Oh, this was something I thought of last night that I meant to post in relation to the 'too much backstory or character development is bad' argument:

Backstory is not the problem. Character development is not the problem. Whatever your character is about, whether it's a story about him fighting demons 10 years ago or what he had for breakfast, pushing that at the expense of your current feud is a bad thing.

Backstory and CD are getting targetted, I think, because they're examples of things where it's very easy to exclude your opponent. But suppose you do include the other guy in your backstory-based post. Example: in my feud with Acolyte, my first post was based on his backstory but linked it to mine by having a character from Darkness's history be present and then show up in the feud later. Was I pushing my backstory? Sure. Was it at the expense of Aco? Not at all. In fact the whole feud was a set-up to link Aco with Dante before Endgame.

Had I done the same with whatever Darkness was doing right then, would that have been any better than letting my backstory push Aco out of the story? Not at all.

The point is, it doesn't matter what you're writing - backstory, CD, what your guy is wearing today - if you do it in a way that doesn't let your opponent in, then it's bad.

Can someone explain, in detail, what "directing a story" is while feuding? I understand the basics, but here's where my confusion lies:

If I'm in a feud, and I offer my opponent 3-4 angles to build from, and he/she responds by involving one while introducing 3-4 angles for ME to build from in my response, and I use three of them, *WHO* is directing the story? It seems like perhaps my opponent would be, but then am I being faulted for incorporating their direction more than mine was incorporated?

Seems like it should be the other way around. If one feuder involves more of his/her opponent's ideas, that's a GOOD thing in my eyes. Can someone clarify things for me? Thanks.

Directing the story or "driving the fued" as I call it is just one part of what is taken into consideration. Sometimes one feuder will take hold of a feud and give it direction.

Overall that's a very positive thing to do, but not the end all be all.

A good "follower" earns as much respect and gets as much a nod as the leader does.

Leading does come with a major responsibility though, the line between leading the feud and pushging something down your opponent's throat can be very thin. A good example of bad leading is how Mjoy once wrote an opponent as something that character wasn't (A homosexual fast food worker to be presice) Now Mjoy took the lead but used it very badly as he forced a bad story line on his opponent.

Is anyone surprised that Mjoy is a shining example of bad "story driving"?

Just as there is good and bad elading there is good and bad following, good following is "getting the idea" and running with it and adding to it. Bad following is ignoring a solid idea out of ego or some other illogical reason.

It shouldbe noted that in most feuds, leader and follower switches back and forth a few times as the story runs it's course.

Generally both driving the story on and following it well and adding to it(Assuming the role of leader) are both abilities that good feyders possess.

But simply following along can be a "tie-breaker" in case of an otherwise close feud.

NOTE: As everyone has their own view of what good feuding is, this is only my opinion. Some of it may be shared withother members of creative, other parts may not.

In my opinion, a good "follower" earns as much respect and gets as much a nod as the leader does.

Leading does come with a major responsibility though, the line between leading the feud and pushging something down your opponent's throat can be very thin.

Oops, you mentioned Mjoy, and I got the urge to cut-and-paste!