Two genres seem to dominate

[Corunner]

In the broadest sense, a First-Person Perspective should focus on what I am doing. A Second Person Perspective should focus on what You are doing. A Third Person Perspective should focus on what Martha and Tom are doing.

The most pervasive perspective that the reader having complete control over the story should be the Third Person perspective. You the reader chooses what Martha, or Tom, or whoever does next or what happens to them or the actions of other characters in the story.

With the First Person perspective, I suppose it makes sense as well. You as the reader is choosing what happens to Me and the chapter should revolve around me reacting to those choices.

However, outside of Mind Control stories...I don't see any reason why the Second Person Perspective should ever have you(the reader) in control of other peoples' actions and personalities within the confines of the story. Second Person stories should revolve around you reacting to the events and situation that you're put in.



In short, I agree. Perhaps I would be more into Mind Control stories if it didn't seem like to a certain extent most stories involve the reader controlling the actions of every character.

The second I post this, you (& everyone else) will be able to see that I "Liked" your post. In all honesty, was hesitant to say/choose that, as it was not so much that I liked it (the way people like a movie or band), but I appreciated it, as it remains me of a school I attended that had daily classes specifically called "Reading" that I don't think ever mentioned "Second Person". (May be why it's still there, but empty.)

Not to totally negate nor argue with myself, but reading your post ALSO made me wonder if all stories on the site aren't in the same person which a comparatively-smaller part is thinking might be yet another "Person", in that the reader & writer (in thought & maybe later on screen) is/are deciding the thoughts & actions of all individuals.

 

[SeriousBrainDamage]

I think the choice of the person has little impact on the development of the story.
You can have a 3d person story where you follow a main character and every decision he makes, like with first and second.
That has nothing to do with the direction you want to steer the story towards, though.

Tom chose to go speak with Melanie rather than Nicole, he really wanted to hook up with the mysterious blonde.

As Tom approached, he noticed the girl was engaged in telephone call. She waved him, gestured to wait, which he did.
Tom obeserved Melanie closely as she spoke. She giggled and touched repeteadly her hair, apparently some guy named Josh was on the other side of the line.
Five minutes later, Melanie was still on her phone, and Tom was still standing next to her with his drink and the one he had brought her.
It was then that Nicole tapped on his shoulder.
They chatted a bit, she asked about the two drinks in his hands and he felt like giving her one.
As Nicole spoke, she smiled and repedeatly brushed his arm, getting a little closere every time. Tom wondered if she had done something to her hair that night, becasuse she looked gorgeous.
When they finished their drinks, Nicole took his hand and asked him if he wanted to dance.
That night, non even for a second, he tought abuout Melanie again.

What has to do the main character decision with the actual development of the story?
If you don't want to think about character as mere puppets, they are still like fish in a bowl.

I'm not sure I understood perfectly the argumentation of Merkos and Corunner though, maybe I'm off point.

 

[merkros]

I'm not sure I understood perfectly the argumentation of Merkos and Corunner though, maybe I'm off point.

To clarify, and maybe simplify a bit to prevent me from getting rambly:

I don't get the appeal of Mind Control Stories when many of the stories on the site are written in such a way that the reader has full narrative control over the story and characters anyway. Let's look at the simplest and possibly most common example of this I'll use a modified excerpt from one of my stories:

The man leans over you and squeezes your breasts with his hands as he humps you harder. His cock pressing into your innermost depths as the hammock rocks under you. You moan loudly from the pleasure and feel your orgasm rising up within you. You fight it off for as long as you can, but your body cannot resist his assaults. your body becomes awash in pleasure and you arch your back as your body reaches its peak. You pussy squeezes his cock, trying to milk it for his seed.

You can tell that he's about to finish.

Does he cum inside?
He cums inside you
He pulls out



You then pick whether he finishes inside or not, but why do you have the Absolute Power in that situation to determine whether he finishes inside or not? Should that not be dependant on his personality or your actions previously? A better way to word the responses would be.

He's about to cum. What do you do?
Ask him to finish inside
Ask him to pull out

Even then, depending on his personality, he may disregard your wishes and still finish inside of you. Maybe you should have seen the warning signs beforehand and not had sex with an absolute tool.

When dealing with Self-Insert perspectives (First and Second/ Me and You), we(the reader) shouldn't have complete control over what other characters are doing. We(the reader) should be reacting to what other characters and events are occurring around us. That should be the appeal of Mind Control Stories. A story where you have control over other characters' actions. However, that appeal isn't really there when most of the stories on the site already give you that power, because a lot of stories give the reader full narrative control over the story anyway.

It makes more sense for Third-Person Perspective stories where "you" or "I" don't exist within the story. "You" and "I" are the readers looking into a metaphorical fishbowl, or setting up this fishbowl that these characters are in... However, even then I would argue that many stories give you a bit too much narrative control over the story. If you choose to put two Metaphorical fish into the bowl that hate each other, they may kill each other before you can get them out. They won't wait to see if you decide that you want them to kill each other or not.

 

[insertnamehere]

To clarify, and maybe simplify a bit to prevent me from getting rambly:
(etc.)

Interesting stuff. I wonder if the whole 'fish bowl' thing might help explain the prevalence of mind control stories. Perhaps a lot of people don't like to be surprised when they're jerking it.

 

[SeriousBrainDamage]

To clarify, ...

I think I undestand better now, thanks.
I agree, you(the reader) shouldn't be given the choice to direct other characters decisions in a second or first person story, even if you(the writer this time) are still the one to determine said choices.

I guess people do that sometimes, especially during the sexy bits of a story, to explore different positions and outcomes, but it's a bad way to do it, you're right.

 

[Corunner]

Excuse me for "dar(ing) to be different", but I'm just simply going to reply to both & quote neither.

1] I get that "jerking it" is a main purpose/draw of the site, but for what I'd think is a pretty-obvious reason, I don't even consider doing that while writing a story, and largely avoid reading my own work with that purpose.

2] As for the other, I also agree the reader should not be given the "choice" to direct other characters' decision(s), but if you don't want to have that ability, there are millions of other stories (& even more other media) to fill time with (& likely more since I started typing this sentence).

 

[gene.sis]

I guess people do that sometimes, especially during the sexy bits of a story, to explore different positions and outcomes, but it's a bad way to do it, you're right.

Well, there's usually a way to reach every scenario you have in mind.

E.g. the same situation as described by merkros... at a decision point just two minutes earlier:

He leans over you and thrusts his hard cock inside you again and again.
What do you do?
- Just lay there and enjoy -> He just continues
- Pull your knees up -> He supports the effort, pushes her legs down and pushes deeper inside her (and might even hurt her)
- Pull him down and give him a deep kiss -> Assuming that he just wants a rough fuck, he breaks away, rolls her around, and fucks her in doggy
- Rub your clit while he fucks you -> He stops her from doing so and pins her hands down on the bed
- Remind him not to cum inside -> He tells her that it feels so good, begs that she let him cum inside her, and even suggest anal

But that's, of course, some additional effort.

 

[Hvast]

When dealing with Self-Insert perspectives (First and Second/ Me and You), we(the reader) shouldn't have complete control over what other characters are doing. We(the reader) should be reacting to what other characters and events are occurring around us.

I can't disagree more.

1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person are tools, ways to tell the story.

We can have a 3rd person story in which branching points are decisions\actions of one character. We can have a 1st person story in which we don't ask about character decisions at all.

Controlling a character (like in an RPG game) or controlling the whole world are just different genres of interactive fiction. If you like the former more - write in it. But please, please, please, do not tell that one way is more correct than another simply because the story is written in 2nd or 1st person.

 

[merkros]

I can't disagree more.

1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person are tools, ways to tell the story.

We can have a 3rd person story in which branching points are decisions\actions of one character. We can have a 1st person story in which we don't ask about character decisions at all.

Controlling a character (like in an RPG game) or controlling the whole world are just different genres of interactive fiction. If you like the former more - write in it. But please, please, please, do not tell that one way is more correct than another simply because the story is written in 2nd or 1st person.

A pickaxe and a shovel are both tools used for digging. That doesn't mean that I would use a shovel to dig through rock, or a pickaxe to dig through silt.

You can have whatever perspective you want and as much control or as little control as possible. That doesn't mean that the story wouldn't better or easier to write from a different perspective.

 

[insertnamehere]

I can't disagree more.

1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person are tools, ways to tell the story.

We can have a 3rd person story in which branching points are decisions\actions of one character. We can have a 1st person story in which we don't ask about character decisions at all.

Controlling a character (like in an RPG game) or controlling the whole world are just different genres of interactive fiction. If you like the former more - write in it. But please, please, please, do not tell that one way is more correct than another simply because the story is written in 2nd or 1st person.

It's not that one way is correct - more that it's logical. It makes no sense for 'you' to have the ability to control everything if it's not explained in the story. For the same reason, it's frowned upon in regular writing to, for example, use first-person but describe every character's thoughts. 'I' can share my own thoughts, but I can't read everyone else's minds.

Yes, you do indeed have the freedom to do it your way. Nobody's going to bust your door down and arrest you. However, perspective is not just an issue of mixing-and-matching. Each one has particular purposes, strengths, and weaknesses, and it's important to be aware of these in your writing.

 

[Hvast]

It's not that one way is correct - more that it's logical. It makes no sense for 'you' to have the ability to control everything if it's not explained in the story. For the same reason, it's frowned upon in regular writing to, for example, use first-person but describe every character's thoughts. 'I' can share my own thoughts, but I can't read everyone else's minds.

It is different. If the protagonist in the first person can read everyone else's mind, then it is not really written in the first person, more like a bad mix of 1st and 3rd and it doesn't work.

Branching points are simply not a part of a story. If you take one branch and write it down as one linear story, then branching points will cease to exist.

Branching points like "Will he fuck you in your pussy or in your ass?" don't change the fact that the story is written from the point of view of a female protagonist in 1st\2nd person describing her experiences. Character doesn't make decisions about how the story will develop, you, the reader, do.

Don't treat an interactive story written in 1st\2nd person like an RPG. Those are different things. In a roleplaying game, it is, indeed, a cardinal sin to let a player to play other characters. There is nothing bad in letting a reader to decide how will an interactive story continue.

 

[merkros]

Don't treat an interactive story written in 1st\2nd person like an RPG. Those are different things. In a roleplaying game, it is, indeed, a cardinal sin to let a player to play other characters.

Pretty much all RPG's in existence are effectively interactive stories. Strip out the visuals, music, graphics, etc and what you're left with is essentially an interactive story. Even ignoring actual video game's and going back to Tabletop RPG's. If you put it into prose, then they aren't so different.

Character doesn't make decisions about how the story will develop, you, the reader, do.

Why even have characters at all then? Why give them a personality and goals and intentions when The Reader can just handwave that away because that's how they want the story to play out? At what point are you not writing characters and just writing up automatons for The Reader to play with like a bunch of Barbie dolls in a dollhouse?

There is nothing bad in letting a reader to decide how will an interactive story continue.

There's a difference between allowing the reader to make decisions that influence the outcome of the story and giving the reader full narrative power over it.


I feel like this might be one of the reasons why stories often have a tendency to degrade into just sex. When the reader has full narrative power and the reader wants all of the characters to be moist sluts that only get wet for him, then that's what the endpoint ends up being. This goes back to the original purpose that this entire discussion was caused by. I don't get the appeal of Mind Control Stories when many of the stories on the site are written in such a way that the reader has full narrative control over the story and characters anyway. Why would I get turned on by the idea of being able to control the minds and thoughts of others when so many stories on the site already do that without some magical McGuffin giving the reader that power?

 

[Corunner]

It is different. If the protagonist in the first person can read everyone else's mind, then it is not really written in the first person, more like a bad mix of 1st and 3rd and it doesn't work.

Branching points are simply not a part of a story. If you take one branch and write it down as one linear story, then branching points will cease to exist.

Branching points like "Will he fuck you in your pussy or in your ass?" don't change the fact that the story is written from the point of view of a female protagonist in 1st\2nd person describing her experiences. Character doesn't make decisions about how the story will develop, you, the reader, do.

Don't treat an interactive story written in 1st\2nd person like an RPG. Those are different things. In a roleplaying game, it is, indeed, a cardinal sin to let a player to play other characters. There is nothing bad in letting a reader to decide how will an interactive story continue.

Once again. I feel split.

1] Linear writing does lack branching point(s, only including this at the end of the word because the statement made also makes the plural noun beyond needless & pointless).

2] The "point" you wrote that wasn't (because it was a question) does indeed change the "fact" that (in that case, at least) isn't a fact.

 

[insertnamehere]

Branching points are simply not a part of a story.

This seems to be the statement upon which we primarily disagree. In my opinion, a reasonably well-written interactive story will be designed such that no outcome of a reader's decision is less logical than any other given outcome. This means that branching points are not only relevant, but absolutely integral to the story, IMO. That is, regardless of the reader's choice, characters should behave in a way true to their personality unless the story's design accounts for the reader's ability to choose the actions of all characters. As the use of first- and second-person perspectives is contrary to this, they are significantly worse choices than third-person. As I said, an author's selection of perspective should not be random, but instead determined by whatever works best with their writing.

I should clarify: previously, I may have misordered my statements. It is not that I believe first- or second-person stories should avoid decisions beyond the protagonist's control, but that stories which allow such decisions should usually be written in third-person.

 

[Hvast]

Pretty much all RPG's in existence are effectively interactive stories. Strip out the visuals, music, graphics, etc and what you're left with is essentially an interactive story. Even ignoring actual video game's and going back to Tabletop RPG's. If you put it into prose, then they aren't so different.

All RPG are interactive stories but not all interactive stories are RPGs. You seem to want all interactive stories in 1st or 2nd to be RPGs, I think both RPG and non-RPG stories work fine in any POV (assuming they are written well and properly use advantages of any given POV)

I should clarify: previously, I may have misordered my statements. It is not that I believe first- or second-person stories should avoid decisions beyond the protagonist's control, but that stories which allow such decisions should usually be written in third-person.

What if some author wants to write a story focused on the feelings of the protagonist but wants to have branching points that are world based (Simplest example of that is a non-con story which is told from the POV of the victim but branching points are decisions of the rapist or decisions of both)

Tell me why some weird semi-omniscient 3rd person that tells us thoughts of the victim but tells us nothing about rapist's feelings will be better than a past tense 1st person POW with victim recollecting past events?

 

[SeriousBrainDamage]

I feel like this might be one of the reasons why stories often have a tendency to degrade into just sex.

I doubt it. It's more the other way around, actually.

Controlling a character (like in an RPG game) or controlling the whole world are just different genres of interactive fiction. If you like the former more - write in it. But please, please, please, do not tell that one way is more correct than another simply because the story is written in 2nd or 1st person.

I think this's the gist of it.
The whole idea of writing the branching point with question adressed to the main character, will you fuck her? Did I stay? Does Nicole accept?, seems to be a dogma here on CHYOA.
I get it, it's interactive fiction, but just recently I found so much more liberty in avoiding that and just ignoring the question.

What Havast says, it's that (i think) no matter how you put it down, you're still writing the story how you like it.
You can ask you main character if she wanst to run, you can go with a simple next , ask if a second character stops her, and so on.
The result will be the same.
While I agree on that, I still think that matching the question with the prospective used as more... don't know how to say it, elegant? Formally correct?


O.T.

2] The "point" you wrote that wasn't (because it was a question) does indeed change the "fact" that (in that case, at least) isn't a fact.

Corunner, are you a native speaker?

 

[insertnamehere]

What if some author wants to write a story focused on the feelings of the protagonist but wants to have branching points that are world based (Simplest example of that is a non-con story which is told from the POV of the victim but branching points are decisions of the rapist or decisions of both)

Tell me why some weird semi-omniscient 3rd person that tells us thoughts of the victim but tells us nothing about rapist's feelings will be better than a past tense 1st person POW with victim recollecting past events?

Here, I would write in third-person. First- and second-person affects the logic of branching points, as I've discussed at length above. Third-person, on the other hand, would prevent only the most amateurish author from writing about the thoughts and feelings of characters or flashback scenes. Show, don't tell and all that.

I will also add that third-person need not be "weird" or "semi-omniscient" if that is inappropriate to your story. It can be as subjective or objective as you need it to be, as long as you're consistent.

Of course, my argument operates on the assumption that branching points are among the most important factors to consider when selecting the persepective of a story. I understand that many writers on this site simply do not care. I suppose we must agree to disagree.

 

[brevdravis]

I see each story as a fourth dimensional matrix involving various possibility paths that bifurcate along various branch points, and yet can affect each other in a non-linear causality way as events that occurred before events in the story have in actuality been created afterwords.

And if you don't understand that... I probably need to be smoking less weed before I post... I mean, the original choose your own adventure books occasionally would have the player meet themselves on another branch. It was just weird experimental storytelling occasionally, and that's just fine. IMHO. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes crazy shit just... works...

 

[insertnamehere]

I see each story as a fourth dimensional matrix involving various possibility paths that bifurcate along various branch points, and yet can affect each other in a non-linear causality way as events that occurred before events in the story have in actuality been created afterwords.

Wow, that's some really high level thinking. I balk after third dimension.

 

[Hvast]

What Havast says, it's that (i think) no matter how you put it down, you're still writing the story how you like it.
You can ask you main character if she wanst to run, you can go with a simple next , ask if a second character stops her, and so on.
The result will be the same.
While I agree on that, I still think that matching the question with the prospective used as more... don't know how to say it, elegant? Formally correct?

I think there are three types of branching points

1) What protagonist does\decides. (will you ask Katie to have sex?)
2) What are direct consequences of protagonist's action(s) (how will Katie react to your offer to have sex?)
3) What happens in the world (will anyone enter the room while you'll have sex with Katie?)

Limiting reader's option to only number 1 increases immersion and creates an RPG-like experience. But there is the price - you'll have less flexibility. What if author wants to explore two storylines, one in which Katie will agree and another in which she'll refuse. I guess we can use something like -

Do you ask Katie to have sex?
- Yes. She starts undressing you
- Yes. She slaps you

but isn't it the same? You still control actions of more than one character.