Bash me or not bash me (C&C)

[Kakashi Hatake]

Day 4 - The Gunsmith's Gamble

Some general commentary:

For starters, I have to say that one of the best things about your writing is that you have no 1-dimensional characters, something that I have a HUGE problem with personally. I really liked that the bandits weren’t all just cackling Bond villains or generic psychopaths, it really make the story much more enjoyable to be able to see both sides of the story. The relationship between Jensen and Agern was especially interesting to me. They’re clearly not just strawman bad guys; they’re just doing a job for the country that they love.

I also really enjoyed the dramatic change in Ballad’s personality through this. From what relatively little I’ve read of yours lately, his personality didn’t really resonate with me and I didn’t know much about his motivations. This story REALLY helped out in that regard. It makes Ballad a much more tragic and complex character, not just some crazy gunman.

The exchange in the tent between Ballad and Immy was really sweet. It was nice to see that someone was starting to crack Ballad’s tough guy facade. And oh boy, that scene in the field of flowers. Such feels. Masterfully done, man. And then GAH, the twist! THIS is why the guy has trust issues. Why did you do this to me?! xD

The last part of the saga really played out like a movie to me (that’s a good thing). Very fast-paced and interesting. Ballad’s resolve to end all suffering was a really interesting realization. I’m really looking forward to what you’ll be doing in the Frozen Fields.

Alright, on to the short remarks/nitpicking:

If anything, he felt like he had two voices inside his head. Each one with a contrasting idea on what he was supposed to be doing. One would cry for him to keep moving, the other would cry for him to turn back A disembodied shout to kill followed by a radiant saint urging him to make peace. Both fought within the battlefield of his consciousness, trying to see which one could prevail. Even here, in a world where he was immortal, could slaughter countless people if he found the effort to try, and the ability to cheat time to generate innumerable objects, food, and drink. Even here, conflict found its way to his doorstep. Like an old friend who believes that they had grown apart. And no matter how many times he would shut the door and tell it to go away, it would stubbornly return until he acknowledged its presence. It was a cycle that never ended.

This is a really solid paragraph. It clearly paints the picture of the constant struggle that Ballad has in his subconscious.

When he opened the lid, he saw blood. Blood as clear as the morning sky. He smelled smoke. He tasted death. And he hid away. Like a coward.

Just a flat-out excellent couple of sentences. Very simple, yet poignant.

"FUCK OFF, YOU PERSISTENT SHIT!" Ballad responded in kind. He did not have the time to start up an interesting conversation about politics or the weather when he was busy stuffing bullets into the chamber of his revolver.

This bit made me laugh. Has a very PTSD-war-veteran-yelling-at-a-girlscout vibe.

It had been three days since they found him, and a lot had happened.

The only major recurring issue that I can really highlight in you writing would be that not every conjunction needs a comma before it. You’d only need a comma if the two clauses were independent (if they had their own individual nouns). In this sentence the second clause is dependent, so you wouldn’t need a comma. Not a HUGE issue, (I’d rather have too many commas than too few =P) but it can disrupt the rhythm of the sentence.

“Another group of two patrons stroll into the bar,”

This isn’t really a recurring issue, but take care to keep the tense consistent.

"Really?" Ballad said, feigning interest in the subject. A third group silently walked into the bar, this time with distinguishing features. One of them was fairly bulky, and stood tall over the other, more lean figure. A long cloak overlapped over his back, though no attempts were made to hide his face, which had wrinkles, and no facial hair. His eyes were green, …

Dialogue should generally be kept separate from descriptive paragraphs. This helps the writing ‘flow’ and helps a reader grasp the material more easily.

"You might want to leave." Tender said sternly. He had pulled Ballad forward by the shoulder, which given the circumstances the gunsmith didn't mind too much. The sharpshooter stared at Tender for a little bit, seeing concern in his eyes before whispering "Right..." and standing up from his bar stool.

When introducing a new speaker, start a new paragraph.

"Hey." A voice called to his right.

Sorta nitpicking, but it should be [“Hey,” a voice called…], as it is all one sentence, with the dialogue tag ending it.

“Without warning, the older man gripped his cloak from the front, tossing it off of him, revealing a full set of black plate armor”

You pack a lot of description into your sentences, which is a good thing. However, it can sometimes be hard to read. You can round these sentences out by adding some conjunctions and tweaking the tense. I’d recommend something like “Without warning, the older man gripped his cloak from the front and tossed it off of him, revealing a full set of black plate armor.”

The hill had a large hole in it. One made entirely of stone.

Generally, use of sentence fragments is not 100% correct, but is perfectly acceptable as a stylistic choice. I’d just say be cautious with them as when done correctly, they’re brilliant but they’re a very difficult thing to place without ruining the tempo of the sentence (not that that’s what you did, but I thought I’d mention it.)

There was still a good amount of civilians

In the case of something countable like civilians, you’d use the word ‘number’. ‘Amount’ would be used for something non-countable like fire or sadness.

He hoped it lasted. He didn't want something like this happening again.

A pair of short sentences like this (i.e. sentences that ‘rely’ on each other for meaning) can be joined with a semicolon to improve the tempo. If of course you chose the length of these for a style choice like I mentioned above, ignore this. Side note, the pair of sentences right after this I think is an excellent example of fragments done right: “Not to anyone. Not to Camelot.” Sounds so cool.

"You know why I'm here... Agern. Your... rabble have done an...adequate job with the work you've always wanted. But... it's not enough, is it?" replied the specter, its voice echoing throughout the landscape.

This again might just be a personal preference more than a rule, but I’d put the unquoted bit in the middle of the quote. Something like this:

“You know why I’m here...Agern,” replied the specter, its voice echoing throughout the landscape. “Your...rabble have done…”

I think it keeps the sentence ‘balanced’, if that makes any sense.

"I have done plenty."

"No... it really isn't."

I really like the way you handle back-and-forth dialogue for short sentences like this. It makes the speech seem ‘quicker’ and keeps everything moving. I’d only caution that if you have more than 2 speakers it can get confusing (that’s not an example of 2+ speakers, but ya’ know). However, longer sentences like the follow:

"I know your desires! I KNOW what you wish to do! WHY FIGHT IT?!"

should have the speaker mentioned. Given, you can usually infer who is speaking by the order of the speech, but a few times I found myself having to re-read a sentence to make sure I had the right speaker in my mind. Just keep an eye on that.

However, his group were well-known, or at the very least had enough of a reputation that bribery was more than enough to sway anyone nosy enough to take a look inside.

In this instance the group itself is being described as a unit, so you’d use ‘was’ rather than ‘were’. If the sentence read “the men in his group”, you’d be correct.

”That might be preferable.” He replied as they ran down the hill, with the girl making some odd, reverberating noise which captured a laugh from the gunsmith.

You have a good few sentences in your posts that use sentences like this. While there’s nothing really too wrong grammatically, you might consider removing phrased like “which did x” as it seems to be too much ‘telling’ and not enough ‘showing’. You could remove the word and tweak the stuff around it to something like this, which I think flows better:

“That might be preferable,” he replied as the ran down the hill. The girl made odd, reverberating noises as they ran, capturing a laugh from the gunsmith.”

Overall, this is a really really excellent storyline. I thoroughly enjoyed it.