1.4.0 20260529T202800 Prev: 1.3.2

NOTE: Note that this story is not yet officially released. It may still be subject to change, and I need to get a backlog and changelist of rules documents uploaded.

This document is descriptive, not prescriptive, and is an attempt to describe my beliefs and processes through creating this work. As I produce and discover more, this will be updated with greater resolution. Past versions will be maintained for reference and potential reversion, if I arrive at a point where the list no longer sufficiently aids in its purpose.

This document is a post hoc summary of processes and techniques I discover after writing. Earlier work may not adhere to it, as it was the production of the work that made me discover the rules.

The purpose is:

I should enjoy writing this, and my readers should enjoy reading it.

The meaningful pieces, including all the words, and the reader-facing presentation, should require me to make them. Readers should get something meaningful from the experience.

This document may contain spoilers for works that I’ve written, or am in the process of writing. I will avoid specific references, but you may be able to deduce plot points based on what I focus on.

Rules are divided into Craft and Meta rules. Craft are specifically those that help direct my writing process. Meta directs my general attitude before and after I actually do the writing. As writing is an iterative process, especially when wanting to create multiple, discrete releases, Meta rules which may seem to apply only before or after release will apply between each of them.

I expect, if wanting to generalize or apply these rules for your own process, Meta rules will be more applicable than Craft rules.

Patch numbers, 0.0.X, represent small changes, such as formatting, typos, or otherwise non-semantic changes. Minor numbers, 0.X.0, represent semantic changes, or large syntactic changes, but non-breaking, and shouldn’t contradict the previous existing rules, but are rather tightening the model. Major numbers, X.0.0, represent large changes which may contradict earlier versions.

Rules

Meta

1. The world will not recontextualize itself as something bounded. (Added 1.0.0)
   1. From outside the universe, looking in: It is not a dream, it is not a story, it is not presented by an omniscient narrator with a persona.
   2. From within the universe: Free will exists, and the future isn’t fixed. The choices made in the present are meaningful. If time travel is possible in-universe, it will be so restrictive as to not allow meaningful moments to be undone.
      1. Characters may hold these positions to be false, and they may be unknowable in-universe. In cases where the work itself is incapable of presenting a definite answer, you can treat this as author headcanon.
   3. The world is not connected to earth, nor does causality originating from earth influence how this universe acts. If something appears to be from earth, it otherwise developed independently, or is a coincidence.
2. The work is finished when published, and it exists distinct from headcanons, from author comments, or from author notes. (Added 1.0.0)
   1. Headcanons: Headcanons exist separate from my work, and they shouldn’t influence what would otherwise happen. The work should avoid turning into a closed loop, where it takes critique and fanworks as input, to the detriment of cause and effect within the world. It may be the case that they point to a weakness of the world which should be addressed; addressing this in the work is fine, but, only if it doesn’t otherwise violate the world.
   2. Author Comments: Unless released in an official format, author comments should be treated as speculation and headcanon.
   3. Author Notes: This is primarily for me. I will sometimes write scenes which get cut. These can be divided into two categories: ‘soft canon’, from which ideas could still be pulled from, which could’ve come to pass if X character were in Y town, or Z character had talked to A character earlier, and ‘supplanted canon’, wherein the characters or setting is so different from what they are in canon, that pulling verbatim from them would be erroneous, as it would mean mischaracterization or worldbuilding contradiction. These, and the list of ‘pre-canon’ ideas, should all be kept distinct. Actual, official ‘published canon’ trumps the others.
   4. I may screw up and make a plot hole. In these cases, in descending order of severity; the reader may be implicitly asked to come up with an explanation themselves; the hole will be treated as an opportunity, and later information will recontextualize it, so the reader understands how it makes sense in the world; I will provide an authorial headcanon explanation, which can be treated as a replacement canon; it will be explicitly retconned in official material. This doesn’t apply, of course, to information which has an in-universe explanation which hasn’t yet been presented to the reader.
3. The world accommodates what I want to present. (Added 1.0.0)
   1. In-universe causality acts independently of out of universe causality. I may want a character to have a particular name, or use a particular world. Therefore, in-universe, the universe will have been such that that name or word could have come about.
   2. Occasionally, I may want to present something which the format typically disallows. In such a case, either I will modify the format such that I can do it, I will come up with a well-enough fitting alternative, or I will outright present it in another format. There will thus exist a canonical presentation of the story, the location of which will be clearly indicated, and adaptations will potentially be degredations of that. The canonical presentations may necessarily be on different platforms. For instance, if I were hosting the story on my own website, I would be able to make footnotes hoverable, I could alter the font to add new characters, I could easily add images, I could add music, I could edit the background between sections. If this were a paperback book, however, these digressions from a standard book would require reworking or cutting. This also includes potential language translations, or adaptations into other mediums. As such, fitting alternatives will be found, and the canonical presentation at that point in time will be clearly noted within the adaptation.
   3. As the author, it is my responsibility to present things in such a way that my readers can understand, and wants to understand. As the reader, it is your responsibility to pay attention, think about the perspectives of the characters who are communicating information, and come to your own conclusion as to what is accurate information, and what is right and wrong. You have finite energy at any given time, it is my responsibility to craft something that I believe wouldn’t feel like you wasting it.
4. Every part of the presentation communicates to the reader, so do it in such a form that you can take pride in. (Added 1.2.0)
   1. The minimum viable product is the text itself. Few people will read if the font is messy, or words stretch across the entire screen, or the background has garish colours and textures. Make the reading experience something that you yourself will enjoy.
5. I am currently a human. Basic human needs take priority over the work. (Added 1.4.0)
   1. I need to eat and sleep and shower and shave and clean and maintain a basic lifestyle. That must necessarily take priority over writing, because those prerequisites need to be in place for me to be able to do writing.
   2. I enjoy writing, and I enjoy the stories I work on. It would be a disservice to those who enjoy them to abandon them when it’s expected they’d continue. I have an obligation to you (the reader) to not waste your time.
      1. I don’t want to get to a state where I’m continuing out of obligation, or continuing at the expense of my necessary human functions, or continuing because it’s necessary for my life. Regardless of what my relationship with the work becomes, I will put in the effort to give what I believe would be a satisfying ending. Beyond that, I will need to evaluate my relationship to the work, and determine what, if anything, comes next.
   3. If my life begins interfering with releases, I will make that clear.

Craft

1. I discover as I’m writing. As such, when editing and looking at what was meaningful in a scene, I can often cut more than I think, because what I wrote then didn’t prove to have meaning later. (Added 1.0.0)
   1. Written drafts have undue weight to them, and are easier to stick with, than potential better scenes which could be written in their stead. As such, drafting will be done in a format which cannot easily be used as a scene proper. This will include voice notes, jot notes, lists of inputs and outputs to a scene, storyboards, or written lines of me thinking out loud.
   2. New elements will need to be acceptable as primitives from which other elements derive, or will be derivable from existing elements. New elements shouldn’t destroy one’s suspension of disbelief in the world, such that their existence makes the world feel unrecognizable from how it was previously presented.
2. Discovery in scenes, discovery of junction points, then building to and from them. (Added 1.0.0)
   1. First, freely write, discovering how characters would act, how the world works, what happens. Then, discover scenes that will I want to happen (‘junction points’ or ‘joins’), determine what must be true for them to occur, and begin crafting scenes such that their outputs will contribute to the necessary true inputs. This keeps the process both ordered and fun for me.
   2. I will follow characters and concepts which interest me.
3. Grammatical narration point of view is another tool. (Added 1.1.0)
   1. First person puts you in their head. Second person puts you in their body. Third person puts you as an observer. An observer can be really close or really far.
      1. The perspective of the character may influence what grammatical narration perspective is used.
   2. The narrator is not the character itself.
      1. When the narrator says something the character wouldn’t have reason to think, such as a transition to or from another scene, these instances should be understood as a narrative technique, possibly influenced by the perspective that’s currently being shown, and not as the opinion of an omniscient narrator, nor, where not applicable, the thoughts of a character who would have no reason to have them.
4. The shape and sounds of the words can contribute to meaning. (Added 1.3.0)
   1. ‘Zero’ and ‘0’ aren’t strict synonyms. You encounter the numeral in different circumstances than you encounter the word, so you’ll have different associations.