Unknown2009-10-20 17:05:37
QUOTE (Vibeke @ Oct 19 2009, 07:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also, jewelry and clothing in your description is bad.
I entirely disagree! First, I despise that the jewelry/clothing items that are required for combat show up in LOOK... it makes most characters look hilariously ridiculous. Instead, I much prefer jewelry (and, I suppose, clothing, though there are some pretty sweet robe designs as is...) to be included in the description... and then I can simply ignore the 'She is wearing...' bit! I mean, the argument has always been that you should not describe objects that your character does not own.
It becomes silly fairly quick when you consider that you are arguing against characters in a text game not describing what they do not own in reality.
Unknown2009-10-20 17:21:46
I'm not sure if I want to put up my desciption on here...
Scary people.
Gimme your thoughts
Scary people.
QUOTE
She is an ordinary undead human and is a graceful, slender woman of five foot, her skin a gentle cream colour marred only by one scar down her neck. Her hair is a deep ebony colour, swept up into many intricate braids. A few whisps of rebelious hair float down, framing her delicate heart-shaped face, and she often tucks them back behind her slightly pointed ears. Her face is pretty for her race; beneath gently arched eyebrows sit her large high swept, amethyst eyes. Her pupils are pitch black, surrounded by flecks of ice blue, giving her eyes a slightly alien look to them. The rest of her face has angular set features with high cheekbones. Her full lips are her most noticeable feature, painted a sickly blood red colour. Her frame is athletic and toned, with a bit more of a wiry musculature than the average human, though she is not without soft womanly curves, starting with her full chest down to a small waist and feminine hips.
Gimme your thoughts
Unknown2009-10-20 18:26:54
QUOTE
She is an ordinary undead human and is a graceful, slender woman of five foot, her skin a gentle cream colour marred only by one scar down her neck. Her hair is a deep ebony colour, swept up into many intricate braids. A few wisps of rebellious hair float down, framing her delicate heart-shaped face, and she often tucks them back behind her slightly pointed ears. Her face is pretty for her race; beneath gently arched eyebrows sit her large high swept, amethyst eyes. Her pupils are pitch black, surrounded by flecks of ice blue, giving her eyes a slightly alien look to them. The rest of her face has angular set features with high cheekbones. Her full lips are her most noticeable feature, painted a sickly blood red colour. Her frame is athletic and toned, with a bit more of a wiry musculature than the average human, though she is not without soft womanly curves, starting with her full chest down to a small waist and feminine hips.
Only thing I have a bit of a problem with is the action in the description. You could maybe change it to be "...and often has to be tucked back behind her slightly pointed ears." or something to that extent to show that the action is performed regularly. Beyond that it looks fine to me, though the end is a bit iffy. I think you could just leave it at "...not without soft womanly curves." Minor spelling corrections as well.
Everiine2009-10-22 01:04:06
With regards to jewelry in the description-- I'm fine with jewelry in your description if it doesn't exist as a game created item you are currently wearing. For example, if you decide that your character has a ring with his/her family crest on it, but you don't belong to an ingame family, go ahead and describe the ring. My issue is with the redundancy of an item appearing both in the description and in the list of items at the end.
Evomire2009-10-22 16:49:01
QUOTE (Vibeke @ Oct 20 2009, 01:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Except 4th grade level adjectives are perfectly fine. I don't mean be overly simplistic, I mean don't be overly complex.
The following is just my opinion and should be treated as such:
TOO COMPLEX: "She is a human and is a tall and proud being, a perfect monument of flesh and muscle standing amongst the crowd that bustles beneath her. Her frame is lissome and supple, with limbs like willowy branches, coated with fine, wiry musculature. Soft tresses of hair, locks of a most luxurious and silky chestnut hue, make their way down the curve of her back to fall at the very midpoint, her fringe masking the radiant, mystical orbs of mahogany that are as pools of sweet milk chocolate set into her warm visage. "
JUST RIGHT: "She is a human and is of greater than average height with a lithe figure. Deep brown hair falls to her back, framing eyes of an equally deep hue."
TOO SIMPLE: "She is a human and is tall and skinny. She has brown hair and brown eyes."
The "too complex" is way too fluffy and overdramatic, not to mention annoying to read. The "too simple" is short and clunky. The "just right" combines both fluff and brevity to form an easy to read, yet detailed description.
The following is just my opinion and should be treated as such:
TOO COMPLEX: "She is a human and is a tall and proud being, a perfect monument of flesh and muscle standing amongst the crowd that bustles beneath her. Her frame is lissome and supple, with limbs like willowy branches, coated with fine, wiry musculature. Soft tresses of hair, locks of a most luxurious and silky chestnut hue, make their way down the curve of her back to fall at the very midpoint, her fringe masking the radiant, mystical orbs of mahogany that are as pools of sweet milk chocolate set into her warm visage. "
JUST RIGHT: "She is a human and is of greater than average height with a lithe figure. Deep brown hair falls to her back, framing eyes of an equally deep hue."
TOO SIMPLE: "She is a human and is tall and skinny. She has brown hair and brown eyes."
The "too complex" is way too fluffy and overdramatic, not to mention annoying to read. The "too simple" is short and clunky. The "just right" combines both fluff and brevity to form an easy to read, yet detailed description.
I actually thought that the "too complex" one was about right, even if it is horribly cliche and doesn't actually describe anything beyond hair color, body type, and eye color. I think that in a description the most prominent features should get flowery language, while the others that are less noticeable are relegated to shorter depictions. The problem with overly complex descriptions is that they either get so caught up in showing off the writer's prowess that they describe nothing, or that they get SO LONG describing everything in ultra-flowery language that you just don't care anymore by the time you get halfway through.
Your "just right" one isn't very descriptive. I think that a good description is important to setting your character's mood, and it's usually indicative of the player's RPing style. Overly complex for the sake of being complex descriptions are, imo, just as bad as one line descriptinos that say nothing.
But that's just IMO.
Jack2009-10-22 18:48:54
Overly complex for the sake of being overly complex is what Howard Phillips Lovecraft was all about. It's our right - goddamnit, our duty - to uphold the aureate, byzantine prosaicism he embodied. Bestir yourself, Lovecraft enthusiasts! This is our time!
Evomire2009-10-22 18:55:07
QUOTE (Jack @ Oct 22 2009, 06:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Overly complex for the sake of being overly complex is what Howard Phillips Lovecraft was all about. It's our right - goddamnit, our duty - to uphold the aureate, byzantine prosaicism he embodied. Bestir yourself, Lovecraft enthusiasts! This is our time!
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Complexity R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn?
Jack2009-10-22 19:30:44
For some people Lovecraft calls to mind Ia! Ia! Cthulhu f'htagn! To me, it will always be the phrase "penguin-fringed abyss".
Unknown2009-10-22 21:06:52
QUOTE (EVOmire @ Oct 22 2009, 12:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Your "just right" one isn't very descriptive.
Xenthos2009-10-22 21:39:42
QUOTE (Vibeke @ Oct 22 2009, 05:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So... isn't all your posturing here "your opinion," too?
Unknown2009-10-22 23:40:06
Unknown2009-10-23 04:36:16
Eventru2009-10-23 05:49:41
Enough, back on topic, thank you.
Casilu2009-10-23 05:54:05
QUOTE (Eventru @ Oct 22 2009, 10:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Enough, back on topic, thank you.
He is an ordinary elder god and was Celest's poo.
Like that?
Eventru2009-10-23 07:14:05
No.
Casilu2009-10-23 16:49:01
Unknown2009-10-23 21:01:39
Would it be bad for me to make my character lack facial features? Y'know, just have a kind of oval on it instead of eyes and a nose and mouth?
Fern2009-10-23 21:45:24
You have to have facial features, the mechanics of the game make it so. Ears and eyes can be lost, I think noses can be broken, and you can cough up blood, so you have to have those.
Unknown2009-10-23 21:52:25
QUOTE (Fern @ Oct 23 2009, 05:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You have to have facial features, the mechanics of the game make it so. Ears and eyes can be lost, I think noses can be broken, and you can cough up blood, so you have to have those.
True enough, but Lucidians be prone to a fair amount of mechanics the shouldn't be. They're solid chunks of crystal, how do they bleed? How do they have muscles or tendons to attack?
Aerotan2009-10-24 03:34:53
Magic