Player Comments on Moonlit Lands from Long Ago

Disclaimer: to the author, take everything in this review with a grain of salt. I’m not a professional writer and only somewhat of a seasoned reviewer. To the readers, this review will contain lots of spoilers, so I suggest you read the storygame first.

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

The description immerses the reader in the setting, establishing the situation and problem the protagonist faces. It leaves unanswered questions, e.g. what doesn’t quite make sense? Having the quote is a good way to set up the tone and dangerous world of this story. I like the implication that the protagonist can meet characters from other well-known fairytales and change their fates; I remember plotting a storygame like that in the past. A nitpick: I think ‘helo’ is a typo, as upon a quick google search, it’s an informal term for a helicopter (which isn’t something that features in this storygame) .

Moving on to the first page. I enjoy how it begins with description, using a nice blend of sensory details and internal narration to ground readers in the scene. Choice of diction like “snow”, “cold” and “wintery” paint a consistent picture of the setting. Having the juxtaposition of traffic shows how the protagonist is used to a more modern world and possibly ill-equipped for the adventure to come.

I noticed a few grammatical errors. Most of these revolve around the use of commas. For example, the first sentence: “The snow crunches beneath your feet, each step, uninterrupted by the usual thrum of traffic, seeming unnaturally loud.” It is phrased awkwardly. Maybe removing the comma after ‘each step’ might make more sense. But reading it again, if the ‘unnaturally loud’ part refers to each step rather than the snow crunching, you could add a semicolon before ‘each step’ and change ‘seeming’ to ‘seems’.

There’s a comma splice here before ‘after all’: “You're just about to ignore it, after all, who needs those useless bits of paper any more when we have satellites and screens?” A few more are scattered throughout the story, so adding conjunctions would rectify this. Or you could use semicolons instead (though they are already used frequently).

The story sets up the first choice well. There’s an unexplained street on the map, but at the same time, their discomfort outweighs their curiosity. Hence, their choices are to find answers on their phone, get home, or search for new boots. It reflects the character’s current struggles.

WRITING STYLE

Pacing and emphasis are used well in this storygame. To stretch out the suspense regarding the mysterious street on the map, it’s mentioned quite a few times, and rather than just stating there is nothing there, the next sentence adds, “There's just a wall, nothing else, not even a house”. It emphasizes the mystery associated with the street and foreshadows its sudden appearance later on.

There are a few typos throughout the story, but seeing as another comment already mentions some and this review is long enough as it is, I’ll refrain from listing them out.

The story is quite descriptive. It paints a vivid picture of each unique setting, from the seaside shack to Death’s mansion. There is a good use of specific nouns and concrete imagery, but perhaps a slight overuse of adjectives and adverbs at times. Descriptions effectively convey the atmosphere of different locations. For instance, the house between worlds has a roaring fire, a wooden face that’s “neither inviting nor foreboding”, and a collection of different items on the mantle. It feels lived-in and somewhat cozy. It juxtaposes the dark, foreboding forest outside, with bare trees standing like gangly men and a path leading into nothingness.

Fear conveyed very well. First, details are presented about the setting, like the darkness and silence, then this is suddenly broken by the screeching and white face of a barn owl. The protagonist is understandably frightened. Then, it dwells a bit on his internal narration: he wishes the sound would stop and his imagination conjures up the scary creatures that may live here. It’s done so well that the reader may even wonder why the protagonist ventures here in the first place. More about characterization later, but is there a reason for him being there? Curiosity? The desire for adventure? And how do these things balance against his fear, keeping him from turning back? Important characterization is needed to make this story more developed.

I quite enjoyed the song outside the shack. Though the lyrics appear quite random and unconnected at times, there’s a good adherence to rhyme scheme and meter. Stressed and unstressed syllables are utilized well. This is good foreshadowing too, as the moonlight reflects on the snow, the owl pops out of nowhere, and the part about dreaming may reference the protagonist getting knocked out by a branch. And Johnny is mentioned, who later briefly appears to help the protagonist.

A poem is also used to warn the protagonist about what is to occur. As the fox mentions the three paths ahead, he also gives the protagonist information about calming the wrath of Baba Yaga.

As previously mentioned, the descriptions are very immersive. They not only form the atmosphere and mood, but also hint at the characters that live in each place. This is especially true for the crumbling castle, with its rusted gates, ancient hall, dead chandeliers and dusty cobwebs. Everything gives the impression of a place tethering on the edge of death and ruin. It characterizes the sorcerer who lives there (and foreshadows his struggle) long before the protagonist ever meets him.

CHARACTERS & PLOT

Having a picture of the cat was a good choice, as it’s adorable! But there’s a slight error where the cat is referred to as ‘they’, then ‘he’, and back to ‘they’ again. Following the cat might be a reference to Alice in Wonderland: both follow an animal down a magical route which leads to a whole new world.

The pacing is pretty good, but some details seem skipped over, e.g. the cat being good as new is just mentioned in a one-liner, though that’s something that must surely seem odd for the protagonist. This isn’t explained but I’m guessing it’s something to do with the fireplace having healing properties. Still, this could be due to the focus of that scene being on the painting, who so happened to talk.

The man with a pointed hat in the painting fulfills the archetype of the wise old mentor. I enjoyed his philosophical takes, like how things don’t simply die when no one believes in them. To each person, their own world is all they know and it’s always alive, but to someone else, that world may not exist. But that’s neither here nor there, so let’s return to the story. The man in the painting frames (excuse the pun) the choice of leaving or staying as the distinction between clever and wise.

The inciting incident occurs when the protagonist chooses to embark on an adventure. However, as the protagonist isn’t characterized much, it comes off as somewhat weak. We have no idea why they want to find out about the key or explore this new world, especially when they were focused on getting home a few scenes ago. Simply put, they don’t have a motive or a clear goal to carry them through this storygame. The quest is also vague: go on a journey and follow the cockerel’s crow once it’s done. This makes it more difficult to root for the protagonist as we don’t know exactly what they’re doing or why.

Edit: In my first read through, I missed the path straight towards the house. This meant I knew nothing about the whole mission and it felt like the protagonist stumbled upon a random amalgamation of fairytales, just to interfere for no reason. Yet, upon reading this path, it made so much more sense that the mission is to unravel the threads.

The Cabinet of Curiosities had an Alice in Wonderland-esque feel. It was interesting to see the allusions like ‘Nobody’ and the cyclops from Greek mythology and the sparkling fairy wings. Having a sword reflecting its history is such a cool worldbuilding idea (though maybe it’s a reference to something I don’t know about).

As the protagonist suffered from a lack of characterization, it means some choices completely change his personality. While this may be a benefit for branching storygames, as it allows for vastly different plotlines in one story, sometimes it seems more random than anything. Let me provide you with an example. When the protagonist meets the fox, he can choose to kill it for food or give it some of his own food in his pocket. These are vastly different options. The first option does not make sense either, as why would he randomly attack a fox with no weapon to ‘kill’ it? While I would excuse this if it led to completely different narratives or used delayed consequences to impact the story, this didn’t seem to be the case. Yet I suppose helping the fox did lead to getting more information about the three paths, which reinforces the common fairytale moral of good behavior being rewarded.

It’s a nice touch that the saying ‘sure as day’ is changed to something more fitting of the setting: “sure as blackbird eggs is blue and nightingale's are brown” (though that first ‘is’ should be ‘are).

—Hansel and Gretel—

The protagonist is quite altruistic, going in with the goal of helping Hansel and Gretel. It mirrors the original story: a family too poor to have any food, parents who don’t really care about the kids, and children who find a gingerbread house and begin eating everything. But there are additions too, like frog who’s a prince (though unlike the Princess and the Frog, he sends them to the gingerbread house instead) and the witch’s magic mirror (similar to Snow White, with a twist on her classic ‘mirror, mirror, on the wall’ monologue).

The characters of the owl, robin and crow are established nicely. Out of the three, the owl appears to be the wisest; it cares about saving the children whereas the other two just want to feast on the gingerbread house. They’re good at insults lol, if the protagonist calls them feather-brains their responses are well thought out. They have distinct voices that would make it easy to tell them apart by the things they say and the way they speak. Each plan fits the traits associated with each bird- owls are wise, robins are stealthy, and crows…steal things?

Their symbolism predicts each outcome too. The owl’s plan succeeds almost instantaneously, swooping in to save everyone. But the robin’s path may require assistance from the owl depending on what the protagonist chooses to do. Then, unsurprisingly, the crow’s plan is to visit a cave in the woods and steal something. Though I noticed everything ends the same way: the gingerbread house catches on fire, Hansel gives the protagonist his fishing rod, and the birds promise to take care of the children.

There’s a brief moment of inconsistent characterization on the robin’s path: why would the protagonist run into the forest screaming when he was so scared about attracting attention there earlier?

Speaking of the ending, it might have been better to have different results especially when the choices and methods are so varied. Perhaps some options might have failed, e.g. when the protagonist answers the riddle wrongly or chooses the wrong item to take from the cave. This would have added more stakes and also fit with the implication in the description that the protagonist may change the outcome of well-known fairytales.

And why on earth would the protagonist take the children’s fishing rod? Given that the house burnt down, unlike the previous fairytale, they don’t get their happy ending where their hunger is solved by having a gingerbread house. Taking away their only way to get food is like stealing candy from a child. But I suppose there had to be a way to give this to the fisherman in the next tale.

It’s nice that the items in the house change as more fairytales are visited.

—The Wishing Fish—

I can’t remember what this tale is called, but I read it when I was younger. It follows the story of a fisherman who is content with his life but when he finds a wishing fish, his wife makes more and more wishes, eventually getting out of control. A lot of good pathetic fallacy is used in this story: the waves are gentle at the start, though after the first wish, they turn yellow. Later, there’s a storm, with wild waves and thunder. But finally, by the time the last wish is made, with the fish’s anger increasing, there’s a maelstrom with trees uprooting and rocks flying. It’s a great way to convey the fish’s emotional state and the turmoil that the fisherman likely feels.

The two characters are portrayed well. There’s the wife, with her thirst for power, though the combination of her wishes being granted and her enabling husband leads her down a corruption arc. She spirals out of control. At the beginning, she only has power over her husband, but she wants to control the entire kingdom and eventually, the whole world. Her selfishness is reflected in her dialogue, especially the part with the capitalized ‘ME’ at the end of every sentence.

On the other hand, there’s the fisherman who is content with his life. He understands that the fish and its power is not to be trifled with. Even when tempted by the protagonist to get a new house, he instead says he’s satisfied and doesn’t need anything. But his fatal flaw is his obedience to his wife. He does everything he can for her, even to the point of sacrificing his own ideal life.

Unfortunately, the protagonist’s choices don't affect any of the outcomes in this story, as each character’s decisions are already made. It only changes a few lines on each page. But it would have been nice to see the protagonist’s actions interfere with the story, like how it could stop the fisherman from bending to his wife’s whims every time if the protagonist stands up to her, hence allowing them to reach a moment of realization. The choice to give the wife the fishing net doesn’t change much either, as after the first wish, the story proceeds as if that didn’t change and it’s still the fisherman asking the fish for wishes and not the other way around. But it ends thematically: with them returning to the shack at the start, with no trace of their earlier wishes.

—Soldier in the Bearskin—

I’m assuming this is a fairytale I’ve never heard of. The fox makes another appearance here and allows the protagonist to see a tapestry which connects all the stories visited prior. Then, there is a lonely poor man in need of gold, but he doesn’t want to take it, so the protagonist must make up some way to give it to him. The soldier is suspicious and it is consistent with his characterization, as he believes he’s been abandoned by the world after fighting for peace.

It’s funny that when he tries to be intimidating, the man just thinks he’s “impersonating an akward, confused traveller” haha.

Every attempt to help the poor makes things worse, as the person who is given money always dies. This is foreshadowed by how it is the Reaper’s territory. It is a subversion of the common ‘kindness is rewarded’ trope that is often found in fairytales, though there doesn’t seem to be a reason why.

Next, the protagonist meets three sisters. Following the two leads to an allusion to the story of the sister with jewels in her mouth and the other with toads (it’s familiar although I can’t remember what it’s called). This switches up the kindness = rewarded trope. Though if they’re not advised to be nice, they act like the jealous stepsisters in Cinderella, trying to get the sack of money, and soon fall down a pothole. And the soldier in a bearskin marries the redhead sister? Just…after one conversation? But maybe it’s a part of the original story, so I’ll give this the benefit of the doubt.

There’s a slight continuity issue: even in the ending where the sisters do not die, the tapestry still shows two skeletons.

—Death’s Apprentice—

Again, I’m not sure what this one is called. There are so many different fairytales that I can’t believe I thought there were only three paths at the start.

Here, death takes a young boy as an apprentice to heal people. The protagonist actually gets to alter the course of events this time, acting as an advisor to the apprentice. Him telling the boy to disobey death, as expected, does have harsh consequences, yet obeying him leads to an…interesting outcome. I’m not exactly sure what to make of the last part with the cabbages vs severed heads. That’s probably just the weirdness of the original fairytale, as some fairytales in the past were unnecessarily dark and didn’t have moral lessons. Either way, death escorts the protagonist to one last adventure

—The Sorcerer Avoiding Death—

The theme shines most strongly in this story. There is a man who tries to avoid death, coming up with a convoluted plan to survive. He has the protagonist aid him. It’s a bit surprising that the protagonist just agrees so quickly, but seeing as his characterization is inconsistent, I’m not sure I understand half his actions anyway. Speaking of that, he can either save the life of the servant or take the elixir for himself. Seriously, what’s with this dude and his flip-flopping morality?

I like how the sorcerer’s grand plan is undone by a single nail. Still, there is a continuity error sometimes, as in one of the paths, the protagonist is supposed to know nothing about the nail but the sorcerer rambles about it anyway. Though the protag could have dismissed it as him getting senile as he dies very soon.

I did enjoy the sorcerer's character arc, where he sees the young servant and realizes how he had so much of his life left to live. Ironically, in the only path where he gets his antidote, he chooses to give it up instead. This is also the only ending where he reaches his ‘aha moment’ and Death permits him to live.

—Death’s Mansion—

This is the final story with a compelling theme: death cannot be untangled. But up until this point, I saw the theme as something along the lines of how fate will always find its way. This is due to quotes like the owl’s "Isn't it interesting," he says, "That the mirror's prediction still came true, no matter what the Witch did to stop it?" and the servant’s “You spend enough time with magic, you can see threads of destiny if you look hard enough. And the threads around your destiny are stronger than most”. But I get how the main theme is about Death—he’s a recurring motif throughout the storygame.

At first, I didn’t see how the woman wanting more things was cheating death, but I guess her last wish about becoming a god was. And the coins changing lives—is it a stretch to say that the money would lead to living a longer life, hence it just sped up the process and they died more quickly? But it’s interesting how they’re all connected by the tale of Baba Yaga and interwoven with death and their attempts at avoiding it,

I don’t know what to think about the end with Tom being the king of cats. That doesn’t feel too satisfying, as we have no clue what that means or why it should matter. Maybe if more information was presented about this, like the previous cat king being corrupt or a cat war at the start (but of course, nothing of the warrior kind), this may be more cohesive. It would give the protagonist more motivation to help too. It feels like the build-up with the cat’s knowledgeable eyes and scratched up appearance at the start didn’t really reach a satisfying conclusion.

This story had a gauntlet structure with many different fairytales to encounter along the way. There were lots of choices but some without much impact. At the start, they only altered the way the result was reached but the end result was always the same, though towards the end, the outcome could be changed. I’m not sure which I preferred. The former makes each choice more significant and meaningful, but the latter reinforces the theme that destiny occurs no matter how much one tries to avoid it. Yet, I would have preferred more early end game links as the only way to finish this story is to go through all the fairytales.

Given the quote in the description about how this world is dangerous, I would have expected the protagonist to die if they made the wrong choices, but it seems they are somehow granted plot armor to go through the whole story. I guess it could be related to how Death orchestrated the whole thing but still, it limits the stakes when they can’t die. Only the side characters’ fates are put at risk (and sometimes, it’s not as if anything can change those). Though they’re more likable than the protagonist so that’s usually reason enough to root for them.

Overall, it’s a solid storygame and incorporates a lot of fairytales into a unified and thematic narrative.

Nice homage to European fairy tales and folklore. I was happy to recognize most of the stories you re-imagined and was also pleased that you included Baba Yaga from Russian folklore. I thought the whole bit about my character needing to unravel the tapestry was both an interesting way to tie the stories together and give the overall work a philosophical take on life and the human condition. I did at times think there could have been more instances where my character could have been given a greater sense of agency. I particularly felt that the section covering the story of the fisherman and his wife tended to railroad me the reader and make my choices inconsequential to the overall narrative. Also, particularly near the beginning of the story-game, I felt there were a number of comma splices and run-on sentences. Found a few typos and instances of words that probably could be omitted if you should choose to revise the text. Also, I felt there were some descriptive sentences where the subjects or objects were a little too vague. Again, this is something you can fix in the revision process. Still, I don't feel like I wasted my time reading this. It was both colorful and familiar.

I liked this one: short and sweet with some unexpected twists and turns. The story didn't seem to stick to any one plot or theme too closely but it was nice meeting all these different weird and wonderful characters and interesting enough for a 5-10 minute read.

There’s something to like about a meandering fairytale story. All the creatures, tropes and characters from classic tales packed into a singular story is fun (if a rather literal interpretation of the theme.) But I think there are better ways to go about an homage like this. We meet a character and move on with little consequence. In fact most of the choices are inconsequential and seem to exist just for there to be a choice. This story is linear and lacking in substance this way. I wonder if there was an overarching theme or goal for the main character how it would add to the story.

ew an fsp game gross

You should read this! Well worth it.

Little bit of spoils ahead ig?



This review will be my thoughts as I'm reading, don't take expect this to be a "you need to work on..." review. Fuck tom, he ain't a real one ong. Any who, I love the whole you turn around and everything changed trope. -1 didn't knock on the door. Just a thought, if this kind of review needs to be put in a thread or just not posted, pm me, and I'll refrane from doing this type thing again. Tom isn't so bad, glad he's no longer looking ragged. Tom walks you home if you choose to leave right away +1. When you agree to stay the word "cat" is spelled "act" a very minor detail. So far this story is great. +2 for the description of surroundings. I can picture some of these scenes as if I was watching a movie. The transition from the young to the middle-aged to old is great, reminds me of the one goddess "Hecate" +1 because mythology is fucking amazing. When leaving the tapestry, weaving shack quickly is spelled "quicklky". Getting an Alice and Wonderland Esc feeling, idk if it's because that's what you're going for or if it's because I read that as an example for this contest. The idea of a kid going through fairy-tails (I am going on a limb, saying that will be what you have to do to untangle the threads. wowie I'm so smart.) and setting them back to how they "should be" is intriguing 1+ I have yet to read something like this and I rather like this idea. HELL YEAH, MY PEA BRAIN FIGURED OUT THE RATHER OBVIOUS MAIN "QUEST" OF THIS STORY CORRECTLY!! When the fished makes the house a mansion, "gold.Crystal chandeliers" A space is forgotten. +1 for the goated fish tale that I haven't heard in over 3 years. "The fisherman shakes his head,;" mistake I think, it is when the wife wishes to be kind and you follow the lad. When the bitchy wife of the fishermen wants to be god, despite is spelled with 2 e's. I learned a new word, "whelp" thank you author. When you get the bottomless pouch will is spelled with an extra L. You have great use of figurative language +1. Cuddles is amazing. CUDDLES IS TIM 0o0 AND HE'S DEAD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-1. KILLED A CAT. This was a great story and I liked it. The ending for me seems a bit subpar for all the build up; but one of the things that struggle to meet my standards are endings, it's justa me thing. I liked the use of occasional pictures +1. Overall the plot is nice, idea is original, has good grammar, and great vocabulary. One thing I didn't like was the lack of backstory on our character. I didn't get a great sense of their personalty at all. 6/8

Very fun to read!