Does anyone have experience writing fantasy novels?
I often write prologues or first chapters and am often afraid that it will be boring for others, because after all, when you buy a book, you look at the beginning or the blurb. Unfortunately, I have to admit that I sometimes overlook mistakes and usually need two attempts before there are almost no more mistakes. So I wanted to ask if you could take a look and rate it. That would be really nice 🙂
LG
Here is the prologue:
prolog
In the shadow of the ancient trees, their gnarled roots reaching deep into the earth, lay a forgotten glade, surrounded by wisps of mist that swallowed the moonlight. The wind whispering through the branches seemed to carry the stories of times long past—stories of heroes and kings, of wars and peace, of betrayal and love. But all of this paled in comparison to the prophecy that had held the world in suspense for centuries.
In the center of the clearing rose a broken stone monolith, its surface covered in ancient runes. No mortal could read them except those born with the gift of vision. It was said that the runes would only glow when the time of fulfillment approached. For centuries, they had remained dark, but on this night, a faint light flickered across the carved symbols.
Far away, in the halls of the White Tower, the seer awoke from a troubled sleep. Her heart raced, and cold sweat beaded on her brow. The vision that haunted her was clearer than ever before—and more terrifying. She had seen the faces woven into the world's fate and the shadows that threatened to consume it. An old, long-forgotten voice echoed in her mind:
"When the stars bleed and the last moon sinks, the fate of the realm will stand at a crossroads. Three will be chosen, but only one will bear the power to shape or destroy the world. An heir to darkness, a child of light, and a heart that belongs to neither."
The words of the prophecy burned in her mind, as inextinguishable as the fire she had seen in her vision. She knew the time had come to warn the Council. The age of peace was drawing to a close, and the world would soon face the greatest trial it had ever known.
The seer rose, her old form painfully bent, but her mind clear. The prophecy was no longer a fairy tale, but a looming reality. And the threads of fate that once hung loosely began to intertwine—in a darkness that threatened to consume even the brightest light.
Night fell over the land, and the wind carried the ancient prophecy far away, where the ignorant slept and dreamed. But in the deepest shadows, something stirred—and fate took its course.
(1 votes)
Loading...
I have to join WilliamDeWorde: Your way of writing sounds pretty blurred and especially unnatural, which is why the impression is awakened, ChatGPT would write your story. For example, such descriptions “Wind who whispered through the branches” simply seem strange to me. You hear the wind crying or the leaves that move in the wind and whistle.
Personally, it doesn’t bother me that your story is quite conventional first. Of course, such elements as an old prophecy have been used many times, but still, authors always create new stories to build. And honestly, who has a really new idea where there are not already a thousand stories with the same superficial setting?
Nevertheless, I don’t really like your prologue because you don’t create a voltage curve. The trip to light doesn’t make any sense at all because you just describe it to go. The part with the seer already has more potential, but also here one does not really arrive, which is why the tension remains.
Here are some ideas how to make it different:
– You could really expand the part with the seer, so that you’ll find it in the story. That means, instead of allowing them to hoke two lines in their tower, you could really follow her one piece. For example, how she tells the Council about it and how he accepts it.
– You could just delete the prologue. There is no obligation to write one. You can also start very well with the first chapter. All you’ve written so far would have space in normal history.
– You could illuminate the history of the country in the prologue by following your readers how the prophecy was spoken. But also here: I don’t mean that a seer stands in a tower and does it just, but that you really are taken into a scene.
With regard to prophecy, I would join Andrastor. It is also too specific to me, which is why it is very boring.
Nicely written, but very conscientious and very sworn. I don’t expect any surprises.
Everything is made to age. A prophecy that has been known for centuries is no longer arousing. That’s a legend and out. Besides, you say the place is forgotten.
I don’t count all logic errors. In any case, a white tower cannot accommodate halls. A tower has a slim stalk. And a glow is called because there light falls and that is happy many small young plants. The temples of Maya were all over the jungle.
That’s so conventional that I wouldn’t read it. In fact, I feel that you are not yet aware of what kind of threat could be.
Why don’t you dare a little bit of tangible and introduce a protagonist?
And the structure with mini shoulders of the same length also has a sloping effect.
And finally, I feel that ChatGPT has done the job for you.
—
Supplement to the question “Prolog or not”?
It doesn’t matter how you divide and name it. Mainly, there is a certain logic in it. The first version you write for yourself, as a guideline and to become warm. In the course of writing and only right, when everything is done, you will always find points where you think: this should be mentioned before! And so the “prologue” fills with facts. You write the final version of the beginning when you are satisfied with everything. Sometimes the figures go their own ways because they are also characters and because you want to remain credible.
I’ll write you what ChatGPT says:
… Your criticisms are very legitimate and show that you have thoroughly analyzed the text. In fact, the prologue is overloaded in many respects, especially by the frequent references to “old” and similar terms, which are intended to emphasize the atmosphere too strongly. This excessive use of old and mystical elements can quickly cause the text to be clichéd and not original.
The lack of concreteness of prophecy is another weakness. Prophecies that are too vague or too often repeated can lose their effect. Readers could get the feeling that the story does not develop a real tension curve because the threat remains too abstract and nothing really new is introduced.
The aspect of forgotten lighting is also problematic. As you notice correctly, it is difficult to understand why a light is undiscovered over centuries and is still free from growth. This can undermine the confidence of the reader in the logic of history.
Another point is the lack of a clear protagonist. Without an identifiable main character, the reader lacks a reference person who draws him emotionally into history. A protagonist who is introduced from the outset could make history more tangible and provide more interest.
To the Oxford comma: You are right, the phrase “Your heart burst, and cold sweat perlted on her forehead.” actually contains an Oxford comma, which is unusual in German. Here it would be more stylistic to remove the comma: “Your heart rusts and cold sweat perlts on her forehead.” This contributes to clarity and better reading flow.
Overall, you worked out the weaknesses of the text well. A revised version could reduce the excessive mystical elements, make prophecy more concrete, create a more logical environment and, above all, introduce a clear protagonist to better structure history and make it more emotionally appealing.
I mostly agree with William’s opinion.
There’s nothing that makes it kind of exciting to read on. You could do that with a few changes, rather than an epilogue.
And as a tip: Start with short stories. Little episodes from your hero’s life before they became heroes. This gives you a feeling for the characters, your world and what story you want to tell.
First, write a prologue only if it is absolutely necessary. If you can incorporate these events into the story itself, then build them there and leave the prologue away.
This prologue is fucking short for a novel. He might take half a side in the pressure, if not even less. He would be better suited as a bookback text.
The prophecy is too accurate with regard to the properties of the “chosen” person:
It is immediately clear that it is a potential end to the world through the figure. The place
It’s clear she’s morally in the middle.
That makes it all, in my opinion, uninteresting. A good story does not result from the size of the conflict, but from the personal involvement of the figures.
The salvation of the world is uninteresting as it is incomprehensible for readers. This is a topic that goes so far beyond all experience that it loses completely value when the figures are not personally involved in it.
2 examples:
The Lord of the Rings. What makes history so exciting and interesting is not that the main characters try to save the world from Sauron, but that they have to leave their comfort zones and experience, do and see things that they never wanted. With each step to the goal, their personal involvement becomes stronger due to the suffering that they had to endure, the dangers that they have to cope with and the ties they close with other figures.
“Warcraft 3”. The great finale of the game was the battle of the night-climbs against the burning legion, which threatened to destroy the world. But because none of the figures were emotionally or personally involved in the situation as a result of the pure desire for survival, the finale was emotionally unsatisfactory.
The story of the first chapter in which the human prince Arthas Menethil was spoiled by the undead agents of the Burning Legion by building and expanding a personal rivalry between him and the undead commander Malganis, which then culminated in the fact that the prince was forced to kill innocent civilians, was much more exciting and compelling and still considered one of the best strategy game campaigns.
To return to the prophecy: I like such much more sneaky:
So you can interpret everything wrong and right. Are the tears of black blood, for example, the result of a disease that rages somewhere? Or is dark vinegar spilled over a wall carpet, so it looks like the embroidered stars are crying?
Are “silver floods” water or a mountain of silver coins in a treasury?
Raben can be, besides the birds, people who fled the bodies. Or people of a county with a raven as a coat of arms. Or members of a corresponding tribe.
Is the throne a real throne or metaphorical?
etc.etc
Much more mysterious.
To conclude, another praise:
Your shields are very good. You can put yourself in the situations. For my taste, they could be even more developed, but for a prologue they would be completely fine.
These prophecies are undoubtedly mysterious, but there is no law that they must sound like Nostradamus. On the other hand, the Orakle of Delphi has spoken much more clearly. The joke is that the reader must suspect something because he feels smarter than the protagonist. He believes to have a knowledge advantage and reads on to confirm that. But if it sounds so discarded that you can only pull the shoulders, the game is broken.
There are no laws in this regard.
But there are tricks and tricks you can use to write a good book. For example, I recommend “how to write a damn good novel”.
A “knowledge advantage” is not fun and alienates the readers from the main character. You feel like being smarter than certain characters (not all of them recently) but by reaching those figures deprived of knowledge, it works cheaply and like fraud.
If you want the readers to compete mentally with the main characters, you need to create a fair environment for it. You don’t do that by treating a page preferred.
If you don’t understand the difference between a novel and a picture book, it doesn’t surprise me that you consider 36 pages as little.
You have eaten here like a toddler and as I suspect you have all your information about the subject of ChatGPT, which is such a celestial poverty certificate that you can only be pityed with a headache.
As I said, grow up and try again. You’re so embarrassed that I really don’t want to contribute to your rhetorical self-destruction.
So don’t expect any further reactions to your contributions here, unless you can make it an at least intelligent or semi-way entertaining contribution for a change. And I don’t mean you’re going to shoot AI again.
Yeah, you’re a big analyzer and psychologist. If you care…
One could have found a consensus, but “no, no, no” – I didn’t say your way is NO possibility – but let’s do that. Let’s get something out of the questioner.
You didn’t scare me with your statements for the first time. Your “books” of 36 pages apparently didn’t catapult you as a result of their tension to the world’s top. Otherwise you wouldn’t have time to push yourself around.
My mistake. But if you were only half as read as you did, you would have noticed that I analysed your behavior here and not that of the questioner.
Using my words against me would make sense if you had something to say. So you’re embarrassing yourself with your childish spotting (like with your previous posts), that you’re someone you can’t take seriously.
Become grown and try again.
You’ve encouraged Th3St4rwonder to do it yourself! Thank you.
Well, that was the wrong address for your speech. What do you think of the rest?
Would you have left you five minutes for a search?
Warcraft and Lord of the Rings! I knew where the wind was blowing from.
This is the case in bad crimes. In a good criminal the readers know as much as the investigators and can thus try to solve the cases with and/or before them.
A well-known exception is “Columbo” where it is not about solving the case itself, but how it is solved, which is why the murder is always seen before the name-giving investigator.
And good storytelling is timeless. Your 5-minute research has at most confirmed your prefabricated opinion.
But I see the wind blowing from here. You don’t want any help to get better, you just want to do your bowl and tell you how great you are that you managed to start prologues and 1st chapters.
Excuse me, I hate to say: There are many advisers, but the one you call is the highest midfield. The guy’s not only controversial, but unsympathetic. Only the successors he, as he is, stabbed! It’s all right, but it’s better than nix.
It is also important to tell the beginners: The stools and requirements change with time. What was the last scream of narrative art in 1950 was 50 years more than the last, but does not have to lead to a hit today.
The aforementioned knowledge advantage is a fun trick because the reader a) can go with it, whether what goes wrong and b) because he asks himself all the time when the hero writes it. This is often the case in the best criminals. Not in the bad.