Hello all. I hope that the day has been favorable for all of you. Now let us jump right in shall we?

Here I hope to speak a bit on powers. Admittedly, powers have taken a bit of a back seat in recent times, still, there may be some relevance in what I have to say. There's also some bits of advice/beliefs I've been hankering to share for quite some time now, so perhaps you'll find this rant useful? I have a lot of ground I want to cover, so I decided to just break them down and try to be as keep to the points.

You can get away with anything if you write it well enough
At the risk of blowing my own horn, I've been in the FPL for a few years now. Sad, but true. And in my time, or perhaps only in my mind, I think it could be said that I've contributed to some of the mindset we FPLers generally follow, or at least tell the newbies to follow. A couple of which are that "powers don't mean anything, writing is everything" or the now less oft used, "you can get away with anything if you write it well enough".

The latter I am somewhat proud to say, I can lay claim to. I spent quite a few posts and some chat time spreading that particular phrase, as well as creating characters that spit convention in the face and writing rants in the interest said phrase.

So it pains me to sometimes see it mentioned without seeming regard for what it could mean. On occasion, you see posts asking if a certain power could be used in a certain way, and someone would reply with "you can get away with anything if you write it well enough". However, with no further explaination. How well is "well enough"? Sometimes it seems like the phrase has become just a license for "freebies".

So allow me to expand and explain.

You can get away with anything if you write it well enough, within reason.

Right away, let me explain "within reason". The thing is, what I meant originally was that you can get away with anything if you could offer a reasonable explaination as to why what you're trying to do is plausible. And that is still the meaning. "Well enough" would denote giving a reasonable or logical explaination of why the power can be used in such a way, within the confines of the original power. Making something static into something dynamic.

Powers don't mean anything, writing is everything
Now this one I can't claim too much by way of positive credit for. I helped spread this during the whole Guardians/Elitism fiasco, and I did and do believe in it. But back then, it was something I spouted without even all that much concern as to what it implied. However, one of it's possible meanings, has been most adequately put forth by Phil and Chris Moore. It is this interpretation that I hold most highly.

Essentially, they said that the character was the canvas. The powers, the paint. Writing, brush. It is up to the creator/artist to put paint to canvas with brush, and create not a painting, but art. Anybody can use a brush and put paint to canvas, but it is how you apply the brush and yes, paint, that you can breed art. Of course, art is sujective, so a blank canvas can be just as much art as something fully painted on. But in general, most of us will agree on what is (broadly) considered art, and sadly, most paintings are just that, paintings.

It's all quite subjetive. In the end, for the most part, it's a matter of not knowing what is art, but knowing what you like. Powers have their place, but how important they are all depends. Of course, you still have to use the brush to apply the paint. Although yes, you COULD just splash it on the canvas, but in general, we use the brush. In any case, there are always exceptions, which contrary to the old adage, does not always denote the rule. Though there are always exceptions.

You know, I could probably expand on this whole painting thing, but best not. At least, not for now.

To sum up, it's hard to define "better" or even just plain "good" writing. You like what you like, powers aren't everything, but they aren't nothing either. To tell the truth, I personally find it highly odious when someone claims to have better writing than the other. Even if I do find the other to be of a "lower quality". I think of it as "personally liking the other less".

While I'm somewhat still on-topic, here's another phrase that's been out of use, but one I could lay claim and credit for, "Rules are not to be broken, but may be reshaped". Although the old version of that was something along the lines of "Rules are for being destroyed and put back together however we like" and "Rules only apply to the peasants, not us gods". Mind you, nowhere in any version does it say "Rules are to be bent".

I'll leave the above to be construed however you, dear readers, wish to do so. But I would say it's quite similar to that whole "create not a painting but art"-thing.

SIoK
Otherwise known as the Supreme Irony of Khazan. This isn't really something for me to rant, Graves was the one to coin it, long before I came onto the site. I have a passing understanding of it based on a certain old post thread that can be found enshrined on the site somewhere, but I'm quite sure that it was not (purely) meant as a scapegoat for defeat.

"SIoK has struck again!" or "I lost because of SIoK". What do these mean? Is the creator saying he or she lost despite your character being "better"? Define "better". "Better written"? Define how one work is superior to the other. Or that the creator lost purely by luck? Some cosmic fluke that made the majority of voters who were voting randomly to click the radio button against said SIoK struck creator's character?

Essentially, this is an actual rant. I'm fairly shaking my head in disgust when SIoK becomes said scapegoat for defeat. Even if that is indeed its meaning, let us not use it as such, for such thinking is a deterrent to self improvement in my view. You can't choose to strengthen your weaknesses if you refuse to acknowledge even having weaknesses.

Oh my...
I fear this has gotten a bit out of hand in terms of length, so I shall have to cut this short. I hope it hasn't been too bad, just a grouchy old FPLer speak.

warning: pompous rant