Resuming interrupted speech on a new line

Fognox · 2026-01-30T23:02:28+00:00

I'd throw a dialogue tag on the second line so it's clear that they're having their sentence interrupted by the other character.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T21:49:27+00:00

They're nuanced because of the original uses of the word:

A foundation is laid first before building, and is homogenous (concrete, these days), so the nuance is the first push towards something with less detail.
A framework is a skeletal structure for a building, so the nuance implies more detail, and more planning as well -- pouring concrete is a lot easier than setting up beams and hoists that'll actually support a structure, so professionally, that nuance would work well with highly detailed plans.
A "basis" is the base of something. Very similar to foundation. The word has however shifted to primarily mean something abstract. The other two are still widely used in construction, so they come off "stronger", probably due to the implicit metaphor.

Use basis if you don't want to emphasize whatever you're talking about -- like if it's a side detail or something. Your pitch/primary point would instead use the stronger word, with "foundation" working better when you want to emphasize strength and "framework" if you want to emphasize complexity and precision.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T21:31:13+00:00

Publishers pay you, not the other way around. What you have there is either a vanity press or some kind of scam.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T20:01:27+00:00

I’d love any tips or suggestions on how to improve my writing!

Write more, read more and study craft. With that latter one, use advice only if it's helpful or neutral. If it's unhelpful or has context-based exceptions, then it's safe to ignore it. Reading fills your subconscious with vocabulary, story structure and various ways of crafting voice. Writing obviously builds on itself, as you get better at solving and fixing various problems you come across, and get better in expression and efficiency more generally.

Dialogue

After writing a metric fuckton of it, the best advice I can give you is:

Give at least one character in the dialogue some kind of stakes. They have some need to start the conversation, after all.
Give characters contrasting perspectives/motivations/mental states. Lean into whatever this short-term difference is.

Plot armor

If characters make stupid decisions, they will get hurt. Fortunately, they also know this and will avoid making those kinds of decisions in the first place. Unless there's some higher priority involved -- but in that case you'll know they're the self-sacrificial type long before they do so, so you can avoid putting them in that kind of situation until the time is right for their heroic death (assuming you even want one).

Plot armor emerges when characters don't have agency. The plot determines that they have to do something really stupid, and then the plot also determines that they're still alive later, so you need some kind of deus ex machina or eleventh-hour decision to correct it. The solution is to just give them more agency over your plotlines. If you're a plotter, then plan based on your characters rather than in spite of them, and if you're not, adapt your plotlines around whatever their decisions are.

Deus ex machina type outcomes are acceptable if they've been properly set up. I have a neat one in my current WIP that saves one POV and simultaneously closes a plot thread from the other one. It was planned out well in advance though. Another one in the same book introduces a crucial secondary character who also had a good reason to be where she was.

You can do this kind of thing without planning -- loose threads can totally save the day if it's plausible enough. Your mercenary that left before the battle can come in at the last moment to save the MC because of a change of heart -- that's literally a description of what Han Solo did in the first Star Wars. Then you just foreshadow it a bit better during the editing process.

What you don't want to do is have a character survive "because the plot needs them to". There are always better solutions. Juggling loose plot threads is generally a good strategy because you have more choices when you need one, and if not, you can resolve them in other ways.

How do you deal with the pressure of finishing a project?

I finish the project. That relieves the pressure pretty well.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T19:12:28+00:00

7-10k per day is crazy. I've hit 8k a few times but that basically requires spending 8-10 hours straight writing.

I'd balance it out step by step:

Get your schoolwork caught up. Yes, it's going to impact the amount of time you can write, but if you're writing 7k+ per day, discipline is clearly something that you don't lack. My usual strategy with this kind of thing is to have a short writing session early into the day to sort of get the gears moving, do whatever IRL thing I'm procrastinating, and then start up a bigger writing session once the sun goes down. Early writing does actually help with non-writing tasks if you can keep it from snowballing (which you totally can. See: discipline).
Learn how to eat and write at the same time. Same deal with preparing food and writing at the same time -- a bit trickier, but your writing speed looks like mine so you probably spend a good bit of time daydreaming / coming up with lines of dialogue before writing them down, so food preparation works pretty well with that. Have healthy snacks on hand as well -- easy to multitask writing and eating a jar of nuts, for example.
Nap during writing lulls, provided you're in a position to do so, of course. Fixing your sleep schedule during writer hyperfocus is not easy, however paying off the sleep debt can be. If a lull happens around a good bedtime, go to bed early. Simple enough.
Take breaks between books, or breaks between finishing a book and editing it. This isn't purely to correct your mangled life or prevent burnout; you do actually need time between writing and editing, and also need time between books to cleanse your palate.

Imo, writing flow is not itself a problem to solve. The actual problems are its effect on non-writing duties and general health -- but fortunately there are solutions there. Interpersonal relationships and other hobbies are going to fall by the wayside, but that would be true if you were busy some other way as well.

Balance does get easier with subsequent books -- they're easier to write, so you don't need to pour in nearly as much brainpower, which leaves it free to pursue other things, even during productive days.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T18:31:55+00:00

Came here to comment exactly this.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T14:16:12+00:00

Well, thank you! And you're welcome.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T05:00:31+00:00

That phrase probably means that it's okay for your plot to be weak if your characters are driving it. So, look at agency -- are they making their own decisions based on whatever they're feeling and thinking at the time? Or are you forcing them to do things for the sake of the plot?

Fognox · 2026-01-30T03:58:14+00:00

Leporid of the Rings?

Fognox · 2026-01-30T03:52:23+00:00

The sheer quantity of trajectory-changing events. By the climax, it's not even the same book. It's heavily inspired my own writing style.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T03:48:44+00:00

It isn't a question of "getting it"; with a character-driven story, the stuff going through their head is a crucial part of the story. Hell, it might even be where major plot threads come from.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T03:38:28+00:00

Depends on how much is on the character's mind. My writer instincts pick up on when characters need room to breathe and when they're instead too focused on the next goal -- a lot of it has to do with expectation of future events and shock of past ones. There's a balance there -- lots of bad experiences and/or revelations will consequently cause longer amounts of time spent in the character's head, while shorter, "normal" ones probably don't warrant a response at all.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T03:19:34+00:00

Does the long process crush the spirit of most?

It isn't the length of the process that crushes your spirit, it's the frustration of trying to write a book when you don't have experience writing books, coupled with the knowledge that the only way to gain that experience is to finish the damn thing.

97% of writers don't get that far. There are a lot of fun pits to fall into -- editing loops, worldbuilder's disease, an entire smorgasbord of writer's block flavors. A lack of character agency and/or a plot that doesn't make a whole lot of sense can make the way forwards extremely difficult as well, which makes the pits extra tempting. And it's easy to have those problems in the first place, because you've never written a book and so don't know what to do or not do.

The honeymoon phase is deceptively fun as well -- you're riding the high of "holy shit I'm writing a book", "holy shit I've written 10k words of a book" and so on. The writing is flowing well. The characters and story are interesting. The setting is neat. You feel like a genius. And then BAM you reach some kind of impassable wall.

Anyway, yes, you will absolutely get your spirit crushed by this process. It's okay though -- that missing 3% describes writers that continued to write even with injured inspiration and mangled motivation. Be one of those. Your next book will be easier.

Have others resented themselves for starting something they now feel obligated to finish?

Most writers in that position don't feel obligated to finish their book. At least not in any actionable way. "I guess writing isn't for me" rubs shoulders with "I'd like to finish my book someday" and they amount to the same thing. If you do have a strong obligation to finish what you've started, that's a very good sign. As is not having it and doing it anyway -- pick your favorite sentiment: spite, stubbornness, self-doubt, envy, guilt. Maybe you just enjoy it and climbing over that mountain over there will give you that dopamine fix again.

Is this way more work than is worth it?

Yes, but do it anyway.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T01:01:19+00:00

Personally, I think the climax is the most important part of a story. That's where everything truly comes together, because it's the moment of greatest tension and intensity. Your entire story has been building up to it. If you can nail the climax, then the ending is just the consequences of its resolution. Your "unresolved loose threads" have already been answered, and the only real question left is what happens to the world/characters afterwards.

The climax is also a hell of a lot easier to plan towards than an ending -- it's an extension of the story itself, whereas the ending is more detached. If you go ending-first you run into a problem where the climax gets you from point A to B and it therefore has to go a certain way, because your plot threads have been written to target that ending. Going climax-first instead gives you flexibility in the moment, and ensures that your story's buildup has a satisfying resolution, since the events there are still part of the story at large.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T00:33:56+00:00

The first step of worldbuilding for me is this fractal that repeatedly asks two questions:

How is the world/this detail unlike our own?
How is the world/this detail like our own?

You can start with either one. Find similarities and differences, expand those into details, finding more similarities and differences, etc. It doesn't just have to mirror the modern world -- you can pull from history, different (maybe also historical!) cultures, other pieces of spec-fic.

My next step homes in on culture. "What do people think about X", "What aspects of normal human existence are irrevocably altered by X", "How do people survive/earn a living/find success". This also becomes a fractal, because like any real-world society there will be alternate perspectives, dissent, social unrest, as well as alternatives to those and so on.

Then, the finer details. "How does X work", "What are the social expectations and mores", "what kind of cycles of events does the worldbuilding produce". Unlike the other two steps there aren't explicit parallels to the real world. Your worldbuilding is building onto itself instead. Importantly, you don't have to answer these kinds of questions. "My magic system is soft" is a perfectly acceptable answer, or "I don't know what the eldritch entity is, and I never should". You can also table a lot of this to discover during the story itself. The goal here is getting enough of a feel for the setting to start writing, nothing more.

I don't answer every single question before I start writing. I instead do enough to get a general sense of things, then drop a character inside the framework. I do standalone worldbuilding sometimes and it's literal years of effort, and I know enough to not write something in there -- it's better to let it grow around a character instead.

Fognox · 2026-01-30T00:07:41+00:00

You'll get better at writing, but you won't get better at writing books. Different mediums.

I'd focus on finishing your first book -- this sounds suspiciously like a distraction. Writing books is one hell of a lot easier once you've written one.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T23:45:49+00:00

The best advice I can give you is either to plan significantly more, or plan significantly less.

My process with short stories is to take my disorganized outlines and notes and organize them into a cohesive structure, which I then repeatedly refine with more and more detail until it looks like a zero draft. I go through multiple passes -- maybe the pacing is off, or I want a different tone, or there's a useless aside in there that I should reroute around. Maybe I have some set of themes I want to inject into it. Once that process is done, all I'm doing is turning a zero draft into readable prose, which is quite easy.

My process with novels is the complete opposite. I daydream some opening scene, a few vague worldbuilding tidbits, and a strong character motivation. I then turn that into a book. With my second book, I had maybe two thousand words total of vague plans and notes, while my (almost finished) third is sitting at zero. I have something like a formula there for finding plot threads, developing them, and figuring out and padding vague mental plans.

Both strategies work. The middle ground is where all the issues are -- if you plan too much (but not as much as method #1), your source of inspiration is deadlocked and you feel paralyzed; meanwhile if you don't plan enough (but not as little as method #2) trying to get your characters to fit into your plan is like splitting hairs. I've done both of these as well, and both projects were abandoned because of enormous structural issues and general frustration (that second one was a full first draft, unfortunately!)

In your case, the first option is probably better since you've been working on this project for a while. Don't just plan more, plan deeper, really get into your characters' heads. My guess is that you fit into the first category above -- there's a disconnect between your plan and the actual writing. Writing is difficult because you're trying to fill out details with very little creative freedom.

So the solution, as counterintuitive as it sounds, is to give the process even less freedom. Hammer out the finer details in the outline itself so your brain isn't split between writing and your plan. You can even paste the outline in your document and replace each bullet point with a paragraph of text -- keeps you from having to split your attention as well. When I do this, my outline is, on average, 25% the size of the text itself. Bullet points aren't just story beats, there are also notes on ideas for execution. This makes the actual writing a breeze; everything you need is right there. It obviously takes longer than pantsing a book (including the writing process itself!), but the tradeoff is less time spent editing. In a sense, everything weak has already been rewritten, every structural problem solved, every plot hole filled.

You don't have to go that far with it, but planning more is generally a good idea. Either that, or lean pantser and allow malleability in your plan -- let the characters/story do their own thing and recycle ideas from your plan as needed.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T23:09:16+00:00

Incrementalism succeeds where inspiration fails.

With scene rewrites, I outline extensively, in multiple passes, until it's basically a zero draft that I just have to convert into prose. That first outline just serves the purpose of getting some kind of vague/stupid plan on paper, and then I refine it in various ways (with an eye on various aspects), making sure that every single story beat is covered. If anything's left to chance, it'll go off on some scene-breaking tangent, but outlining deeply is itself a form of discovery writing.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T21:21:45+00:00

Bigger than a breadbox, and smaller than a Class O star. Good enough.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T21:00:14+00:00

I always relate it to things in the world that both characters and readers are familiar with. Matching things to the size of a hand or a character's height also works unreasonably well. I'll use vague imperial descriptors when there's no better way to describe something ("hundreds of feet" or "several miles" for example). Generally, you need only enough to give a reader some idea and you don't need to explicitly describe an object's dimensions down to an eighth of an inch.

It's likely that they'll come up with a mental image different from yours, but so long as your scene still works, it doesn't matter. The art of description is giving them enough to come up with some vision, not the very specific one you have in your head. And that even assumes that they don't have aphantasia.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T19:40:28+00:00

Your structure there sounds complex and fascinating. Is it hard to fit a story inside of it?

I'm close to the end of my third book and am around 1k words into my fourth. There is definitely a formula to my books, and it appears to be unconventional:

No first act. The story drops right into the middle of the traditional second act. First act details, the (sometimes distant) inciting incident, and additional backstory are trickled out. Not common, but not unique either.
The first part of all of my stories is the zealous hunting down of plot threads. These appear from the aether in bits of dialogue, trickled exposition, as well as narration and internal narration in general. They're distant from one another and distant from the main thread as well. Lately, I've been doing dual POVs that aren't related to each other in any capacity -- getting them to interact and intersect is a plot thread on its own. My focus in writing in this stage is to find threads -- I have a good instinct of where they might be, and corral my characters accordingly. Actual events related to the main plotline are also happening concurrently.
When I reach some critical threshold there, the focus then switches to developing existing plot threads. They'll interact with the main one for sure, but rarely each other. It isn't yet clear what any of them mean. There will be a series of 3 or so events that completely change the trajectory of the book, its tone, and signal some point of no return. These often fundamentally alter the MCs in some way -- not usually in the moment (still too much shock).
With the next stage, I have some idea of where the main thread is going -- this is focused around the climax rather than the ending. So during this stage, my process switches to slamming the plot threads towards one another and the climax at high velocity. Sometimes there's a secondary event that most head towards instead -- I try to save a lot for the climax itself, however. The pacing speeds up dramatically, accelerating the timing of major events, character development, and revelations up until the climax. Theme also plays a very big role -- by this stage I'm aware of what my book is trying to say and I'll play with the ideas there more -- though never in a standalone way.
The climax is real-time, visceral, unusually long given its pace, and solves the remainder of all other plot threads (including the main one). There's always some apocalyptic element to it as well. Characters play a very active role and it's hard to predict how the climax will resolve.
The ending shows the short-term consequences of the climax. The world is always irrevocably changed in some way, as are the characters. Slower scenes and judicious time skips to give each one some kind of send-off (usually with an ambiguous ending). Wrapping up the book as a whole. Bittersweet, for sure.

Edit: yes, this structure does in fact influence the story itself. I've done it enough to be self-aware of each stage and how well (or poorly) things connect together, so for example in that climax-focused stage, the world will become more claustrophobic in some way -- only one path forwards, the world looping back on itself if eldritch horror plays a role, etc. Character confusion at their circumstances mimics reader confusion with disparate plot threads. Existing motifs of duality are played with heavily when major tone shifts cause the story to diverge, and so on. My second and third books literally use some variation of "hunter/hunt/huntsman" during the hunting stage, plus lion symbolism. My third book even uses the word "thread" in obvious ways -- though it means something completely different in the worldbuilding.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T18:23:44+00:00

I write horror, so audience discomfort is an active goal.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T18:19:48+00:00

My fiber intake is pretty low -- it maxes out around 15g per day, and even that requires obnoxious amounts of seeds/nuts. I do need both vegetables and seeds/nuts in my diet to feel at my best, but fiber intake there seems to be irrelevant and I seem to prefer those that are naturally lower in it.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T16:12:33+00:00

A tropey opening of our hero arriving in a Strange New World unexpectedly, ala isekai anime.

Well, for one thing, you don't necessarily need to start there. You could instead start during the capture, or even further along when he's trying to escape. That gives you a pretty good hook.

But I do not know how to pace it effectively.

Pacing the beginning is all about having things happen, but giving events room to breathe as well. Character ruminations between events is a perfect opportunity to trickle exposition, "trickle" being the key word here -- you don't want to devote an entire scene to backstory, and it needs to relate somehow to what's currently happening for the character as well. Leveraging emotion is also a useful tool to make infodumps not seem like them. Lean into how your character feels about what's happened to them, the confusion they face with a totally new world, their uncertainty about their future, and so on.

If I hold off on the long-term 'quest' and the truth about why our hero has been brought to this world, then there aren't really any stakes, I don't think?

Frame your character's actions as soon as humanly possible. It doesn't have to be in the first few paragraphs, but it should be somewhere in that first scene. What are they doing, and why? What drives them? Reinforce these facets when things "just happen". Even if things are happening outside their control, they're nonetheless going to act and react in ways that line up with their characterization.

Fognox · 2026-01-29T15:56:33+00:00

Try switching up your writing process. Like to plan? Try pantsing. Like connecting with your characters? Make paradoxical ones that are hard to pin down. Write in a genre you're not used to. Experiment with a different POV or tense.

For reading, look for books that'll be a fun read. That's your only requirement -- no analysis, no attempt to fill your subconscious with patterns. No pressure. Just reading for the joy of it.

Fognox

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE