7854129 Umm... I don't know man, I think maybe you should just back off. You're making me nervous. Lets just agree on these details and walk away, alright?
"If." A period at the end as well, since there's follow up speaker description.
“I know she doosn’t want any of that.”
"Doesn't."
Overall this was very good, and I love the idea and presentation. Twilight getting accosted by a friendly tentacle plant? Well, while not my normal cup of tea, you write it well enough to keep my interest.
It gets a little dry though.
When the tentacle finally pushed all the way in and sandwiched her sensitive flesh between it and the one in her pussy, she gave a muffled scream and convulsed in bliss as she submitted to another orgasm.
I think what it is, is that when the action gets going, there's a point where things are concise but descriptive, active and a bit "snappy." Generally a good way to show exciting action is to make your sentences shorter so things are literally read faster. Breaking up some of the longer ones may help at the climaxes.
The other part is that more direct language can make sentences shorter, while also putting the character and action closer together. Instead of things like "she gave a muffled scream," you can swap it to "she muffled her scream" (not the best example, but "giving a scream" instead of simply "screaming" is less snappy). Indirect language isn't wrong, but this kind of distinction can add more excitement to those key moments.
Twilight Sparkle has no lab safety whatsoever. If she was dealing with a plant that releases large quantities of gas, she should have been wearing safety goggles. Besides that, her instinct should not have been to check whether the gas is harmful or not, but rather to rush towards the eyewash sink which this lab should've been equipped with. When there's stuff in your eyes, you disannul it ASAP.
Moreover she didn't do even that much with the liquid in her mouth. She decided to swallow a foreign agent because it tasted good. That's a dumb decision. Chloropicrin, for example, supposedly tastes very sweet, but that is a chemical you would never want to consume under any circumstances. This plant clearly overpowers her rationality with her libido, but the text doesn't indicate there was a direct correlation between her arousal and her decision to arbitrarily consume that exotic goo the first time.
Wait... how am i reading this on January 8th 2017... when it says it was posted on January 9th 2017..?
7853927 Time zones. And it's telling me it was posted the 7th.
7853935 Ah. Didn't think about that.
Should one be able to deduce that the author is perhaps...
70% water, has two eyes, enjoys MLP, and has the writing skills necessary to make literature about said television series?
7854129
Umm... I don't know man, I think maybe you should just back off. You're making me nervous. Lets just agree on these details and walk away, alright?
7854151 you've given me a mystery my dear author. Your nervousness betrays you and I have narrowed you down to 1 in approximately 234967 people.
7854151
7854196
shit man i think he's onto you hide
Awfully reminiscent of Kaidan's work.
Sex-greedy Twilight is the best
7854196
7854248
Packing my bailout bag right now!
7854980 perhaps we shall go to a mental facility to discuss what's on your mind... mine to...
Well, it certainly is quite the nice idea. I'm rather curious to see where this will go!
"Twilight's"
"If." A period at the end as well, since there's follow up speaker description.
"Doesn't."
Overall this was very good, and I love the idea and presentation. Twilight getting accosted by a friendly tentacle plant? Well, while not my normal cup of tea, you write it well enough to keep my interest.
It gets a little dry though.
I think what it is, is that when the action gets going, there's a point where things are concise but descriptive, active and a bit "snappy." Generally a good way to show exciting action is to make your sentences shorter so things are literally read faster. Breaking up some of the longer ones may help at the climaxes.
The other part is that more direct language can make sentences shorter, while also putting the character and action closer together. Instead of things like "she gave a muffled scream," you can swap it to "she muffled her scream" (not the best example, but "giving a scream" instead of simply "screaming" is less snappy). Indirect language isn't wrong, but this kind of distinction can add more excitement to those key moments.
> took on it’s aroma.
its*
Twilight Sparkle has no lab safety whatsoever. If she was dealing with a plant that releases large quantities of gas, she should have been wearing safety goggles. Besides that, her instinct should not have been to check whether the gas is harmful or not, but rather to rush towards the eyewash sink which this lab should've been equipped with. When there's stuff in your eyes, you disannul it ASAP.
Moreover she didn't do even that much with the liquid in her mouth. She decided to swallow a foreign agent because it tasted good. That's a dumb decision. Chloropicrin, for example, supposedly tastes very sweet, but that is a chemical you would never want to consume under any circumstances. This plant clearly overpowers her rationality with her libido, but the text doesn't indicate there was a direct correlation between her arousal and her decision to arbitrarily consume that exotic goo the first time.
Oh, but this was very sexy!
8005555
Damn, nice thinking
Didn't knew that (Cholropicrin), I guess you learn something new everyday right? Thx for the class ;)
You misspelled "masturbation" several times in the story.