Consistency is good.

Concerning minis by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-26 13:35:00 UTC Reply

I've been reading a few fics essentially at random, trying to find one to use for my first mission, and they've thrown up a few questions about the creation of minis:

1) What if a character deliberately mispronounces another character's name, in order to wind them up or something? I know that for "Every name spelled wrong in 'Rings', a mini-Balrog gets its wings", but does it still count if it's not actually a typo?

2) Is a mini created if the only mistake is a lack of capitalisation? I guess it probably should have some effect, but I'm not sure if it is considered enough to invoke a mini.

3) Following on from 2, I've spotted OCs using nouns for names, sometimes lacking in capitalisation. If an OC is called 'Rain' for example, then the sentences 'Rain fell down...' and 'rain fell down...' will obviously be interpreted differently in the Word Worlds, but I'm just curious as to whether you more experienced and knowledgeable people think that the second case should cause it to start randomly raining, or have a mini-Sue appear.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Apologies if any of these have been covered before, but I’ve had a look on the wiki and couldn’t find anything addressing those points specifically.

On question one... by HerrWozzeck on 2012-03-26 16:32:00 UTC Reply

"What if a character deliberately mispronounces another character's name, in order to wind them up or something? I know that for "Every name spelled wrong in 'Rings', a mini-Balrog gets its wings", but does it still count if it's not actually a typo?"

It doesn't count if it's actually intended to be like that. ("Rainbow Crash" would not spawn a mini because it's said in a bullying way.)

But it does bring up a whole other interesting conundrum: I sporked a fic once that consistently misspelled a character's name in the narration by dropping the 'y' (in 'Norman Jayden'). The author kept on doing this and doing this and doing this.

And yet, there was no mini, because ultimately the misspelled character ended up being a character replacement in the sporking.

Here, have the character's Stu page for more info: http://ppc.wikia.com/wiki/Norman_Jaden

Consistent misspellings by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-27 21:26:00 UTC Reply

Funny you should mention that; I've just encountered it myself in an Old Kingdom/Abhorsen fic. Just skimmed it so far, but it looks like the author misspells three of the main character's names (Sabriel as Sabrial, Mogget as Moggot, and Lirael as Lireal) every single time they come up.

Now I know how to handle it if I use it for a mission, thank you.

Slight OT: Old Kingdom? by Rosie Azrael on 2012-03-27 23:27:00 UTC Reply

You are an Old Kingdom fan as well, then? That makes me happy - there aren't enough of us in the community.

Always good to meet another Old Kingdom fan by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-27 23:55:00 UTC Reply

Yes, I am indeed an Old Kingdom fan; I think the stories are fantastic and I really love how unique the setting is, but most of all I love the concept of the Abhorsen.

I've always thought it a bit odd that in most typical generic fantasy settings (most of which I've encountered are games that seem to have their roots in early editions of D&D, but there have been a few books as well), necromancers are universally reviled as evil, but the heroes are quite happy to take a resurrection spell whenever they need it. I know the term 'necromancer' actually has more to do with communicating with the dead rather than necessarily raising them, but it seems to be that second part that necromancers in fiction concentrate on. And 'resurrection' and 'raise dead' always seemed like they had a lot in common to me, despite being associated with opposite ends of the moral spectrum. I actually have a vaguely half-defined idea for a fantasy setting where all the best healers are actually necromancers, but currently have no plot for it.

That ended up going slighty more off topic at the end there than I'd originally intended, oh well.

Abhorsen is awesome. by AnnaBee on 2012-03-28 02:13:00 UTC Reply

I've only read the first book but I love it like mad. I love the vaguely 'steampunk meets Tolkien' thing it has going on.

Seconded, or thirded, or whatever. by Shadow on 2012-03-29 01:34:00 UTC Reply

What I really love about the setting is how there are all these big, unexplained mysteries lurking in the background, so it feels like there's far more to the world than what we see of it.

I've had that happen... by Rosie Azrael on 2012-03-26 17:40:00 UTC Reply

While I was sporking "Sary", I ended up with Aragon and Eldorna as character replacements, rather than minis. Eldornna, on the other hand...

Minis are also formed by spelling mistakes in canon. by Tawaki on 2012-03-26 15:15:00 UTC Reply

That's how we got the mini-Camoudile Whark (from Gehn's journal in Riven), the Agatha Christie mini Imhtep, (from a misprint in my copy of Death Comes as the End), and the mini-Discord Zakora (from the captions).

I hadn't even considered that, thanks for the info (nm) by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-27 21:06:00 UTC Reply

Re: Minis by doctorlit on 2012-03-26 14:16:00 UTC Reply
1. No mini. Minis are mistakes in the story, and an intentional misspelling is, well, an intentional part of the story.
  
  2. As Guv said, yes. This creates a mini. Punctuation is part of proper spelling.
  
  3. Again, as Guv said, it's up to the individual author. My personal preference would be to do both, and make my agents have a showdown in the rain against the mini-Sue.

Re: Minis by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-27 21:19:00 UTC Reply

I guess that the most important things regarding point 3 are to make it funny/entertaining, and maintain consistency with myself? So if I have both happen the first time that (admittedly rather specific) circumstance shows up, that's how I should always play it, rather than just making it up on the spot.

I think I'd be tempted to have my agents be unsure of what to expect, at least the first time it happens. So to continue my previous example, have it start raining (without them actually seeing a mini) but have them search for one just in case they missed it, because a misspelling should have created one.

I can just see 'forcing agents to spend half an hour searching, IN THE RAIN!' on a charge sheet.

Consistency is good. by doctorlit on 2012-03-28 04:07:00 UTC Reply

The writing itself is king (or queen), of course. Whatever keeps the flow of the story moving in the most entertaining way is the option you should take, and that might not always be the same option. The example you used happened to cause two things that worked together well, leading a to a mini-Sue battle under a stormy sky.

(Yo, dawg, we heard you liked rain, so we put some rain in yo rain so you can fight rain in the rain.)

But sometimes you might have to give up one or the other to keep the story moving along. If Batman got misspelled Ratman, it would probably be funniest to just focus on the rat-themed super hero (or villain?) created by that, and not bog the scene down with a mini-whatever-gets-decided-on-in-the-post-up-above. (That mini should still be listed on the appropriate wiki page afterwords for anyone who wants to adopt it.)

Anyone disagree?

Well... by Guvnor of Space on 2012-03-26 13:42:00 UTC Reply

It all depends. I'm actually no more sure on the first point than you are- its something I've never seen before.

On the second point, it is if its the lack of capitalization of a name. Improper punctuation (see the various Middle-earths) can also cause minis.

On the third point, that all depends on what the author of that mission wants to do. I'm pretty sure, at least, that we don't have any set rules on what would happen in that situation.

Thanks for the clarification (nm) by the Irish Samurai on 2012-03-27 21:07:00 UTC Reply