Lheticus' interesting narrative ideas

[Lheticus]

Imagine a world where there are recognized...metaphysical boundaries, known as Walls. The First Wall would be the boundary between dreams and the world of the waking. The Second Wall is the boundary between life and death. The Third Wall, between mortals and deities. As far as most or all would know, those are the only walls--except for whispers of legends of a Fourth Wall--the outer boundary of all Reality. It sounds pretty cool to me...but I dunno what I'd do with it. Ah well, just wanted to get this out there.

Latest idea:

It's time to add a new idea, and since I can't double post I'm having to do it like this. The idea came to me when I was rereading that weapon myths article on Cracked.com, the bit about no amount of money being able to keep a machine gun barrel cool through 600 rounds a minute.

So, my idea is for a fantastic, science fiction metal, or perhaps a fictional element, that doesn't take on heat--some strange property of the molecules and/or the molecular structure means it is impossible for said molecules to vibrate at a certain speed, and thus the metal literally cannot be heated beyond a certain point. Obviously there's room for expansion with this one.

[Lord Loss]

Postmodern writers, amongst others, frequently play with the fourth wall. I don't think I've seen anything as directly fourth-wall directed as what you're suggesting, but a lot of writers of theater and fiction, especially in recent years, have incorporated strong elements of fourth-wall-breaking or metafictional concerns within their works. For some reason I'm drawing a blank as to actual examples, which is strange because I'm sure I've read some fiction that plays around with such ideas.

[Lethologica]

Interesting idea to incorporate metafiction so deeply in the setting's metaphysics.

Postmodern writers, amongst others, frequently play with the fourth wall. I don't think I've seen anything as directly fourth-wall directed as what you're suggesting, but a lot of writers of theater and fiction, especially in recent years, have incorporated strong elements of fourth-wall-breaking or metafictional concerns within their works. For some reason I'm drawing a blank as to actual examples, which is strange because I'm sure I've read some fiction that plays around with such ideas.

The comic this website is based around, for starters. There's also a body of literature that goes in the opposite direction, having the author reach through the fourth wall to be part of his story, such as Stephen King's The Dark Tower series, or perhaps Six Characters In Search Of An Author.

[Lord Loss]

The comic this website is based around, for starters.

I remembered that soon after posting

There's also a body of literature that goes in the opposite direction, having the author reach through the fourth wall to be part of his story, such as Stephen King's The Dark Tower series, or perhaps Six Characters In Search Of An Author.

Huh, I've read the first two Dark Tower novels, but never finished it because for the most part I'm not a fan of King's writing style. I loved The Gunslinger, wasn't much keen on its sequel. I'll perhaps give them another shot. I've got the third and perhaps the fourth lying around somewhere.

[Lethologica]

Huh, I've read the first two Dark Tower novels, but never finished it because for the most part I'm not a fan of King's writing style. I loved The Gunslinger, wasn't much keen on its sequel. I'll perhaps give them another shot. I've got the third and perhaps the fourth lying around somewhere.

Don't take my reference as recommendation--I've never read a King novel (I read part of On Writing before I had to give it back to the library), so I can't say anything one way or the other. I learned about Dark Tower from Wikipedia and TVTropes.

[Trevortni]

Don't take my reference as recommendation--I've never read a King novel (I read part of On Writing before I had to give it back to the library), so I can't say anything one way or the other. I learned about Dark Tower from Wikipedia and TVTropes.

I for one completed On Writing, so I guess that means I've read more Stephen King than you.

Imagine a world where there are recognized...metaphysical boundaries, known as Walls. The First Wall would be the boundary between dreams and the world of the waking. The Second Wall is the boundary between life and death. The Third Wall, between mortals and deities. As far as most or all would know, those are the only walls--except for whispers of legends of a Fourth Wall--the outer boundary of all Reality. It sounds pretty cool to me...but I dunno what I'd do with it. Ah well, just wanted to get this out there.

I once started writing a story about a guy who can go into fiction, then gradually comes to the realization that he's a fictional character himself. I can go into more detail if you're interested. If I can remember the details anyway.

[Ravens_cry]

Have you read 1/0 by Tailsteak?
Its use of the fourth wall is much like how you describe.

[Lethologica]

Have you read 1/0 by Tailsteak?
Its use of the fourth wall is much like how you describe.

Haha there is no fourth wall in that comic what are you talking about

(I second the recommendation, 1/0 is pretty great.)

[Lheticus]

All right...that last one was just something I wanted to throw out there, but for this one, I'd like some more critical feedback. I have a sort of idea for a setting with a judicial system similar to that of the Phoenix Wright series. I've created several rules for the system, and while there are many similarities, there are also differences, and the primary purpose of these rules is to highlight those differences. The biggest thing I'm looking for is if I've overlooked anything in making these rules.

1. Crime scenes will be investigated by three parties: The official Patroller team, led by the presiding detective, the Interrogator and his/her team, and the Defensor and his/her team (if applicable.)

The Interrogator and Defensor are basically the society's equivalent of the prosecutor and defense attorney. The Patroller team is the police force led by a detective. In other words, in this setting the Interrogation Office and the police force are considered totally separate entities, albeit both under government control, and thus the Interrogation Office's investigation and the Patrol's investigation are not one and the same.

2. In an investigation, the Patroller team has priority selection of investigation locations. The Defensor and Interrogator teams are strictly barred from interfering with the Patroller investigation.

This is more of a similarity than a difference--the police always investigate first in the setting, just as in Phoenix Wright's world.

3. The Defensor and Interrogator teams must investigate for evidence in tandem. Pretrial questioning of witnesses may be carried out in tandem or independently. The Patroller team does not participate in pretrial questioning.

Here we have one of the biggest differences. This measure is designed so that neither side can withhold information from the other. In-story, I plan to make this a recently instigated procedural reform.

4. All evidence found and all potential witnesses the Defensor and Interrogator intend to call must be submitted to the Judiciary prior to trial. Evidence failed to be submitted is inadmissible without exception.

Both a similarity AND a difference--all evidence must be approved, but the prosecuting side doesn't control such approval. The loophole about evidence not submitted prior being required to be relevant to the case on trial doesn't exist, a bit of a trade off there. However, the biggest change is witnesses--requests to call witness are not first made in trial. Rather, a list of all potential witnesses is submitted, and any of them or none of them can be called by the side that submitted them.

5. Subpoenaing unlisted witnesses is permitted if it can be reasonably assumed their testimony will be relevant to the case reviewed.

And this is where that aforementioned loophole went--if it wasn't known before that a person had anything to do with the case, this allows them to be called anyway.

6. Witnesses for the Interrogator will be cross examined by the Defensor. Witnesses for the Defensor will be cross examined by the Interrogator. Either the Defensor or Interrogator may request to call a defendant as a witness, but the Defensor and Judicer must both consent to this.

This never came up in Phoenix Wright's games because he never called any witnesses. However, in the hypothetical narrative I would plan to have the Defensor call a witness in at least one case.

Btw, Judicer = Judge and Judiciary = the court system. Might have said that sooner, sorry!

7. At no time during trial will the Interrogator or Defensor provide support in rhetoric, theory, or presentations of evidence to the opposing party's position.

And finally we come to my golden Chekhov's plot point. This rule is going to come up a LOT--and it will make it very difficult to find the truth a few times.

8. During evidence submission, it is permitted to submit evidence not found on-scene (past records, test data, etc) during the procuration process and prior to actually obtaining said evidence.

Another Chekhov's Rule, but I probably won't use this one as much as the last. It's basically to allow at least some flexibility in submission deadlines to compensate for the zero-tolerance for unsubmitted evidence rule.

One last one I just thought of:

9. Upon a Defensor and Interrogator being selected, the trial will commence after two full days are given for investigation.

This is badly needed because there needs to be a chance for the Defensor and Interrogator to sweep the area the Patrol has, and vice versa. Bet Phoenix himself would wish he had this rule!

And that's what I have so far. Gonna quote this at the top post, for newcomers to the thread.

[Lethologica]

All right...that last one was just something I wanted to throw out there, but for this one, I'd like some more critical feedback. I have a sort of idea for a setting with a judicial system similar to that of the Phoenix Wright series. I've created several rules for the system, and while there are many similarities, there are also differences, and the primary purpose of these rules is to highlight those differences. The biggest thing I'm looking for is if I've overlooked anything in making these rules.

1. Crime scenes will be investigated by three parties: The official Patroller team, led by the presiding detective, the Interrogator and his/her team, and the Defensor and his/her team (if applicable.)

2. In an investigation, the Patroller team has priority selection of investigation locations. The Defensor and Interrogator teams are strictly barred from interfering with the Patroller investigation.

So far, so good.

3. The Defensor and Interrogator teams must investigate for evidence in tandem. Pretrial questioning of witnesses may be carried out in tandem or independently. The Patroller team does not participate in pretrial questioning.

Here we have one of the biggest differences. This measure is designed so that neither side can withhold information from the other. In-story, I plan to make this a recently instigated procedural reform.

Who decides whether a given questioning is in tandem or independent? If any questioning is carried out independently, will that not potentially produce information that could be withheld from the other side? How is this handled?

Also, when is someone charged, who charges them, and what level of evidence is required to sustain a charge?

4. All evidence found and all potential witnesses the Defensor and Interrogator intend to call must be submitted to the Judiciary prior to trial. Evidence failed to be submitted is inadmissible without exception.

Both a similarity AND a difference--all evidence must be approved, but the prosecuting side doesn't control such approval. The loophole about evidence not submitted prior being required to be relevant to the case on trial doesn't exist, a bit of a trade off there. However, the biggest change is witnesses--requests to call witness are not first made in trial. Rather, a list of all potential witnesses is submitted, and any of them or none of them can be called by the side that submitted them.

5. Subpoenaing unlisted witnesses is permitted if it can be reasonably assumed their testimony will be relevant to the case reviewed.

And this is where that aforementioned loophole went--if it wasn't known before that a person had anything to do with the case, this allows them to be called anyway.

What prevents both sides from submitting no witnesses and subpoenaing every witness, in order to prevent the other side from knowing in advance who will be called? What happens if an unlisted witness' testimony is associated with evidence that wasn't previously submitted?

6. Witnesses for the Interrogator will be cross examined by the Defensor. Witnesses for the Defensor will be cross examined by the Interrogator. Either the Defensor or Interrogator may request to call a defendant as a witness, but the Defensor and Judicer must both consent to this.

7. At no time during trial will the Interrogator or Defensor provide support in rhetoric, theory, or presentations of evidence to the opposing party's position.

Cool.

And finally we come to my golden Chekhov's plot point. This rule is going to come up a LOT--and it will make it very difficult to find the truth a few times.

8. During evidence submission, it is permitted to submit evidence not found on-scene (past records, test data, etc) during the procuration process and prior to actually obtaining said evidence.

Another Chekhov's Rule, but I probably won't use this one as much as the last. It's basically to allow at least some flexibility in submission deadlines to compensate for the zero-tolerance for unsubmitted evidence rule.

How long can the lawyers make the court wait for evidence to be obtained?

One last one I just thought of:

9. Upon a Defensor and Interrogator being selected, the trial will commence after two full days are given for investigation.

This is badly needed because there needs to be a chance for the Defensor and Interrogator to sweep the area the Patrol has, and vice versa. Bet Phoenix himself would wish he had this rule!

Is two days enough? I imagine the practical need for delay would vary significantly with each investigation. Also, what if Patrol's investigation relied on time-sensitive evidence?

[Lheticus]

So far, so good.

Who decides whether a given questioning is in tandem or independent? If any questioning is carried out independently, will that not potentially produce information that could be withheld from the other side? How is this handled?

The questioning parties themselves decide--and if one side is concerned that pretrial questioning will lead to what you state, they have the right to listen in on the questioning of the other side even if they have no questions themselves.

Also, when is someone charged, who charges them, and what level of evidence is required to sustain a charge?

This never really seemed to come up in the Phoenix Wright stuff, so I wasn't going to go into it directly, at least the "level of evidence" thing. The Patrol charges criminals.

What prevents both sides from submitting no witnesses and subpoenaing every witness, in order to prevent the other side from knowing in advance who will be called? What happens if an unlisted witness' testimony is associated with evidence that wasn't previously submitted?

An emergency subpoena can only occur if brand new, unexpected information is extrapolated during trial that indicates their involvement where there is not enough to reasonably suspect they were involved before. If an Interrogator or Defensor withholds a witness that it is deemed could have been reasonably submitted prior to trial, they are denied the right to question that witness.

How long can the lawyers make the court wait for evidence to be obtained?

Good catch--evidence must be submitted by a certain time I've yet to specifically determine the day before trial, but must be obtained by the time of trial as well in order to be valid under this rule.

Is two days enough? I imagine the practical need for delay would vary significantly with each investigation. Also, what if Patrol's investigation relied on time-sensitive evidence?

Remember, this is based on the Phoenix Wright world court system, and he's literally never had more than one day for investigation before the trial starts. Law enforcement there has never seemed to need any longer either. The only reason my setting extends this to two days is so that the court teams can investigate the places the Patrol did and vice-versa. As for if it's "enough" time...that concern is irrelevant just as it is in the Phoenix Wright world.

EDIT: It's time to add a new idea, and since I can't double post I'm having to do it like this. The idea came to me when I was rereading that weapon myths article on Cracked.com, the bit about no amount of money being able to keep a machine gun barrel cool through 600 rounds a minute.

So, my idea is for a fantastic, science fiction metal, or perhaps a fictional element, that doesn't take on heat--some strange property of the molecules and/or the molecular structure means it is impossible for said molecules to vibrate at a certain speed, and thus the metal literally cannot be heated beyond a certain point. Obviously there's room for expansion with this one.