![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tegyriusI'm always a bit croggled when someone who I consider a role model and mentor says good things about my stuff. Particularly when I'm not in the audience.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
mazinderan recently pointed me at bruceb's contribution to an RPG.net thread on D&D5. Someone stated, "There are no good writers, only good re-writers," and Bruce responded thusly:
I disagree very strongly with this. Some people produce their best work through many rounds of revision, with changes both small and big. Others produce their best work with thought, then a single draft and no more than minor tweaking after that. I could do lists of authors of fiction and non-fiction in various genres, but edition threads don't need even more off-topicality than they get already, so I'll stick to gaming.
The first example that comes to mind is the knacks chapter for Adventure. Clayton Oliver did that in one fell swoop, pretty much. We playtested the tar out of it, made various changes along the way, and ended up removing almost all of them, because what he gave us really did just work that well. And if you go look at what folks love about Adventure, that's a huge part of the appeal.
(It happens that Clayton is also a great re-writer, but in that case, he genuinely didn't need to be.)
D'aww. Thanks, mang.
I'd never really analyzed it, but this is what I do. Perhaps I've avoided looking at it because from the inside, it looks more like I'm only doing one draft because I've procrastinated right up until the time when the final draft is due. But... yeah. All through high school and college, I never really got the point of multiple drafts of writing assignments. I just... wrote the damned things at the highest possible level of proficiency I could manage on the first try. Once I got sufficiently good at grammar and mechanics and spelling, I pretty much gave up on rewrites because I wasn't making any significant changes. In many cases, I'd second-guess myself out of good content if I went back for a second pass.
In six years of marriage,elalyr and I have had a few... spirited discussions... about my decision-making processes. Particularly when I'm dealing with a major decision, like four- or five-figure expenditures, I'll think about it for months. Then I'll sit on a decision that's 99% complete and wait for a final couple of pieces to fall into place. When that happens, the execution often looks stupidly precipitous because no one else saw the thinking that was done up front.
At least when it comes to game work, my writing style is the same. I'll get an assignment and sit on it for a few weeks, not really doing much besides reviewing reference material. Then I'll poke at some pieces that seem to be low-hanging fruit. Then I'll wait another week. Then my keyboard catches fire from a 10-kiloword day. Then my brain hurts.
I don't know how or why I do it. Wish I could. It seems like something that other writers might like to replicate. Best guess, it's part of the borderline-aspie effect of being an INTJ.
The one area where I don't do it is fiction. I'll revise the shit out of a vignette, and sometimes I have to stop myself from going back to my one abortive NaNoWriMo draft (sitting at a failed 42k) with a chainsaw. Perhaps not coincidentally, fiction is the writing area in which I have the least confidence in my ability to deliver something that anyone else would want to read.
But Adventure!? Yeah, we all did a pretty awesome job on that. I think Spirit of the Century and Hollow Earth Expedition have since replaced it as the gamers' drugs of choice for a pulpy action fix, but they really can't take anything away from it.
mazinderan recently pointed me at bruceb's contribution to an RPG.net thread on D&D5. Someone stated, "There are no good writers, only good re-writers," and Bruce responded thusly:I disagree very strongly with this. Some people produce their best work through many rounds of revision, with changes both small and big. Others produce their best work with thought, then a single draft and no more than minor tweaking after that. I could do lists of authors of fiction and non-fiction in various genres, but edition threads don't need even more off-topicality than they get already, so I'll stick to gaming.
The first example that comes to mind is the knacks chapter for Adventure. Clayton Oliver did that in one fell swoop, pretty much. We playtested the tar out of it, made various changes along the way, and ended up removing almost all of them, because what he gave us really did just work that well. And if you go look at what folks love about Adventure, that's a huge part of the appeal.
(It happens that Clayton is also a great re-writer, but in that case, he genuinely didn't need to be.)
D'aww. Thanks, mang.
I'd never really analyzed it, but this is what I do. Perhaps I've avoided looking at it because from the inside, it looks more like I'm only doing one draft because I've procrastinated right up until the time when the final draft is due. But... yeah. All through high school and college, I never really got the point of multiple drafts of writing assignments. I just... wrote the damned things at the highest possible level of proficiency I could manage on the first try. Once I got sufficiently good at grammar and mechanics and spelling, I pretty much gave up on rewrites because I wasn't making any significant changes. In many cases, I'd second-guess myself out of good content if I went back for a second pass.
In six years of marriage,
elalyr and I have had a few... spirited discussions... about my decision-making processes. Particularly when I'm dealing with a major decision, like four- or five-figure expenditures, I'll think about it for months. Then I'll sit on a decision that's 99% complete and wait for a final couple of pieces to fall into place. When that happens, the execution often looks stupidly precipitous because no one else saw the thinking that was done up front.At least when it comes to game work, my writing style is the same. I'll get an assignment and sit on it for a few weeks, not really doing much besides reviewing reference material. Then I'll poke at some pieces that seem to be low-hanging fruit. Then I'll wait another week. Then my keyboard catches fire from a 10-kiloword day. Then my brain hurts.
I don't know how or why I do it. Wish I could. It seems like something that other writers might like to replicate. Best guess, it's part of the borderline-aspie effect of being an INTJ.
The one area where I don't do it is fiction. I'll revise the shit out of a vignette, and sometimes I have to stop myself from going back to my one abortive NaNoWriMo draft (sitting at a failed 42k) with a chainsaw. Perhaps not coincidentally, fiction is the writing area in which I have the least confidence in my ability to deliver something that anyone else would want to read.
But Adventure!? Yeah, we all did a pretty awesome job on that. I think Spirit of the Century and Hollow Earth Expedition have since replaced it as the gamers' drugs of choice for a pulpy action fix, but they really can't take anything away from it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-06-27 12:39 am (UTC)I don't buy into it too literally, but the explanation which reflects how I see it internally best is as discovery. If I'm writing a program, the one gaming supplement I've tackled, or a major purchase, I often feel as if I'm poking away at a Platonic ideal for a long time with no visible external signs of progress. After a while, it gels and I've "discovered" this ideal. Then...brain dump.
no subject
Date: 2013-06-27 03:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-06-28 02:04 am (UTC)Also, Sweet 16 was pretty spectacular. No "for a first gaming supplement" qualification - it was solid work. I think I spent more time on the Spycraft mechanics adaptations than I did developing your writing.
no subject
Date: 2013-06-28 02:04 am (UTC)eat my shortshate.