between the two, which can be flexible. One of the things I like about this site is that it is much more flexible than the last system I RPed in which had a much more fixed style of character sheets and skills.


The point of this is to show that Althanas is bad as a game and a writer's workshop, and until one of these is decided to be the focus of the site and the other is eventually phased out, these enigmatic problems will keep cropping up. Not to say either side doesn't have their own share of problems, but generally when you try to apply the betterment of writing and some sort of arbitrary rule structure dedicated to quantifying or exploiting it around it, things do not match up.

I dissagree, like I said, the last place I RPed at was much more about the game and it died in the butt.



It can't. You cannot hold pieces of differing lengths to different standards and expect them to be of the same quality because its impossible to do. Everyone has their own level of skill with writing, so what might be good for somebody to write a 1,200+ word short story and get their point across might be significantly harder for somebody to do who needs 4,000-5,000+ words to do it.

Probably my fault in the way I phrased my comment. My point was that there needs to be more than on variable in deciding an overall thread 'quality' (though that word is not suitable, perhaps 'value' might be a better term). These include things like, Story line, writing style, player interaction (when there is more than one writer) and also length of the thread. These variables then come together to judge a combined value of the thread. If two threads have the same value (combined measure of the variables) then they are the same regardless of the length (because that was used in determaning the value).

However if two stories are the same in the variables of Writing style, story line, etc but one is longer, the longer one has a higher 'value', even if the quality of the threads are the same.

I think that is clearer than what I said before :)


This myth of standardized judging needs to be dismissed....

This applies for all judged things, all competions, sports, even the olympics. We have to just accept it and try and limit it as best we can. I agree, but don't think it is that important because it is an uncontrollable variable. A few instances where I have come across this include things like:

Judged by someone who knows my style and knows the faults in it.
Judged by a friend who likes me.
Judged by someone who doesnt like my style.
Judged by someone who is in a bad mood.
Judged by someone who doesnt like the storyline.

And so on and so on. I don't think its such a big deal.


I'd be in favor of seeing the rule removed - I really think length has no bearing on the quality of a thread. A thread should only be refused a judgment it actually can't be judged for some reason, be it incompletion or whatever else. If a thread is short to the point that it hurts the story, then just score it low - such a flaw would likely have a negative effect on nearly every category on the rubric. Refusing judgment just strikes me as an over-the-top penalty based on a rule that exists, to me, more for the sake of having a rule than out of any real need for it.

I think it should just be one of the variables and it can be made up in another way. Like a really good short story recives the same as a slightly longer story with slightly less quality. I know some people might say 'quality over quantity' but I am not saying they are equally weighed, just both included.

[Atzar]

I think it should just be one of the variables and it can be made up in another way. Like a really good short story recives the same as a slightly longer story with slightly less quality. I know some people might say 'quality over quantity' but I am not saying they are equally weighed, just both included.

Yeah, that's basically how it works for quests over the length limit - a 15-post quest will net you more EXP than a 10-post quest, with all other variables (score, character's level, etc.) equal. Getting rid of the rule likely wouldn't change the use of length as a factor in EXP gain.

[Duffy]

Oh, are we flogging that dead horse again?

[Hysteria]

Which part of the conversation is the horse? The quality vs quantity, the solo thread limit or what makes a good thread?

[Taskmienster]

What isn’t the horse? Complaining about the ability to split up a post and get exp from it? Moderator undermining by former staff who obviously doesn’t like Althanas by their own admission? Or pages and pages of off topic chatter about something that doesn’t fit the topic, and is little more than anti-staff/Althanas spam?

Thread closed. If you want to discuss something, I’d suggest that you actually discuss it, not get off topic to the point where it’s just complaining about site policy and the judges.

If you'd like an explanation of the rules, and not just a thread dedicated to complaining about them, feel free to PM me.