Of Swords and Sorcery: Through fire and flames.

[lantzblades]

My real issue is how...quick it was.

well yes, that was the point

And what little reasoning there is for there for the dragon to just come in and do anything.

he's largely a mystery until confronted in the main work, i get the issue but it's mostly unavoidable for stuff like this.

MC has already lost

fixed.

There isn't even a real drawback to the whole thing

it's not dealt with here no, not supposed to be, it gets to be a problem later.

Have it practically revel in causing Gilgamesh pain

not part of his character.

Have someone from the sidelines try to stop it

I go into why they don't else where.

Nasu says Dragons are akin to demons in the west, use this.

depending on what he means by that I either already do or would refuse due to the massive error in what a dragon is.

if he's the son of Shirou and Saber I can't help but see himself taking the blame if the dragon does cross that line. Because it was his weakness that made it manifest, his inability to stop Gilgamesh that brought forth this inhuman beast. This alien being that hurt his friends, that used his body and acted like an animal in his stead.

yes that is part of his character but that kinda stuff happens later.

[YeOfLittleFaith]

See, this is the problem with disconnected parts of a larger story.

They're so disconnected and small in scope you they cannot sound anything but grossly incomplete. Okay, so your snip has action. Where is the consequence? Where is the context? Where are the circumstances that lead to it? Where is the character understanding?
You cut it in such a small bit that we cannot feel these things from it at all, and it hurts our comprehension of the snip. It hampers the reading as a whole. Incredibly so.

Like serving a cake that's missing most of the sugar the recipe required.

[lantzblades]

See, this is the problem with disconnected parts of a larger story.

people asked for this stuff. I don't have and the time in the world and if i do as ask and then get complained at what should my response be? because frankly i don't think it's unreasonable to expect me to be a bit offended.

[YeOfLittleFaith]

Oi. I don't know who asked for it, but fact is people are complaining about it, and people are laying constructive criticism on it to help you understand why people are complaining.

And the latter, at least, I don't think should bear any offense to you.

[Vigilantia]

people asked for this stuff. I don't have and the time in the world and if i do as ask and then get complained at what should my response be? because frankly i don't think it's unreasonable to expect me to be a bit offended.

There is a thing called In Medias Res which you could use, but that requires a bit of finesse and can only be used once.

The fact of the matter is that ALL writers don't have all the time in the world, your condition is no different. Unless all you want to do is "kewl action snippets" and ignore the world building... (which some of our forumites do, it's just not represented as a complete story). Why don't you just build up the story from the beginning like most writers have to do? Writing a good story requires time, there's no way around it.

[Gaboogie]

well yes, that was the point

Brevity is nice for some scenes; but this was too short, nothing happened. It's arguably not even a full scene. It would've been better to post the beginning of the confrontation between Satoshi, this part, and the aftermath of the battle. That would've been a conclusive scene and would allow readers to better understand what's going on.

he's largely a mystery until confronted in the main work, i get the issue but it's mostly unavoidable for stuff like this.

If this is meant to be a preview/snippet of the main work; you should choose a scene that can be self contained and function even without the rest of the main work. Something that would allow us to understand the characters and situation without needing to peer into your brain and at parts not yet written to understand what's going on.

it's not dealt with here no, not supposed to be, it gets to be a problem later.

But without anything to show for it we the readers don't get that kind of vibe; it reads like 'dragon bailout with no consequences' rather than 'dragon getting involved, something's amiss'. The tone of the piece does nothing to set up for this future problem, and it would've been better if we'd seen some of these consequences now, even if it's only a hint of what they really are.

not part of his character.

I don't know that; there's nothing there to really give the dragon a character besides 'powerful and aloof'. And even then, there's nothing to even give this dragon an identity as a 'dragon'; he reads like those anime characters who are aloof and shit, not like an inhuman beast.

I go into why they don't else where.

Again, this doesn't serve the current piece well; because this would be much need context for this scene. Showing an aftermath would've definitely helped things out overall for the readers and what you're trying to convey.

depending on what he means by that I either already do or would refuse due to the massive error in what a dragon is.

In mythology dragons of the East are revered as gods, they are calm, intelligent, and serve as beings of wisdom and power; gods unto themselves that do not need to fight. In the West, dragons are monsters who destroy and pillage as they see fit, they are often associated and considered demons; always harboring ill-will to man.

Both, however; are symbols of power and dominance, associated with rulership and dominion. Given that this is a western dragon; it would be interesting to see the main conflict it has with Gil be one of dominance, of showing that it is the top predator and beast; stronger than the mere human before him. Given that there's absolutely nothing on Y Ddraig Goch in mythology other than it appearing in a vision, you can easily still incorporate the aspects of Western Dragons in the Nasuverse here. The dragon could be supporting the aspects of Arthuria rule that are draconian; those of dominance and conquest, of beating her enemies and showing no mercy, and that is why it supports her and her line.

I don't know what you're shooting for with the dragon, but I'd think what I just brought up hits the 'inhuman and monstrous' vibe that western dragons have.

yes that is part of his character but that kinda stuff happens later.

Again, this is something that should've been shown in this little preivew you gave us here. As it currently is, it's not self-contained and raises more questions and confusion than it does answers.

[lantzblades]

Why don't you just build up the story from the beginning like most writers have to do?

that is done in the main story, as i've said.

[YeOfLittleFaith]

that is done in the main story, as i've said.

Why not post the main story here then?

[Kuradora]

that is done in the main story, as i've said.

Then why not write the main story?

[lantzblades]

Why not post the main story here then?

I answered this from desu eariler, it's long and i'm being a perfectionist about it, it'll be posted I just need to finish it to my standard.

Brevity is nice for some scenes; but this was too short, nothing happened. It's arguably not even a full scene. It would've been better to post the beginning of the confrontation between Satoshi, this part, and the aftermath of the battle.

point, main reason this was post first is because it is the earliest bit of additional material in the timeline.

you should choose a scene that can be self contained and function even without the rest of the main work.

I do have a few like that but they are somewhat longer and i'm really trying to finish the prologue retype.

t reads like 'dragon bailout with no consequences'

every ability needs an establishing point, without it it's sueish.

In the West, dragons are monsters who destroy and pillage as they see fit, they are often associated and considered demons; always harboring ill-will to man.

yeah, I don't roll dragons that way, they are just as many good as evil and far more then beasts.

[Arch-Magos Winter]

...Judging by this your standards are very poor.

[Gaboogie]

yeah, I don't roll dragons that way, they are just as many good as evil and far more then beasts.

Name five from Western Mythology who aren't evil and are good as you believe. Who aren't monsters who do what they will, who disregard the insects that are man before them.

Because from what I can't recall about Western Mythology, there aren't even that many. All the good ones are from the East, and all the more evil ones are from the West; that's just how history and cultural mythology rolled. Which means, if they really existed like they did in the setting of the Nasuverse; that's how they rolled too.

- - - Updated - - -

every ability needs an establishing point, without it it's sueish.

But your establishing point still makes it look sue-ish. Until we see the drawback, which we don't in the given work, we have no reason to assume that there's more to it than 'deus ex machina for the protagonist'.

[Lycodrake]

In the West, dragons are monsters who destroy and pillage as they see fit, they are often associated and considered demons; always harboring ill-will to man.

It really isn't that clear cut, nor are dragons in the west always associated with demons, let alone being demonic.
They are proud beasts hording gold, silver, precious metals and gems/stones, and whatever else they deem treasure: be it princesses or castles. In a few cases, they act as beasts and in others as exceeding human intellect. They were symbols of proud ferocity and wealth.

Trope- and/or alignment-wise, they aren't evil or good, but "cruelly neutral" and selfish, with "blue and orange morality".
They are inhuman and should not be treated as human, whether they be more beast than sentient or more sentient than beast.

...though all of this is rendered moot with my sig. =P

[edit]

Quetzalcoatl is technically Western.

[Arch-Magos Winter]

IIRC, the dragon in Beowulf was referenced as a great serpent AKA satan.

[Gaboogie]

It really isn't that clear cut, nor are dragons in the west always associated with demons, let alone being demonic.
They are proud beasts hording gold, silver, precious metals and gems/stones, and whatever else they deem treasure: be it princesses or castles. In a few cases, they act as beasts and in others as exceeding human intellect. They were symbols of proud ferocity and wealth.

Trope- and/or alignment-wise, they aren't evil or good, but "cruelly neutral" and selfish, with "blue and orange morality".
They are inhuman and should not be treated as human, whether they be more beast than sentient or more sentient than beast.

...though all of this is rendered moot with my sig. =P

[edit]

QUETZALCOATL is technically Western.

1. Quetzalcoatl is a god first and foremost, never called a dragon, and is from a different culture and mythology,

2. And a lot of that can be argued as evil in the perception of humanity; dragons have often be put as the villain and monster in western mythology, the whole 'are considered as demons themselves' doesn't have basis or merit. Again, this also ignores the comment I made about Eastern Dragons and how they are in mythology.

[mAc Chaos]

Well, if you can only do a vignette, or work on the main story, then you might as well work on the main story and wait.

Because right now it's impossible to understand it without more explanations. See these explanations you are giving us in replies? Those should be in the actual story. The reason you have to explain them is because they aren't there, so people have to ask you instead.

[Lycodrake]

IIRC, the dragon in Beowulf was referenced as a great serpent AKA satan.

It's a nameless dragon and dragons are called serpents.

[lantzblades]

Name five from Western Mythology who aren't

i'm sorry i do not subscribe to the lucas division style between east and west dragons. the east aren't all good and the west aren't all bad. I do not play the dragon here as good or evil, if that makes you mad i'm sorry but it's dumb imo.

deus ex machina for the protagonist'.

I still submit that he's dead so it can't be a Deus ex.

[Arch-Magos Winter]

It's a nameless dragon and dragons are called serpents at times, especially in the West.

It's still applicable considering the role snakes usually have in western myth.

[Lycodrake]

It's still applicable considering the role snakes usually have in western myth.

Name a few snakes in these cases, I'm curious.