Hey guys, I'll be leaving the voting thread for Gratis up for a little while longer, and during that time I will also be working on the next prompt! I expect to have it ready by the 14th.

I read the entries, I'll leave my vote soon.

@Calle
>Figured my response would serve better in the discussion section.

Thank you for taking the time to give me a constructive review.

First allow to me to clarify my intentions while writing the story that go heavily into many of the things brought up here. I wanted to create an older fairytale-esque experience with morals and something more bittersweet. My usual heavily crafted style of prose yet fairly simple plot was certainly meant to amplify that feeling.

I can see it the alliteration being a bit of tongue twister for the eyes, but I feel it’s just a personal style that I enjoyed the challenge of reading. If there’s any particular lines you believe could be written better, don’t hesitate to give me your thoughts.

The ‘acceptance’ of the beast was simply more in line with a fairytale/different world. Hence the strong scented candles to ward off hungry packs of doggos. I thought it was pretty clear it didn’t attempt to reflect reality. The authority absolutely noticed his 'wanderer' status, as his interaction was merely concerned with getting in trouble over a citizen or visitor to his town being injured under his watch. That sympathy was swiftly removed once he knew he was a “non-citizen” lawlessly roaming. I also don’t make the beast’s identity known because it’s better left to the imagination. (In my opinion.)

I certainly gave every character more of a purpose and personality than most stories of this nature, not to toot my own horn. But I probably would have expanded further if the word count would have allowed it. Making the four characters warmth inside the pub make them seem more like actual friends before revealing their colder personalities when they go outside. But it had to be glossed over for word constraints. Perhaps, it was better off focusing on the driving force of the story anyway.

I’m not intending to shoot the messenger. I can (and greatly) appreciate and understand those thoughts. My writing tries to not just use big words for the sake of it, even if I admittedly fail that sometimes, but crafting them into sentences that make them unique and not your average typical boring sentences.

I’ve said this before. But it’s often a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario. Where many of my stories will be vaguely expressed with, “Things are too brief and the sentences are so fragmented.” or “Things are so detailed and long, the sentences are far too complex.” And I so rarely get shown the “just right” that people seem to constantly be looking for. I’m sure there’s always something I can do to improve, but it’s difficult sometimes to grasp which direction I need to go. I think for contests especially, I should be (and aim for) reaching outside the box, even if my prose or symbolism becomes too dense as a result.

For the instance the paragraph brought up, I can certainly see certain words I could axe without losing much to the overall narrative. (Luxurious, only added because same 1st letter as layers.) And words I could certainly simplify to mean the same thing. (Debauchery was just me showing off. Ha Ha.) But I’m not 100% sure if it greatly affects the outcome.

Plus the “grinding his thinning patience against his forehead.” I probably could have swapped for, “He rubbed his forehead with his fingers, because he was losing patience.” But I don’t feel like that is a better, nor more concise sentence. Even with the latter part removed.

Thank you very kindly. I feel the structure is so rarely played with for a forum writing contest that has those tools to play with. So I also thought/hoped it worked well. Once again, I sincerely appreciate the effort made to give me a review and vote. I hope you find this response grateful.

And I also appreciate pointing these few things out to me.
1. Yeah that’s a mistake. It’s supposed to be “creature’s”, might have been autocorrected incorrectly.
2. You’re probably correct with that one. I’m unsure.
3. A stray example would be nice to get my head wrapped around it. But I get the gist.

Thank you, @BrokenPromise times three (3).

@Briza Well it wasn't all the flaws. Just something minor structurally that wasn't as important to the overall quality of the story. But yeah, that's your prerogative. ^3^

Heh. Well I can certainly understand how that worked out then. Let me state that I certainly think you can write a good or unique story in the word count that you used. (Maybe a super short word count can be an upcoming challenge.) Some people write poems with a handful of words that are more content and are more creative than thousands of words will ever be. Also, since it was mentioned, just going on time spent on stories. I probably spent more time editing my last two prompts, both with a smaller word counts. So make of that what you will.

Okay, I think I just had a massive brain fart when reading the story for the first time. (It was a late night. ^-^') I thought the clerk and the narrator were one and the same. I think I somehow missed the setting establishing part about the shop. (Or more so because of my first misconception, I missed the idea that it was happening at one at the start.) So I had a very different idea of the story unfolding, entirely my mistake. Though I guess maybe it's just because it seemed like my own warped setting made more sense for the content/brevity of the story. Maybe you are better own ignoring me in this case. Ha ha.

(That sounds very sophisticated for the few hours of time spent. I tease. :P)

But somebody that's precise would have came up with one word that fits the bill, it is a first person perspective and they're out there. The rule of three is because people like and very commonly use three descriptors for something because it just sounds nice. But there's better ways to do it, but I get that you admittedly rushed. Though just as a thought experiment, if we were to assume stereotypes, others may look upon priests favorably. But would they look favorably upon themselves? Probably not, since they believe to be born in sin. (Etc. Etc.) Unless they were hypocrites. (A word I think might be able to fit all those words in there actually.)

Well it was a nitpick after all. But I understand and can respect in believing every word is there for a reason. But I appreciate the response.

But so the discussion doesn't end there. If you'll humor my curiosity, suppose if you knew that the story was 4,000 words and not characters? What would you have added to the story? (Or did you believe it was perfect as is?)

And for your review, thank you very much for reading it and reviewing. It is much appreciated.

@SleepingSilence, nitpicking is not going to help the growth of an amateur writer too, too much. These are entries for a RPGC, not the New York Times Best Selling List. Small grammar errors are definitely a nuisance to read, especially when in abundance, but nipping an entry in the bud due to something so teeny-tiny is perverting the art of literature. Stop aborting potentially good writers, Oniisama! ( `●︿● )💧^{~ Ya-y-yameru!}

But somebody that's precise would have came up with one word that fits the bill, it is a first person perspective and they're out there. The rule of three is because people like and very commonly use three descriptors for something because it just sounds nice.

Though just as a thought experiment, if we were to assume stereotypes, others may look upon priests favorably. But would they look favorably upon themselves?

But so the discussion doesn't end there. If you'll humor my curiosity, suppose if you knew that the story was 4,000 words and not characters? What would you have added to the story? (Or did you believe it was perfect as is?)

Nitpicking is not going to help the growth of an amateur writer.

However, as the author, Briza gets to say the reasons, not someone who managed to have no hand in writing the story.

@Briza I feel you're potentially taking an overly defensive stance over what comes down to mere friendly suggestions. Certainly seems that way at least, but I'll assume this is humor that's being poorly translated like last time. So the following is only for if you may those statements without jest. Otherwise, simply appreciate the given response.

>This is only is you're seriously telling me that I'm nitpicking and I shouldn't try to give advice about characters/setting when I'm not the one who wrote it. Because it's a touch more direct than I'd be normally than if it was mere sarcasm. So I'll only assume a reply to this means that is/was the case.

@SleepingSilence, I love you, too! (＾▽＾)/`❤️

I have thrown in my tiebreaker vote, and so, congratulations are in order for @Briza! Very well done, friend.

And big shoutout to @SleepingSilence for their very well written entry. When I said it was a hard choice on who to vote for, I meant it. I must have spent almost an hour going over why I liked both entries and weighing them against each other.

And now...to get 21 up and running!

Polish those sleigh bells, people.

@Frizan Appreciate the read.