It really isn't possible to create a random story generator because there are too many moving parts to create such a thing and then have the plot and characters make sense.
I was contacted a few years ago by an idealistic young man who apparently thought it was possible to create a random story generator which would spew out stories based upon filling in a few blanks in a form.
He was forgetting that such a form would need to be capable of mixing and matching various descriptions of characters, of surroundings, and of any action sequences. It needed to be capable of using symbolism, foreshadowing, writing unique and compelling dialogue, etc.
So when I said "spew" out earlier what I really meant was vomit, because that is what it would be like to read such stories. It would be literary vomit.
Unreadable trash.
A complete waste of time.
Writing is too much of an art form to have an algorithm or a form that can simply be filled out and then the story is spewed out. It requires the human touch to create something artistic worth reading.
Even the most sophisticated AI (artificial intelligence) currently available is only capable of writing basic sentences, and even then when you converse with such AIs you can often trip them up and spot grammar and sentence problems with how they talk.
For example below is a brief conversation with Cleverbot. As you can tell Cleverbot managed to tell a very short story (too short to even be considered to be flash fiction)... But the story doesn't really make sense. He ended with "he took everyone." Huh?
But this is what you would expect to see from a robotic AI that is trying to make a story. There will be something wrong with it, even if the story is very short. Expecting an AI to make up a novel... Well, that just isn't going to work at all. Novels are too complicated.
A person could spend 50 years of their life trying to create a Random Story Generator with an AI that creates stories that makes sense, but they would never succeed.
It is like the Voight Kampff test scene in the film "Bladerunner". Eventually the AI will trip up and make a mistake, a mistake that a human would never make. A mistake that reveals the AI doesn't really understand how to tell a story and is just following its programming.
And to continue that previous post let us first look at the following Probability Charts for Advantage and Disadvantage. As you can see having Advantage multiples your chances of rolling a Natural 20 from 1 in 20 to... 39 in 400. So it is a 9.75% chance of getting a critical hit.
Advantage Roll of 2d20
Disadvantage Roll of 2d20
However that same benefit is inverted for Disadvantage. That chances of rolling a Natural 1 are now 9.75%.
Having Advantage or Disadvantage on a roll basically equates to having a plus or minus 6.333 on the roll. It is a sizable mathematical bonus for improving a person's odds.
Also when you consider when compared to stat bonuses, in which you need a +2 to a Stat just to get a +1 to hit, that means you need +12 to a stat just to get a +6 to hit. Obviously getting a +12 to a single stat just doesn't happen either. Within the rules and not using any magical items it would be very difficult to get +12 to a stat.
What it makes you realize is that any feats in 5th Edition that give you more Advantages (or "Super Advantage" in the case of the "Lucky" feat being used to counteract Disadvantage rolls) are worth far more than having higher stats.
Likewise any feat that negates Disadvantage is also very useful.
Take the Sharpshooter Feat for example... It allows an archer to shoot at opponents (or objects) from vast distances away - even with 90% cover, with no Disadvantage. But there is a flaw in the rules that says if a target is prone that they get Disadvantage, even if the target is prone a mere 10 feet away.
However if the PC takes both the Sharpshooter and the Lucky feats then it solves this problem. Any time they encounter a prone target they can use a Luck point to give themselves Super-Advantage.
At which point prone targets are basically like shootings ducks in a barrel. The Natural 20 chance rises to a 14.3% chance of getting a Critical Hit too.
Why are Critical Hit Chances only 9.7% and 14.3% on Advantage and Super Advantage?
The problem is that there is a chance you roll two Natural 20s during the roll. (Or 2 or 3 in the case of Super Advantage.)
You would think the base chance should be 10% and 15%, but that isn't actually the case when it comes to probability math. The chance of getting two or more 20s at once means there is actually slightly less than 10% and 15%.
It is the reason why in the above charts that there are only thirty-nine 20s and thirty-nine 1s in each of the respective charts.
The Lucky Feat Times Two!
You may have noticed that the Lucky feat can be taken multiple times. In theory character could take it many times, making it the only feat they ever take. Being able to turn every Disadvantage roll into a Super Advantage roll would be a huge benefit, far outweighing the benefits of higher stats.
However depending upon how much combat is actually happening during each game session it might not be necessary to take the feat more than twice. Other feats might actually make more sense in such scenarios so that a character is more flexible and able to do other things.
Eg. If I was running an archer character I would be very tempted to take Lucky twice and then the Sharpshooter feat.
Depending upon my needs at higher levels it might make sense to either take Lucky again, or to take other feats instead. Really depends upon what my goals are for the character.
If my goal was to make a Legolas (almost always hits) kind of character then certain feats or abilities that improve his archery skills, chances to hit, increases damage/etc would make sense. Including perhaps taking a level in Rogue to get extra damage etc.
A Case In Point...
Back in 2017 I was playing a human ranger during a number of Adventurers League games. At the time I took Sharpshooter and several other options, and I eventually ceased playing that character and going to AL games because my wife and I welcomed the birth of my son. I took a break from playing afterwards. But if I had continued playing I was planning to take Lucky to offset the times when I got Disadvantage to my attack rolls... And because I was running out of feats to potentially take that made sense for the character.
Due to the range of choices, spells and magical items my human ranger (with a splash of rogue) had gained over time he had the ability to sneak during a move action and roll a Stealth check with Advantage and a large number of bonuses. A certain spell allowed him to roll Stealth checks in plain sight, which meant he go into sneak mode every round when he moved, and could basically attack with Advantage every round.
Furthermore because he was in sneak mode so often it meant that enemies had to first see him before they could potentially attack him, and in order to see him they needed super high rolls because he was walking around with massive bonuses to his stealth rolls. So he was practically invisible 90% of the time.
Those abilities PLUS the Lucky feat... Wow. He would have been unstoppable.
He could potentially shoot, immediately sneak after shooting (effectively becoming invisible) and then wait until the next round to repeat those actions. All while having Advantage against any opponents who cannot see him.
Combo Abilities, Feats and Super Advantage!
Imagine using an action or an ability that unfortunately gives you Disadvantage, but then you use a Luck point to give the character Super Advantage.
DMs might even be avoiding giving a PC Disadvantage because they know that whenever they do so the PC just spends a Luck point and gets Super Advantage. They could just try to give disadvantages as often as possible so the PC runs out of Luck points constantly, but that would get boring quickly.
Plus if you're playing a module you can't really do that. Eg. AL games for example.
Consequently a player in AL games could just use the Lucky feat and various other combos to give themselves Super Advantage on a regular basis and there isn't much a DM can do about it except sit back and enjoy the show.
For the DMs...
Giving your monsters Advantage in various ways makes a lot of sense. Any reasonably intelligent creatures will often want to use ambushes, attack from higher ground, using 90% cover, fog or smoke or steam, and other options which will either give themselves Advantage and their enemies Disadvantage.
The good news is that most players don't actually see the usefulness of the Lucky feat and thus don't take it that often. This is shortsighted on their part because being able to turn Disadvantages into Super Advantages is a very useful ability.
As a DM myself I am very liberal with how often I give out Advantage and Disadvantage. Just being horseback or higher ground is enough for a PC or NPC to get Advantage in my opinion.
Likewise trying to shoot a fast moving target on a horseback is grounds for Disadvantage. Or if the enemy is on higher ground.
This works out largely to benefit of the players because they quickly realize how they can gain Advantage more often by making use of my liberal use of Advantage/Disadvantage.
DMing Alternative: A House Rule
One thing I have seen other DMs do is to go back to the older system you see in 2nd and 3rd editions of D&D, by applying pluses and negatives to rolls instead of just rolling multiple d20s.
Both systems have their pros and cons. Having a +/- 2 or 4 or 8 to a roll is certainly more predictable but also flexible than rolling 2d20 which is effectively like having a +/- 6.333 to the roll.
Not allowing Advantage/Disadvantage and replacing it with pluses and minuses is certainly an old school way of doing things. (Also makes sense if you only have one d20 die in the first place.)
There are other ways to make 5th Edition D&D feel more like an old school game too, but that is a topic for another day.
Now immediately you will realize that Chis and Michelle aren't cheap. Big stars may help to get people to take the film more seriously, but the financial risks are greater because they are also more expensive.
The problem with making a D&D film is that they keep starting with a blank slate in terms of plot.
They never based the films on the books...
Eg. They could very easily make live action films based on the following book series:
The Icewind Dale Trilogy
The Dragonlance Chronicles
Those two book series are very popular. Either one of them, with a decent budget, would make a very good trilogy of films and could lead into a whole franchise of fantasy films similar to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
But instead they're going to repeat what they did in 2000, 2005 and 2012. Movies with very little plot, lackluster characters, and sloppy storytelling.
Now it is possible, I should note, to base a film on a book or book series and then completely ruin it.
Case in point:
John Carter of Mars
Having read the books (and seen the Disney version of the first book) I can tell you several things: The scriptwriters ignored the source material for the most part, only loosely based the film on "A Princess of Mars", and what they presented was a cobbled together mess.
To be fair "A Princess of Mars" is an okay book. Four stars out of five. But books 2 and 3 basically just repeat the plot from book 1. Books 4 and 5? Oh look. Same thing. Rescue the princess. You get the picture.
And this is why it is important to choose a book series that changes over time, but has a larger arc for the characters... And why you pick a book series that has consistently favourable reviews.
And then all you have to do is not muck it up.
Hence why I foresee this new 2022 D&D film be a huge financial flop. Unless they're secretly making the first book adaptation then I foresee they will be going into this with a shoddily put together plot, very expensive actors, and studio/producer interference with the final product.
Remember the original version of Justice League?
That's what you get when you get studio/producer interference and then the director quits and you replace the good director with a subpar director.
Many years ago, 2008 in fact, I decided to give 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons a shot.
I had been playing 2nd Edition and 3rd Edition for many years so why not try something new and different?
How bad could it be after all?
Well...
It can be pretty bad.
And worse, pretty boring.
Roleplaying in 4th edition works pretty much the same as any other edition of Dungeons and Dragons. You just role-play your character and adlib what you want the character to do. Essentially making it up as you go like an interactive storytelling system.
The problem with 4th Edition D&D was the combat system, which, let's be fair, is arguably the most important part because 90% of the books is really stuff related to combat. If there was no combat there would be almost no need for the books at all. People could just roleplay their characters, not do any combat, and most of the books wouldn't be needed.
Unfortunately it is called "Dungeons and Dragons"... Which implies that at some point you are going to want to stab a dragon, so combat is a necessity. Oh and there's dungeons, castles, inns, etc... Often with traps in there, so there's rules for that too, but disabling traps (or getting hit by traps) doesn't take much time.
No...
The combat system for 4E was the biggest issue and the biggest fault.
For 4th Edition players each "normal sized" combat will typically take 4 to 8 hours (or longer) just to complete. If combat is only 3 hours or less that is considered to be extraordinarily quick.
Furthermore when playing through the combat it is so bogged down with rules, powers, movement powers, movement actions, sliding, shifting, reactions, etc... Doing a single round of combat with a group of 4 players usually takes about 24-48 minutes, and you can expect the combat to last about 10 rounds (or longer)...
Furthermore even low level monsters in 4th Edition had abilities that basically allowed them to regenerate lost hit points - even though they technically did NOT have regeneration. They could still heal themselves mid combat for no good reason. (This incidentally is one of the things I don't like about 5th Edition either, the whole thing with Second Wind acting like an extra way for PCs to heal themselves. It really makes having a cleric in the group rather unnecessary.)
Now if you're not a D&D player let me go ahead and explain something...
In previous editions of Dungeons and Dragons it was considered normal to have 1 to 3 combats during a single session of roleplaying, but the combats were often relatively short. This meant more time for actual roleplaying, character development, plot development, storytelling, etc. It also meant that you actually more combat done, but that combat was done quickly and efficiently in a manner that did not distract from the enjoyment of the game.
Likewise healing in previous editions meant the party either rested for the night, or they relied upon the cleric (or druid or paladin) to heal the party.
4th Edition basically ignored all of that and said:
"Hey, let's have really long overly complicated combat that lasts 4 to 8 hours and bores players to death."
Because that is what 4th Edition combat was like. Just super long and boring. It was like watching other people playing Warhammer while you (one of the players) stared off into the distance because the combat was so slow you didn't really need to pay attention.
I suspect a lot of 4E DMs would notice their players staring at their phones, tablets or reading a book during the games back in 2008 when 4th Edition first came out.
Now I wasn't the only player who got very quickly bored of 4th Edition. Many other players did too. Some people boycotted 4th edition D&D after they tried it and realized that the combat was so slow that they became nostalgic for older roleplaying games.
Ah Nostalgia...
That is what happened to me.
In the wake of 3.5 D&D (don't get me started) I opted to ditch 3rd Edition and decided to join a 1st Edition group. I played 1st Edition for years and then later (starting in November 2011) I ran my own 1st Edition game for 6 years.
After that game ended in 2017 I started running a 2nd Edition campaign, which I plan to keep running until 2024 or so.
By 2025 I expect to be playing 3.0 and that should last me until 2030-2031.
Meanwhile some other players I know of similarly skipped 4th Edition and played Pathfinder instead, which was similar to 3.5, but felt more like 3.75. Still technically 3rd Edition.
Look at the chart below and it will give you an idea of just how bad 4th Edition was and how it led to Pathfinder becoming more popular.
4th Edition D&D was so bad that it resulted in 3.5 maintaining its popularity until 2011 when Pathfinder eventually overtook 3.5 in popularity.
The folks / manufacturers at Wizards of the Coast no doubt noticed that Pathfinder was now more popular and realized that they needed a 5th Edition, and they needed the new game to make combat exciting again, faster, and to incorporate elements from previous editions. 5th Edition was very much a reaction to just how much players hated 4th Edition.
However we're not going to talk about 5th Edition today. Save that for a future Nerdovore post...
So what do I remember about 4th Edition?
Before I got bored of playing 4th Edition and decided to boycott it I remember the very long and arduous combat sessions.
I don't remember my characters.
I don't remember their names.
I don't remember the names of other characters.
I vaguely remember the names of several players, mostly because I am still friends with a few on Facebook.
I don't remember the plots or anything to do with the stories.
I suspect it is entirely possible that I have blocked the memory of such things because the boredom and horror of 4th Edition was so bad that my brain decided to delete all associated memories of it and retaining specific memories as a reminder to never play 4th Edition ever again.
I remember going to several "Try 4th Edition" events being held at gaming stores in Toronto. I might have the character sheets from those games tucked away somewhere, but it is equally likely that I threw them out whenever I took the time to sort through old character sheets and saw them and realized: "Oh crud! This is 4th Edition?! That is definitely going in to the recycling!"
And then ripping them up for good measure.
So what about past and future editions?
1st, 2nd, 3.0 and 5th edition are all perfectly good games in my opinion. I had to tweak 5th edition when playing it to give it some house rules to make it better, but I do the same thing when playing 1st and 2nd.
I haven't played 3rd edition in about 13 years. I am starting to get nostalgic for it. However in theory I can just play Dungeons and Dragons Online, which is based on 3rd Edition - but on STEROIDS!!! If I start running 3.0 in 2025 I suspect I will also House Rule a bunch of stuff.
That is the hallmark of what makes a good edition of D&D. If you don't like something you can change it using House Rules to fix the problem. With 4th Edition no amount of House Rules was going to change the fact that it was a long-winded and very boring combat system.
I have also noticed - and this may just be me being superstitious - that prime numbers a good thing for D&D editions. 2, 3 and 5 particularly. 1st Edition is still good, but 2nd Edition was definitely better.
Thus I wouldn't be surprised if 6th Edition D&D ended up being really bad... and 7th Edition Dungeons and Dragons being really good.
Call it a prediction.
I predict that the following editions of D&D will all be really bad:
6th Edition Dungeons and Dragons
8th Edition Dungeons and Dragons
9th Edition Dungeons and Dragons
10th Edition Dungeons and Dragons
But 7th and 11th Edition Dungeons and Dragons will be good or at least "acceptably good".
I also wouldn't be surprised if after the series of debacles of 8th, 9th and 10th being flops that fans might buy the company back from WOTC and restart the old TSR brand.
While I am at it I also predict that any films using "Dungeons and Dragons" in the title will be financial flops. If they want to make films they should base them on the books, like the Icewind Dale Trilogy or the Dragonlance Chronicles Trilogy. Basing them on the books guarantees that the films at least have a good plot.
Basing a film on a board game or a video game is very hit and miss.
Want to learn more about why 4th Edition D&D was so bad?
Just watch the video below. In the video you will see new players reacting to playing a 3.5 hour long session of D&D and keep in mind the DM deliberately cut the hit points of all the monsters in HALF because he knew that if he did not then the combat would have lasted twice as long.
And even then... Even then the players discovered just how bad it still is despite the DM tweaking the rules.
This past year (sometime in October 2020) Nerdovore.com surpassed 1 million visitors and this fact went unnoticed until February 2021.
Honestly I have just been so busy during 2020 I didn't notice.
I only noticed today because I was adding a new YouTube button to make it easier for people subscribe to my Charles Moffat YouTube channel and I randomly decided to check the stats for the blog.
I started Nerdovore in July 2011, which means we are nearing the 10 year anniversary 5 months from now. Since then the website has grown in leaps and bounds.
Nerdovore became profitable in February 2015, so I registered the domain name Nerdovore.com at that time. So that is another anniversary of sorts. It has now been 6 years of profitability for this blog.
You will notice that the Google ads take up very little space on the blog itself. This works for me because I prefer advertising to be as minimal as possible. You will however notice that there is considerably more space used for marketing my fantasy books.
As an extra measure of profitability I have also been using Nerdovore.com to advertise both my fantasy books on Amazon and my archery lessons in Toronto business. So "profitability" is really just a matter of how many people purchase my books or how many people sign up for archery lessons in Toronto.
While it hasn't made me super rich, it has afforded me a life of comfort and I get to enjoy being my own boss, setting my own schedule, etc. I get to shoot arrows for a living, watch other people shoot arrows, and then go home and write fantasy books about shooting monsters with arrows. I love it!
What are the most popular posts on Nerdovore.com?
Easily the fantasy maps. 6 of the top 10 most popular posts currently on Nerdovore are about fantasy maps. In general the top 10 most popular posts make up a large healthy percentage of that first 1 million visitors. People come looking for fantasy maps and they generally find what they are looking for.
That said I am still planning on adding more future posts about other fantasy maps and also science fiction maps too.
What are some of my favourite posts?
I really enjoyed doing the interviews with fantasy authors a year ago, but when COVID happened I got distracted and stopped doing the interviews. I would like to do them again sometime.
What would I like to change about Nerdovore.com?
Well... I would like to do more YouTube videos. That is definitely a big thing for me right now. Promoting youtube.com/c/CharlesMoffatToronto is a big part of my marketing plans for my fantasy books during the next decade.
There is also a separate Nerdovore youtube channel, but I am less worried about it. Technically the Nerdovore channel is more popular, but I want to grow youtube.com/c/CharlesMoffatToronto so I can build an audience and post a lot more fantasy book reviews. My goal in 2021 is to be posting at least 1 new fantasy book review per month.
As part of that it means I need to be doing more fantasy book reviews that end up being posted on Nerdovore too.
Thus while I had fun doing the fantasy author interviews last year, my big thing this year is to be writing a lot more fantasy book reviews.
Note - I will not be writing any book reviews about books that I dislike. I am not a fan of writing (or reading) negative book reviews. Part of it is I don't like to be inadvertently advertising a book that I dislike.
I would also like to be posting more food recipes for "Nerd Foods". That is something else I want to do more of. Especially cookie recipes. Who doesn't want more cookies???
So what does the future hold?
Well, I don't expect it to take another 9.5 years to reach the 2 million visitors mark. I do expect the popularity of Nerdovore.com to continue to grow, especially as I post more fantasy maps and book reviews - as well as generic nerd culture stuff. Between posting more maps and book reviews I foresee Nerdovore.com continuing to grow in popularity.
During 2020 Nerdovore.com garnered 157,000+ visitors, with similar numbers in 2018 and 2019. The last three years has seen a huge increase in the website's popularity. With a little extra effort I foresee it could top 200,000 or 250,000 visitors during 2021 or 2022.
Thus I foresee putting more work into growing Nerdovore (and making it more profitable). If it could be getting 300,000+ visitors per year by 2023 - or sooner - then I would be quite pleased with its progress as a blog.
Also keep in mind I have other blogs that I devote my time to, but I do foresee posting on Nerdovore.com more frequently in the future as I continue to build an audience.
There are different kinds of editors out there and depending upon what a writer needs they really should be looking for a specific type of editor to fulfill those needs.
Likewise these different types of editors also frequently charge different rates for their services so it is important that you are only paying for the services you need and aren't wasting your time with an editor who wants to do developmental editing, when in reality all you need is a copy editor and a proofreader.
So what are the differences?
The Copy Editor checks the text for:
Correct spelling
Correct grammar
Punctuation
Story consistency
Redundant text
Proper past tense or present tense
Tone
Flow
Scene transitions
Correct use of words. Eg. Using a word that actually means something else. I noticed this recently when reading one of the books from the Witcher series, and I suspect it was the result of a bad translation.
A copy editor is also expected to provide suggestions or copywrite parts of the text to improve flow or fix problems with the text. Their goal is get rid of confusing parts of the text so the reader has more clarity on what the author meant to say, while still maintaining the author's style and tone.
Copy editors usually only see the book after the second draft has already been self-edited by the author.
The Developmental Editor provides a very different function. They are involved during the actual writing process, often from the beginning to the end. They are there to:
Help organize the book chapters
Help develop the plot and characters
Identify problems with the plot and provide solutions
Try to fix issues surrounding the pacing of the plot
To reject unnecessary content and push for content that fills in plot holes
Correct issues regarding flow and tone.
Developmental editors do not check things like spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. That is the copy editor's job.
When the book is done then the developmental editor's job is complete. The book is then ready to be sent to the copy editor.
Do all authors use a developmental editor? No, they don't. For the vast majority of writers having a developmental editor is completely unnecessary (and even considered to be a nuisance to some writers because the editor will be second guessing every decision the author makes).
How much do editors charge for their services?
It varies on the person. The following was the editor rates that was suggested back in 2008 by the Editorial Freelancers Association at the time. It is safe to say that the rates have gone up since then during the last 13 years.
Basic copy editing: $25 to $40 per hour Pace: 5 to 10 pages an hour Heavy copy editing: $35 to $50 per hour Pace: 2 to 5 pages an hour Substantive or Line editing: $40 to $65 per hour Pace: 1 to 6 pages per hour Developmental editing: $50 to $80 per hour Pace: 2 to 5 pages per hour
Note - I have not found any references to what the Editorial Freelancers Association considers to be 1 page of text. How many words do they consider to be 1 page? Unknown.
How much do I charge?
I am writing about this whole issue of the differences and pay rates because I edit fantasy books, short stories and novellas, but I quietly advertise this service. I only do copy editing. I have zero interest in helping someone who is in the developmental stage of their writing.
I charge $35 USD per hour.
I can do either basic copy editing or heavy copy editing. It doesn't matter which I am doing, it is still $35 per hour.
I accept payments via either PayPal or Interac Email Transfer.
How many words can I edit per hour? Depends on how much is needed. It varies on the author. I can tell you that I normally write 1000 to 1300 words per hour when working on my own writing, and I can edit at a much faster rate depending upon how mistakes I need to fix. The less mistakes that need fixing the faster I can edit. It all depends.
Some authors prefer to pay for a single batch of 5000 words or 1 chapter first to determine the cost vs benefits of hiring me to do more editing. This is totally acceptable and I understand why writers do this because they want to maximize their Return On Investment (ROI). I would do the same thing when hiring an editor.
I prefer to edit things in smaller batches of 5,000 to 20,000 words at a time, with separate payments for each batch. So if you wrote a 100,000 word novel it might take 5 batches for me to edit the whole thing, but this works well for me and my schedule. While it is possible for me to edit whole novels and for writers to pay for the whole thing all at once, my preference is to work in smaller batches of chapters so that I can guarantee faster delivery times of the edited work.
The big thing for me is that I am only interested in editing fantasy
books, and I have a preference towards short stories, novelettes and
novellas. Children's Books and YA are also okay, so long as they're
fantasy books.
I cannot guarantee availability. Sometimes I am busy working on my own writing or other projects. This is one of the reasons why I prefer smaller batches and editing short stories/etc. With the smaller projects I can more easily find the time to do the work and make good on my promise of a faster delivery time.
For each fantasy periodical, magazine, journal, etc they have their own set of rules of what is expected. Read it. Follow the instructions in the submission guidelines.
You will notice below that there are exceptions to the guidelines. Not every periodical is using the same system and they each have their preferences. There is no set standard any more. Their instructions should always override anything you have ever read from any other website, including what you read here.
Many editors won't even read your submission unless you followed their submission guidelines exactly.
Submission must be typewritten.
Use 12 point font. Times New Romans or Courier. These are the most commonly used. Use the same font for everything.
Always use black text on a white background.
If you are submitting a paper copy via snail mail only use paper of good-quality and only print on one side.
If you are submitting a paper copy via snail mail then don’t staple your pages, use paper
clips, etc. Do not fold any papers and avoid
wrinkling it.
Title Page: Put your real first and last name and all contact information (address, e-mail, and phone) at the top left hand corner of the first page.
Title Page: Some magazines also like you to put the word count at the top right corner. Check the individual magazine to see what they prefer.
Title Page: Half-way down the title page, center the title of your story in all caps. Beneath the title add "By 'Author Name'". If you are using a pen name or pseudonym this is where you include your pen name. Remember your real name must be at the top left hand corner of the title page.
Start your story on a new line immediately 1 or 2 lines beneath your name/pen name.
Indent every line of the story.
Some magazines prefer you put your name and title at the top header of every page.
Number every page. Some prefer the numbers to be centered, some prefer the page numbers to be right justified. When in doubt check.
Some magazines like you to include your name, the title and page numbers at the bottom of every page. It really varies on the magazine so check to see what they expect to see.
Left-justify your paragraphs. This will make the right edges look "ragged" or "jagged", but this is what the editors expect to see.
Double space all of the story, but not the contact information on the title page.
Single spacing between sentences is considered normal these days and many editors prefer it that way.
Page margin should always be 1-inch all around, although some editors don't care.
Some editors prefer extra space between paragraphs. Some prefer no extra space. Some don't care. It really varies. There is no standard for this any more.
If there is a scene break use a blank line then put a centered hashtag (#), then another blank line. No indentation for the hashtag.
Never use italics or bold text. There is some argument about this regarding "psychic communication" or people saying "magical words", but if you really want to emphasize a bit of text then use an underline. However doing this is considered unnecessary as you should not have to rely on formatting as a crutch for your writing to stand out.
You don't need to include "The End" at the end, but if you feel you must then center the word ‘End’ or ‘The End’ on its own line. Some people do this to make it clear the story is truly over and hasn't been cut off. Some editors don't like having "The End" there. Some prefer it. If they didn't specify then it doesn't really matter.
Remember to include a short (usually 1 paragraph) biography about the author at the very end of the document.
Publishing a fantasy book? Make sure you get a professional fantasy book editor.
Study Archery in Toronto
So you want to study archery, but you are having difficulty finding an archery instructor who is local. However there is a solution. If you are willing to travel you can take a crash course in archery in Toronto, Canada. 10 lessons over a two week period will take you from archery novice to an experienced and capable archer.
