Carcinios

Members
  • Content count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Carcinios last won the day on July 16 2013

Carcinios had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

65 Obligator

About Carcinios

  • Birthday 09/12/1990

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cambridge, UK
  • Interests
    Writing Epic Fantasy, Reading more of the same. Celtic Music, Board games, Occasional Larp, Church, Hill Walking, Theory making

Recent Profile Visitors

2,510 profile views
  1. A question to think about: What would Odium risk by picking a Champion? 1. The theories linking it back to Mistborn identify one possibility: His champion would essentially be a free agent and thus able to choose a course of action that may cause Odium to lose. 2. A Champion is a single point of failure since they could be killed, meaning Odium again risks defeat by choosing one. Bearing that in mind, it seems unlikely that Odium would want to pick a representative. Unless... Dalinar and the others manage to persuade Odium that his defeat is possible anyway. It might be that by choosing a champion Odium protects himself from damage. i.e. he may fail to conquer Roshar but his essence in the Cosmere remains intact. If Odium is forced into a choice between risking himself to win or protecting himself but increasing the chance of defeat he may choose the safer option. As to who he might choose as his champion I think it is too soon to really have any idea but my gut is leaning towards one of Venli, Eshonai or Taravangian (Maybe Ishar)
  2. As with all the UK/US cover differences I have a preference for abstract over detailed covers. This is really just because I like to give my imagination full freedom to interpret what I'm reading. That said I think the US covers are artistically much more pleasing than the UK ones.
  3. Another one I have just remembered. I always think of Wit as looking like Jack the foolamancer from the Erfworld webcomic.
  4. Whilst it does introduce a limiting factor to the stories it provides a helpful context that allows story teller to do different things. A couple of examples where I have found it helpful... 1. My shared universe involves a kind of cosmic shadow war going on with players on both sides working behind the scenes to influence things. I am generally quite optimistic and so a story which is utterly bleak doesn't appeal to me. However in a shared universe I feel able to explore darker themes because in the deep background there is still hope. It is only dark in one particular place in the universe. 2. It allows me to give characters decisions with much more far reaching consequences. Faced with the choice of unleashing evil on your world or exiling it into deep space, in a stand alone novel the exile choice might be quite appealing. However when that means letting it loose on other worlds with characters you know and love it completely changes the dynamic of the choice. I think it is a fascinating concept to play with.
  5. I think one of the big attractions of the shared mythos for me is that I like to go into a lot of world building that doesn't make it into the story. Having a joint background for me is really just like having a bigger swimming pool to play in. That said there are things that I am working on that don't fit the overall setting so I keep them separate. But anything that involves magic I would pretty much want to keep in the same universe.
  6. I think by and large my feelings were the same as with part 1 although I struggled to follow some of the tactics being used. It certainly had a better flow and I really enjoyed the confrontation with the traveler again. The notion that he was working for both sides was an interesting one. Which raised the questions about what the bridge is there for. And where does the creator fit into the picture. So that left me feeling interested in the wider world beyond the story. Good work. The ending didn't work for me and I wonder if that is because the focus is on the secondary rather than the primary storyline. Most of the events in the other world focus on the defence of the bridge and what that means. The relationship with Magdi feels less important and yet when we get to the end we see how his relationship with Magdi has given him clarity but we don't get to see how the bridge itself has changed him. That is what I wanted to see. Who has Harth become after the lesson of the bridge?
  7. Thanks for the comment. I actually agree with you about multiple authors sharing a universe. It can be done but the shared property has to be well enough defined that everyone knows what rules to play by. (See Black Library fiction for a good example of how this can work.) What I was more trying to gauge is whether other people treated their own fiction as taking place inside a universe common across all their stories or whether they treated each story as an isolated piece of fiction and world building.
  8. So I suspect that everyone here likes the Cosmere as a concept. But I have a question. Would anyone ever consider setting their fiction in a shared universe like that? I was thinking about the pros and cons of having a deep background that is common across the different stories I wanted to tell and was wondering if anyone else had thought about it. Here are some initial thoughts I have had: Pros Gives an easy framework to hang world building off. No need to build everything from base level each time. Allows you to tell stories that don't follow the standard narrative structures because you have a degree of assumed knowledge. Gives a greater sense of depth to the universe Cons Danger of contradiction. Once something is the case in one story it has to be consistent in all stories. Danger of repetition. All the worlds follow the same rules and therefore aren't sufficiently unique (including the danger of being to heavily influenced by pre-existing shared universes) This one may be unique to writers of a religious persuasion but tackling the questions of deity, origins of existence and evil in a way that is honouring to what you believe but isn't just an allegory. Any thoughts one way or the other?
  9. This time around I felt like I was reading the same story but somehow it clicked better. Looking forward to part 2. I think I only noticed to things that still didn't quite gel. The first was the introduction of Dumkald, Cresca and Fermarald. The troops are dismissed and then there is no indication that anyone stayed behind to have the conversation that then starts. The second was the speed at which Harth adjusts to leading an unfamiliar force of soldiers. I don't know if that was due to the supernatural nature of the place and the Creator's influence but it felt a bit odd, as if he had been commanding them for years. I'm still not sure if Harth is a great commander or a failed one given a chance at redemption. Either way you have the tough job of showing him being that rather than just telling us how good or bad he is. My favourite bit this time around (other than the conversation with the Traveller which I really enjoyed the first time around as well) was the battle. I felt really grounded in Harth's perspective and that completely dictated the pace of the scene. Really well done for that.
  10. So, I had a great moment at work today. A customer came into the bookshop where I work and asked me this question: 'I'm trying to buy a present for my friend and he is really into fantasy but I don't really know anything about it. Can you recommend a good fantasy book for me to buy him?' Naturally I took them to the fantasy section and showed them the Final Empire, which they then bought! I got to introduce a complete stranger to Brandon Sanderson and got paid for the pleasure
  11. Sorry I'm so late to the party. Firstly can I say how glad I am that you chose to write this. Being a massive fan of fantasy and military fiction (as well as military history) this piece really sits smack bang in my niche. There are a few areas that I think could do with some consideration. 1. Era. Assuming this afterlife is based on an Earth-like world I really struggled to get a grip on what period of history the dead are drawn from. Their gear seems to be Roman or Medieval but Harth is a Major. A rank that did not appear in either of those historical periods. Now if the reason for this is that the dead come from multiple periods of history then that is awesome. If not then maybe look at flavouring the names and titles more towards the period you are aiming for. 2. War. A couple of people have mentioned the action scenes felt a bit flat. I think there is a reason for that. The rank of your POV character determines how the fighting should be observed. e.g. if you are following a general you hang back from the action and get a more omniscient description of the battle. If you follow a line soldier you will be in the heart of the fight but with no time for philosophical thought or advanced tactics. I think you try and do both; you have Major Harth who is essentially the general, but leading from the front. I wonder which story you are trying to tell. 3. Threat. I felt very little threat in the fighting. I think there needs to be more focus on why they are defending the bridge or if it is intentionally vague then they shouldn't be able to be revived after the battle. Again what story do want to tell. Is it more like 300 where a heroic few hold the horde at bay, or is it more of a Stalingrad story where our heroes that we love are thrown into a meat grinder that they are not expected to survive. I'm interested to see what direction you take it and I'm now going to go read part 2
  12. Anyone notice the worldhopper: the 'immersive' constable Ahlstrom
  13. The flow of the story worked very well for me. I noted there was something wrong early on and whilst it may have been a fairly big hint I like seeing what is coming more than being kept in the dark. I think the only real trouble I had with the story was the world building. The concepts are all very interesting but with the length of story you are going for i.e. flash fiction there is not really much space for that. There were terms for what they were doing which either you understood or were jargon but there wasn't space to expand on what they were. When I am reading super short fiction I am much more interested in the characters than the setting. For example if the setting is described as a workshop then my mind will fill the room with all the tools I expect to be in there, with a bare minimum of description. that gives you much more time to fill out the character interactions.
  14. Initially I thought that Thunderclasts looked like some kind of cross between a lobster and squid but made out of stone.
  15. I suspect they all can at least turn in to some form of weapon or at the very least some sort of armour. The Knights Radiant were formed to protect the people of Roshar from the Desolations. I doubt pacifism comes very close to their purpose or ideals. However we have seen Syl's ability to turn not just into a blade but also a spear, an axe and a shield. Some orders probably utilise their shards more for shielding than for their offensive capabilities.