#Jibber jabber twins pro#

If you don't like a story or a book, think about WHY the readers would like it or why the editor picked that one. Look closely at the stories and what works and how the writers use the different tools to tell that story while thinking about how you can fit those tools into your own toolbox. With short fiction, do the same with the top writers and publications.

Make notes on what you like and dislike and what works or doesn't for you. Study the best-selling books in your genre, make notes on how the writers do certain things, how they solve X problem with character or plotting.

Find good first readers, preferably not writers, preferably people who read voraciously within the genre you want to write and who like the kinds of stories you are trying to tell. Who said write in a vacuum? I'm saying don't take ONE editor's opinions to be a measure of where you stack up in general, that's all.Īnd, in my opinion, of course, there are much better ways to improve your craft than hoping for a line or two in a rejection that will tell you what to do. I don't believe in 'good enough' only in 'better than before and not as good I could be with more work'. Anyone who writes for a living should be constantly working to improve their craft. Are you serious about writing? Then you need to improve your craft. I guess I'm just against using markets as a way to tell your own writing quality. Every story is different, every market is different. It would have been rejected by KD (I can't see a pedophile or underage sex with a dragon going over well in this contest). I'm 99% certain that a story I sold Daily SF wouldn't have made it out of the reject pile here due to subject matter and theme, yet it sold to the second or third market I sent it and will net me hundreds of dollars. Stories that get straight rejected here might go on to sell elsewhere without any trouble. I would argue that the only thing you can read into consistently getting HM or above is that you manage to send stories that fit between the lines of the judge's taste. A former winner read that story prior to me submitting it and gave it a 7 out of 10 chance of being a finalist story, and yet, straight reject. I had hoped the uniqueness of the setting and the story itself would be enough to overlook that, but it clearly wasn't. I'm not surprised, for example, my one rejection was a story that opens with twin unicorns.

If I cherry-picked my stories, I could manage straight rejections here, too. I won't out the particular people I'm thinking of, since they don't post here, but it happens. I do know some people who write very well who have never gotten anything but straight rejections from this contest.

#Jibber jabber twins pro#

I must not be writing at a pro level yet. While other juggs have a hard time late game due to their lack of mobility, mundo can easliy approach and slap the adc to death (his spellshield is near permanent late game since picking it up will complete its cooldown, in a combat, your enemy will more likely to focus your carry first, you can take advantage of that fact to kill or at least kick the enemy carry out of combat temporarily).I've never gotten a finalist. He has about 4000-5000 health while slapping you with 400 AD attacks, mundo has the ability to slow and approach enemy, ridiculous dmg and cc immunity. Mundo, on the other hand, is different, he's one of the rare stat checkers that deals dmg while being disgustingly resilient, if you were an adc, you will kite the shit out of darius but not of mundo. It is true that juggs are falling off in high elo, the most notable are darius and sett, i'm playing in D2, not an extreme elo or smthing but it is really clear that those champs are easy to kite and have no choice but to bully lane early game.