Not tagging this or anything because this is just a random little thing and I'm bored of the AoS drama now. Unless something significant happens -- which, honestly, I don't think it will at this point -- I probably won't use this blog much anymore.
But I recently got thinking about AoS again while I was reading This Kingdom Will Not Kill Me by Ilona Andrews. Why was I think about AoS while reading a far better book that had been through a whole drafting and editing process by someone (someone's) who have been in the industry for years?
Because of all the times we were told that Gardian (jfc it's hard to type Gardian after months of not typing it that way) is Rieka's special interest.
This Kingdom Will Not Kill me is a portal fantasy story, where the FMC is transported into the world of her favourite book series -- a series she knows everything about.
So, I guess what I'm trying to say is, if you want to see the whole 'my character info-dumps because the world is her special interest' done right and not just used as a lazy excuse for bad writing, I suggest checking it out.
Actually... while I'm here, I'm tempted to just start posting about books that are better than AoS, though that does feel a little mean spirited...
I've tried to mostly stay out of the *drama* aspect of things and focus on the writing and the business aspect of WoG, which is why I've taken this particular screenshot.
Initially, I thought they'd decided to just abandon the patreon and pretend it didn't exist anymore. (Free money is free money, right?) But when you have several comments pointing out the potential illegality of your refund strategy and this the comment you decide to respond to? Yikes.
Full disclosure, I don't think it's Elrose's job to deal with it. I think she should have distanced herself and left Milo with the mess he created, but this just makes it worse. It's been infuriating to watch, time and time again, the 'team' choosing to defend themselves and Milo over addressing legitimate issues.
In the very least a blanket 'we understand your concerns and are doing our best to resolve the situation' response would at least make it look like you're not just ignoring people.
And the real issue? It's the fact that no one has explained why refunds are being dealt with the way that they are outside of the WoG website. Yes, I imagine a good chunk of the money is gone, but there's also the fact that most of the pre-orders for the paperback first/second edition were taken well over six months ago, and marked as fulfilled when the bookmark was sent out. Milo is only capable of doing manual refunds now, because so long has passed and it's well beyond TikToks 60 day refund timeframe, hence needing order details.
This isn't me saying I agree with anything he's done (I really really don't, the whole thing has been a shitshow), but I'm baffled that that information was not included anywhere but on the WoG website, the last place people will look since most orders come from TikTok. The mixed messaging between platforms is stupid and indicative of the issues they've had since the start of the enterprise, and shows no one knows what they're doing. These announcements shouldn't be yet more woe is me dreck. These post should not be about Milo or his feelings -- though I'm sure he's feeling bad right now, and I empathise with that to a degree -- these post should be about the people who are out of pocket.
I know to some it's just drama, but in this day and age, with everything going on in the world? That $20-50 people spent on a book they never received could make the world of difference. And even if it had only been $5, money is money and people shouldn't suffer because they made the decision to support an indie author.
Not really related to AoS or any of that drama but...
I literally just finished reading The Devils by Joe Abercrombie and I can't recommend it enough to anyone who enjoys fantasy. It's my first 5 star read of the year.
This is pretty minor in the grand scheme of things but looking at AoS, I don't think Milo actually knows much about astrology. Like, he knows the basics- their names and the personality traits they're associated with- but as for the mythology and folklore surrounding them? There's not even a passing mention of that. And it stands out to me bc the Scorpius constellation is associated with death- it's the scorpion that killed Orion and it peaks in the darkest days of autumn- so if you're gonna have the Scorpios be an oppressed class, it feels like a no-brainer to use that. Like, they're considered bringers of death and thus are granted less rights and treated with suspicion by the other signs.
Regardless of your feelings towards astrology, Milo marketed this book as being based around the zodiac signs when really, it's just a generic magic system with no real connection to the zodiac beyond the name.
Honestly, astrology is not really my thing, but I do agree. And, ultimately I think relying on the zodiac idea is a massive part of the problem because, again, it was trying to do too much in terms of the world-building. At least, the way Milo tried to do it. If the focus had been on 3 signs in one Union, not straying into other territories? That could have worked, instead we got info-dumped so much about things that didn't matter (4 unions, 12 signs, then all the additional archpower crap on top)-- like why were we supposed to care that Sagittarius were universally disliked when the only Sag character (that I recall) was a guy who's lines could have been removed and his actions could have been a few sentences?
There's also the fact that they weren't even grouped by element -- and element is usually the way zodiac signs are broken up. And there's rising signs and suns and moons (and houses? or whatever) -- and considering Milo briefly mentioned the sun and moon being 'Gods' they don't seem to factor into people's signs at all.
And then I just have an issue with the set up of the whole thing. The premise that Gardian is some new landmass that people flocked to from... well, we don't even know where. All over, I guess? None of them spoke the same languages, and new languages developed over time (which, is something else I have feelings about), but they just all sat down and decided that the western zodiac was the way to go? Why? At that point why not just come up with a new 'zodiac'?
Why, if Gardian is future earth did the western zodiac carry through but the rest of human history is entirely forgotten? And, bear in mind, Rieka is supposed to be biracial with Asian and white heritage (though this only ever came out in the art work and never in the actual book) so why are we using the western zodiac? (Because Milo is white, I guess?)
I'm not saying the zodiac thing couldn't work but, again, the internal logic of the choice and the way its presented is so frustrating. Doing zodiacs as elemental would have been an easy solve, but I feel like Milo didn't want the AtLA comparisons.
But, yeah, like I said, astrology isn't my thing, but to just ignore the basics of it even though it's a core part of the story was a wild choice to make. It honestly feels like he just picked a random thing to separate characters into factions with.
I think a key element of worldbuilding that a lot of people fail to take into account is the necessity of seeking other perspectives. You created the world, so you know all about it, right? Wrong! There are questions that are important to the suspension of disbelief that you will never have considered!
You need to seek other perspectives, you need to think outside the box, you need to accept questions and really think about them. You don't need to go too deep, generally, but some things you consider perfectly understandable even from a surface level will look like huge plot holes to others. No amount of worldbuilding will be enough for everyone, but worldbuilding strictly from your own perspective is a recipe for disaster if you ever intend to share your work with a wider audience.
If you have issues with rejection sensitivity, questions can feel like criticism, particularly when it's something you never thought of yourself. It can make you feel stupid—you invented this world, why didn't you ever figure that out? This is pretty common in neurodivergent folks, and it's something you just gotta work through via exposure.
If you're in early stages and aren't in a place to put your work out there for scrutiny from other people—whether that's because you struggle as described or just because you don't have anyone your trust to treat your work with respect—it actually isn't entirely necessary to take questions from other people. There are plenty of worldbuilding questionnaires and primers out there that you can go through, some of which are quite comprehensive. Keep in mind, though, that filling out a massive worldbuilding questionnaire wherein 90 percent of the questions aren't actually relevant to the story being told won't help you avoid unbridgeable gaps later in the creative process.
You need to answer questions that:
Matter to the setting;
Matter to the storyline;
Help to establish limits for you within the narrative.
Anything beyond that can be fun, but focusing on minute details that don't mean anything to the story will bog down your creative process and can cause you to stall out and hit walls. You are never going to be able to create a world as rich and comprehensive as the one in which we live. You cannot answer every question. All the most educated, experienced, intelligent people on the planet combined don't know everything about the real world, you can't expect for your single human brain to know everything about the fictional reality it created.
Just try not to make "interpersonal relationships—romantic, platonic, and familial—are forbidden among the ruling class" the single most important aspect of your societal setting and then crash out when readers ask how the hell the ruling class manages to reproduce.
I think there's a misconception when it comes to writing and world-building that if you don't have every little detail figured out before you start that you've somehow failed. This isn't true. I've seen a lot of good writers falter because they've been too swept up in world-building to realise that the world and the characters are a vehicle to tell a story and they are in the driving seat.
When your world-building becomes too detailed, too ironclad, it boxes you in, meaning you can't make changes without burning the whole thing down or you have to completely break the rules that you put in place. I had to remove a whole character/kingdom from a story I'm working on because it detracted too much and complicated the world beyond what I needed for the story. It's not nice to cut things out, but it's often necessary (also, if I'm honest, I didn't want anyone to think it was a Shadow Daddy character...)
Your world has to be fluid, not rigid. You need to be able to tell the story that you want to tell, before you go back and shore up the foundations -- this is why we do rounds of editing. This is why we do developmental editing. The story/world/characters develop with each round.
I won't say that you shouldn't inhabit the world your building -- I understand that that isn't possible for some -- but if you want to create something that works for someone other than you, you need to be able to step back from it, and look at it objectively. In your head, I'm sure you can find a million reasons why your main character is the most special person in the world who's also oppressed and part of a hated group but easily makes friends with every single person. But if you want to sell it to others, you need to take a step back and understand the reader isn't in your head.
Personally, when I write, I let the world grow with the story. I let the characters grow with the story. Without a story, you just have a world and, unless you're making an MMO, no one is going to give a shit.
Also as an aside, I'm going to put it out there, I actually hate character sheets. I think they're an utter waste of time (your milage may vary). Especially in this scammy 'reply writer to the video and I'll send you the character sheets that will help you finish your novel' economy on TikTok. Start with the basics and let things breathe, let things evolve naturally. Don't waste time trying to decide what your character's favourite food is because it'll probably never come up. Things like past, personality, and motivation are really all that matters (in my opinion).
I think the first, and maybe biggest crime of AoS, is that it didn't set up Rieka's initial motivation beyond she's a Scorpio, the code is bad, and she just happened to find an arch.
Focus on the plot, then build a world that supports it. Ask questions as you go along, like 'okay, Scorpio's are hated, why is this guy being nice to Rieka?' If you can justify that niceness, then go for it, if you can't then don't.
And, yes, you should talk to other people. People who will offer an honest opinion.
[Note: I started writing this a couple of months ago, then I got bored/sick of the situation. I think a lot of these issues could have been avoided by picking up a few books and researching how dystopian governments retain power. This isn't entirely finished, it's barely spell-checked, but I want it out of my drafts. This is 2.6k words that can be summed up as; it doesn't work, chat.]
I'm not interested in fixing the book. It's not my story and I don't feel it's my place. So, this is more just pointing out why, in principle, it doesn't work — and, frankly, I don't believe it can be fixed.
Again, I've read the book cover to cover. I've analysed the text, insofar as that is possible. I'm looking at what is on the page and not what the author has vaguely expressed as intention outside of the book. Every reference to the book will be in regards to the first edition, because you can't take back a book that people have already read. (Honestly, as much as I wanted Milo to fix things at the very start, the more I think about it, the more I think we shouldn't normalise do-overs once money has been exchanged, especially when some people never even got the book.)
I'm going to quote some parts of the book and... look, if I start pointing out the glaring issues in syntax, structure, and word use, we'll be here all day. (Yes, that's mean but again, money exchanged hands for this.)
The Scorpio Issue
Scorpio are the ruling class. They are the oppressors and the oppressed. This isn't something that's impossible to pull off — though it is something that can come across as a bit icky in certain situations — 1984, Fahrenheit 451, The Will of the Many, the movie Equilibrium all show that it can work. You can create a system where the oppressed engage in, and become an integral part of the oppression.
The difference in those settings is that the oppression is universal.
Now, what do we know about Scorpio's? If we want to go with easy statistics, they're about 8.3% of the population. Only, they're not. The book states;
'I looked my enemy in the eyes: the same person who’d given me a torturous childhood, the same person responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, the same person who knew that it wasn’t justifiable.'
This is in reference to the current Scorpio Arctura. Not the whole system, but a single person in a single lifetime. Hundreds of thousands of deaths — I don't know, maybe it's hyperbole, but given that Gardian's history is Rieka's special interest, you'd think she'd have a handle on the figures. (Also why use a single word like 'countless' or 'innumerable' when you can throw out a massive number, right?) Regardless of actual figures, the Scorpio's are actively lowering their own numbers. We see that in the book.
Then there's the planning/eugenics of it all. People who aren't Scorpio would try to avoid having Scorpio kids — blah blah blah, we've had that conversation before. It's not really brought up in a meaningful way in the book except for a throw away line, so I won't waste time on it.
But, okay, it's not unheard of that a strong minority could take control, in fact, in the broadest strokes most dystopias rely on oppression being a downward force through society, from the few to the many (again, James Islington's Hierarchy books use pyramids as an excellent metaphor for oppression and societal control or, for a more YA example, the Capitol in the Hunger Games controlling the districts). But there needs to be an internal logic, some clear way that the minority retains control. At least in Equilibrium they forced everyone to take drugs to suppress emotions — or, in Level 16 they're forced to take sedatives to keep them compliant.
That said, the Scorpio power is shapeshifting, so how they gained power over anyone is another massive plot hole — and, no, what Rieka does with her necklace/sword, is not shapeshifting, in my opinion, and I have a whole similar Antman level issue with that. Shapeshifting implies you use what's there to create something different — you shift its shape into something else. A sword made from a tiny scrap of metal would be paper thin at best, otherwise you're conjuring something from nothing. (Maybe it's Merzost from Shadow and Bone, I don't know...)
Anyway...
Who does the Scorpio Code benefit?
Not the Scorpios. It doesn't keep them in line, doesn't cause any net benefit to their society, and all it really does is diminish their numbers. (Yes, before anyone brings it up, I have the same issue with the parapet in Fourth Wing — if you're in desperate need of soldiers and dragon riders, why are you letting so many potential recruits die?). And, beyond that, how does it help the big bad, Blaine? Again, it doesn't — or, if it does, the books doesn't show it.
More importantly, if the Scorpios are in charge, why are they oppressing themselves? And why would Scorpios go along with it when 92% of the population don't have to? Surely the Code would work better if it was enforced against everyone? Or even everyone who isn't a Scorpio — if Scorpio's experience emotion differently (which is vaguely hinted at in the brief moment that Chase's sign is switched) why would they not force that on others?
Though, I say go along with very loosely since no one actually follows the Code behind closed doors, and the only person who seems to have any difficulty pretending to follow it in public is Rieka (which, yes, I know is supposed to represent her struggling to mask in terms of her neurodivergence, which I don't have an issue with in and of itself. In a wider sense, that actually would have been a great story if the world building and reasoning weren't so wishywashy and broken).
Blaine has fabricated and enacted a law underneath the title of “the Scorpio Code.” The Scorpio Code contains three tenets: never show emotion, never befriend, and never fall in love. Blaine claims to have located the scripture concealed within the Scorpio Archive. His status as an adjunct to the Scorpio Stellarium allows him to establish validity in the “discovery” of this “holy oath.” Following Blaine’s attribution of the lack of the Code to the imbalance of Zodiac Turners, the majority of Scorpio’s population has accepted the Code. This law strips the right of choice from Scorpio Individuals and thus encourages them to join the Stellarium. Despite losing the war, the Scorpio Stellarium will maintain their governmental influence and dictation of the economy.
(I know I said I wouldn't criticise the text but... fuck me.)
We're told that the lie of the Scorpio Code was to put Scorpio in power but also to control the imbalance created by Zodiac Turners? Realistically, how is a group who willingly oppress and slaughter their own, retaining that power? How does the Scorpio Code help control other factions/signs? It doesn't. Sure, it helps control the small Scorpio population — only, according the text, it doesn't even do that. Again, no one actually follows the Code.
There's no sense of social hierarchy that puts Scorpio in charge and there's no reason for any other faction to put up with them. Especially if Scorpio lost the war.
“Have you ever felt anger like that?” Chase asked. “Or let it release?”
“Not that I can recall.”
“Well, there’s part one of your answer. The Scorpio Code might’ve halted you from catching it earlier, if it’s an emotion-based magic, and that’s what it sounds like to me."
First off, you'll never convince me that Chase is anything more than a sentient McGuffin — there to fill in the blanks as if they're the most obvious thing in the world. He brings nothing to the story that a first aid kit couldn't have handled.
The book offers the idea that Rieka could have 'discovered' (memory wipe notwithstanding) her Zodiac Turning if she hadn't been suppressing her anger because of the Code (though we've seen time and time again, that she hasn't been following the Code). This implies that there's more Zodiac Turners or that there is a potential for more (the book says there's 6 but doesn't explain why or how there's only 6 or how they know that for a fact. I know why, it's so the MCs can be super special). Why would they want that fact hidden? Arguably, Zodiac Turning is the most powerful power, so why not make use of it? If everyone is a Scorpio then Scorpio power is absolute.
How the fuck did Scorpio lose the war when they had Zodiac Turners on their side?
I know there's the line about not wanting another war and that whole 'myth' that the Zodiac turners were 'evil' but, again, lets be realistic here; Zodiac Turning is so overpowered that nothing else would really pose a threat. Oh, you can shapeshift into a Dragon? Well, you can't anymore, now you're an ink mage. As much as I hate to compare anything to ACoTaR (fuck SJM), it's the Rhysand problem all over again. Rieka/Zodiac Turners are too OP to tell a decent story with any stakes.
But, okay let's suspend disbelief, Zodiac Turning = bad. Why let Rieka live? In fact, why not kill her at birth when she's born with the hetrochromia that basically outs her as a Zodiac turner? Why let her live after numerous breaches of the Code?
I'm going to guess that Blaine has been 'protecting' her and that she has some super secret destiny that's supposed to explain away all of these inconsistencies — though, honestly, that raises more questions about why anyone would follow Blaine/the Code if they understood it was all lies. But then... oh wow, it gets gross when you think about it. If the purpose was for Rieka to be a pawn in Blaine's plans, that would mean he actively went out of his way to have a Scorpio child, which in context of things is horrifying (it could work, but not in a YA book).
Ultimately, if you want a small faction to have any degree of control, you need them to have a valid reason to have that power in the first place. I guess the argument here is that there were supposed to be more books, and in some cases saving some important details until the second book can work (again, James Islington's Hierarchy books — honestly, just go read them), but in order for the reader to buy into the world some sense of internal logic needs to be established early on to stop niggling questions.
Also, if you're going to kill a character for being in a gay relationship but give your main girl enough plot armour to live despite breaking the code, despite falling in love (as a lesbian at that), and despite being a Zodiac Turner, then... yikes. Please stop burying your gays. (And no, Rieka being a lesbian, doesn't counter-act the grossness. A lesbian standing on the corpse of a gay man to further her story is gross — maybe research why the L comes first in LGBTQ)
Then there's the Elephant in the Room.
The Scorpio Code is supposed to be a religious edict. I'm going to ignore how this doesn't work in terms of the narrative not presenting anything of the sort, and go on the idea that was supposed to be there. I'm also not going to even try to address which religion its supposed to be allegorical of because... it's a religion that violently controls and oppresses its followers and kills anyone who goes against it, and where this small minority controls almost everything.
Again, this is another massive reason why this story shouldn't be set on a future Earth because... listen, I'm going to be generous and say Milo was going for sweeping generalisations about religion but, honestly, if you think too hard about that idea... big yikes. (Especially when the term 'Holy War' gets thrown around.)
“The Code enforces Scorpio’s place of power. It is a holy law, initially enacted during the War of the Rebalancing to obey the will of the Gods. If that reason remains true today, I do not see it observed.” I stepped over a fallen pine. “Are you educated on the noble history of the Scorpio Code?”
“Something to do with the War, holy instructions on obeying the Code?”
The word 'Gods' appears 6 times in the book. The word 'Religion' appears once. 'Religious' does not appear at all. 'Holy' appears 9 times (and two of them are in the excerpt above). 'Scripture' once. The words 'God' and 'Goddamn' also show up, but that makes no sense — which god? Why is it being used as an expletive in a supposedly religious world with more than one god?
Contrast with One Dark Window/Two Twisted Crowns, where the origins of magic, the Spirit of the Woods and the Shepherd King, are brought up ad nauseam because the origin of the magic is the root of the conflict. Age of Scorpius wants to sell us on the idea that the holy instruction of the Code is the root of the conflict, but it's barely considered beyond it exists and it's bad.
And, again, how does the 'Holiness' of the Code grant Scorpio's place of power? It doesn't. It doesn't work. There's nothing in there to explain why Scorpio are given so much control when it's an edict over the Scorpio's. It would be like vegans taking over the world but letting everyone else continue to eat bacon and killing their own for daring to look at a ham sandwich.
Power can be looked at in terms of soft power that tends to come from influence (i.e. a rich country giving aid to a poorer one can help forge loyalty and support) and hard power (i.e. military strength). The Scorpio Code does neither, plenty of breaches happen and go unpunished, until it's vital to the narrative. There's no way to enforce the Code — all you have to do is go into the other room if you want to giggle.
The Code and children.
We're given this abusive view of education for Scorpio children — or at least, abusive for Rieka (again because she can't mask her emotions — though we're only really shown one other Scorpio child, Kaia's brother in a flashback, and he doesn't hide his emotions either since he gets killed).
The school flashback is there to show the cruelty that Rieka faced and to paint her as the victim — which, yes, she is in that instance. But why are the Scorpio children mixing with other children to begin with? And why is a Scorpio teaching non-Scorpio children? In order for something like the Code to work, there needs to be indoctrination on some level. Showing a Scorpio child how every other child gets to act and feel is ridiculous. (I know, the school sections are literally only so Narah and Rieka can meet, but it doesn't make sense. Again, logical consistency. Also, they're in a class together but they don't know each other?)
Also why are these grown Scorpio adults allowing two 13 year old girls to dictate anything? Why aren't they arrested and killed the moment they show powers that they're not supposed to have?
And how does that even work with non-Scorpio children? Why would you let your non-Scorpio child be taught by some cold, emotionless teacher who metes out corporal punishment? I know that this point is a nitpick but that's kind of the point — worldbuilding shouldn't completely crumble the second you look too closely at it. You can have weak world building, books like Fourth Wing succeed because it doesn't waste time letting you look too closely at its weaknesses. Age of Scorpius is built on the flawed plot hole-ridden Scorpio Code and doesn't give you anything else to distract you.
The foundation the whole plot is built upon is structurally unsound, and I think that's the problem. Yes, you can spend ten years building a world, but you have to be able to cut away things that no longer work/things that don't work beyond your imagination. You can't build on a weak foundation and expect your house to withstand a storm.
I could say something petty but I won't. These excerpts speak for themselves.
All I will say is that, if you want something in your story, you actually have to put it in the story. Avia being abusive doesn't fail to come across in the first edition. It isn't in the first edition.
In fairness, Milo can change characters all he wants if/when he rewrites it, but don't tell people the sky is green and expect them to not be annoyed when they bother to look up.
It's not that it didn't shine through in the first edition, it's the fact that it wasn't written. It's not there.
Throughout the first edition, Avia is the voice of reason but also the first to throw herself into danger to protect the others, especially Rieka. Re-reading this, I noticed that at the start of the book, Rieka is actually closer to her sister -- and, no, not in a she's being manipulated by her abuser way -- but around half-way, once Kaia enters, there's a shift. Maybe because this is where two different drafts were Frankenstein'd together, or maybe Milo just forgot. This isn't just a case of it needing better editing, it needed a consistent writer.
[EDIT because it was bugging me after posting : the book is written in first person. Rieka both outwardly and internally shows that she trusts her sister, even if they don't always agree, and when they do disagree it's because Rieka is having a tantrum that is not supported by anything in the writing.
In fact, I'd go as far as to say, in those moment, when Rieka screams that she's 'had enough' of Avia's behaviour, she's the one that sounds abusive because her outbursts are based on nothing. She comes across as trying to gaslight Avia and the people around them into seeing poor, sweet innocent Rieka as the victim.
The worst part? None of this is intentional, it's just bad writing and poor character development.]
I can't find a better copy of this one, but this is taken from the Reads with Rachel video. It's a bit blurry, but states;
RIEKA is the [or maybe it says one?] person severely impacted by a system weaponizing religion. She makes this discovery. Rieka is a queer and neurodivergent protagonist. Why is this story told from HER perspective?
These were the others, I don't know if there were more. They were apparently on the patreon but at some point have broken containment and ended up in less savoury places on the internet.
Also, can I just say, it still drives me fucking crazy that the text isn't justified?
[EDIT for the sake of my own sanity
-- 7/7 the first one star review on goodreads
-- 10/7 first post on patreon (idk if there was anything before that was deleted)
-- 18/7 these screenshots posted
-- 26/7 second edition covers posted??
-- 28/7 Milo saw that TT (it was posted on 27/7)
-- 30/7 the patreon starts posting about revising book
-- 22/8 they commit to three patreon posts a week
-- 24/8 revised first chapter
-- 25/8 now deleted Q&A with Kaitlyn]
No, a significant change in the rate of progress is not needed. That window has closed. If you don't have a first draft of chapter 2 yet, then the book will not be ready by the Spring goal you have set. There were 39 chapters in the first edition. You have less than 5% of the book now.
The significant change required is to remove any concept of a release date and wait until the book is actually ready. At this rate, if it comes out this year, it's going to be another flop. Writing takes time. Redrafting takes time. Editing takes time.
It you want to call yourself a 'business', you should learn about the business that you're in, and stop setting unrealistic expectations.
Or don't. Whatever.
But maybe bear in mind that this is your last chance. The poetry book annoyed people, but if you put out another less than perfect novel, it's over. Stop squandering the extra chances that you've been given and stop charging people for a patreon subscription that is essentially just a stream of excuses and non-canon artwork.
It seems Milo Winter is promising to send out second edition books for those who ordered a first edition but did not yet receive their order. That doesn't seem legal to me. If they paid for the first edition, they did not consent to wait till whatever time the second edition will be finished to get that one instead.
Milo... I don't think you can just decide what your customers will get even when they paid for a different order. And you do not get to make that decision without a product to actually deliver. The second edition will not be finished in Spring. You cannot leave people hanging in limbo because you want to send them something they did not ask for.
(So, this is actually a post I was working on that I didn't post because... as I've said before, I'm so incredibly frustrated with how dumb this whole situation is now, so if this reads as weird, it's because I'm repurposing what I originally wrote.)
Full disclosure, I'm based in the UK and the last time I studied contract law was during my undergrad days. So, that might colour things a certain way.
What are the rules around pre-orders?
Mail, Internet or Telephone Order Rule in the US states three simple rules;
1. Give a reasonable estimate of when the product will ship
2. Communicate any delays as soon as reasonably possible
3. Provide the ability to cancel and get a full refund in the event of a delay.
In the UK, we have more red tape around pre-orders;
Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 (CCR) which similarly to the America rules covers the right to clear information about delivery and the ability to cancel.
Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) which covers product descriptions and misleading claims among other things.
(Obviously there are other jurisdictions — I believe most EU jurisdictions use the same framework as the UK, as the UK Acts came into force before we left the EU.)
Now, I'm not saying anyone should run for a refund, if they haven't already — it's your money, and at this point if you haven't asked for a refund, you've clearly already made a choice. (That said as someone who also has experience working in UK banking, if you want a refund and haven't been able to secure one, talk to your bank about raising a dispute — most banks, at least in the UK, won't call it fraud because you knowingly gave money for this product.)
But, what I want is to take a moment to consider the nature of pre-orders and the obligation that a seller has to a purchaser. This isn't necessarily just an Age of Scorpius thing, but I think it's an interesting example.
At what point does a book stop being 'as advertised'?
A few months ago (I think it was that long) I made a joke that Milo seemed to have changed the WoG website to call Age of Scorpius Young/New Adult (which I'm not going to get sidetracked explaining how I don't like blending those two things together). But I think it's a good point of conversation at least — if the book was sold purely on the basis of it being YA (there's evidence of this on TikTok, over and over), are the people with existing pre-orders still receiving what they purchased if the book now strays into NA territory and has scenes that are no longer appropriate for a wider YA audience?
What about deeper story changes? Or changes of length in the final product? Additional artwork — when does it stop being a novel and start being a picture book? If you were sold a novel, should the illustrations be doing the heavy lifting?
If you purchased the book originally because of the story you were told you were getting, are you still going to get that story when so many changes are being made? The book was marketed on very specific plot-beats.
Is Spring 2026 just an abstract moment, untethered from reality?
My opinion is that, no, the second edition probably shouldn't be used as a replacement for the first edition. I don't think the second edition is comparable to the first edition; the suggestion alone that it might be NA instead of YA means that it's no longer suitable for younger people who might have ordered. The nebulous release date is another clearer issue, especially as there has been no updates about any delays.
Legally... technically there is already an avenue for refunds and people have been told that they're, essentially, getting a different book, so I doubt there's much legal recourse as long as those refund requests are being honoured. Arguably, not asking for a refund could be seen as consent to the changes in release/product changes. (Which, yes, I did see a couple of comments saying they hadn't had refunds, but I've seen nothing since, but let me know if there's any recent ones).
Basically, it's a grey area. I don't think Milo will get in legal trouble, but ethically? It's sketchy as fuck to do business this way as an author on the internet because you are the brand just as much as your book.
The refund from Reedsy for the copy edit is not the moral victory Milo probably thinks that it is.
I wrote a much longer piece about this but honestly? I'm tired. This is dumb. This whole situation is dumb.
Reedsy has a 14 day complaint window because you — the person who has the money to engage the services found on Reedsy — are assumed to have a basic understanding of the process that you are paying for and how it should work. You — the person who has spent hours of your life writing a manuscript — are expected to read the notes given to you in a timely fashion so you can either implement them or go through the complaints process.
If you'll allow me to present an analogy;
Milo Winter bought a pair of running shoes for a marathon. He ran the marathon, but he didn't win — in fact, he got a pretty awful time that was nothing close to what he expected (perhaps because he's not good at running, or perhaps because he didn't put enough effort into training). Regardless, he still made money from running the race. Milo then decided that his shoes were to blame for his poor performance, so he took them back to the shop for a refund.
Anyone who has ever worked in retail sees this for what it is. Entitlement. Audacity.
Milo made money from his book. Regardless of the level of edits, he made bank. Regardless of what he then did with the money, he got six figures worth of readers money. Regardless of any stress Milo was under with pre-orders, he took money from thousands of people.
You don't get to complain about the shoes after wearing them out. You shouldn't get to complain that the edits were insufficient after using them and making money from them.
Like I said, this situation is dumb. It's childish. And the sheer audacity to ask Reedsy for a refund when there are still people who haven't received the book that they paid for is, frankly, beyond the pale at this point. (And no, I honestly don't think the promise of the second edition counts for anything. The new version is going to be drastically different, therefore not the product initially purchased — I have thoughts on that too but this is getting ridiculous now.)
The moral of the story, as ever, is this; if you write something, it's your responsibility to quality check it before trying to make money from it. End of. Yeah, maybe the copy editor phoned it in with Age of Scorpius, but can you blame them? I guarantee the amount that they were paid was nowhere near enough to deal with that level of work. I've read the final draft and if that was the edited version, I can't even begin to imagine what the poor editor was sent. Usually you're quoted a flat rate based on word count, not content — the editor didn't set the price based on the quality of the work.
And finally, from a legal perspective, when you enter into an agreement with anyone (be it Reedsy or any other service) and you're given a 14 day complaint window, then you should check the work that you paid for within that 14 days, not months later when you think you can scapegoat someone else for your poor work.
I have no more good grace left for this situation. Time and time again zero accountability has been shown and it speaks to a level of entitlement that irritates me beyond words. No, people shouldn't buy a book sight unseen, but an author shouldn't put out a book that bad and take money for it either.
A novel belongs to its author — this is why the authors name goes on the cover, why they get the accolades when things go well. The buck stops with you.
Ignore this, it's just a dumb thought I needed to get out of my head about world building in The Age of Scorpius (or, I guess, lack thereof)...
Why don't they have guns?
I know the obvious answer is because they don't have machines to make them, but muskets have been around since the 15th century, and they were made by hand.
The second answer is because they have magic, duh. But, okay, why do they need swords then?
Again, I feel like this is reason enough that it shouldn't be set in earth's future. I don't see any amount of magic from the stars stopping people from engaging in some sort of arms race (y'know, in a very dystopic way) especially when some people's only magic is transformation/transmutation. It doesn't make sense that they've fought wars with swords and spears but no one has looked into more effective methods, or that those methods didn't follow them to Gardian in the first place. Especially when there's a supposedly brutal ruling class who apparently oppress people and kill hundreds of thousands of their own (seriously, that's the number given in the book).
Though this isn't me saying that the book needs guns, just that for it being set on a future earth, I feel the world building should at least address it in some way? Did the people who originally settled Gardian not leave notes or bring things with them?
But also... wouldn't there be other things from our time that would still be around? (If you've read Hugh Howey's Silo series or seen the Apple TV show, you'll get what I mean.) From an environmental standpoint, the sheer amount of garbage and plastic that is literally everywhere now wouldn't just vanish. Unless the stars did that too, I guess? Even if Gardian is some entirely newly formed landmass (which, listen, suspend your disbelief, I know that wouldn't work) there's still a garbage patch the size of Texas in the ocean, so things would wash up.
And don't even start me on all the chemicals and radation that would, no doubt, end up in the ecosystem if it wasn't properly dealt with before the 'apocalypse'. Not to mention PFAS... if you want environmental themes in your world building, this might be the place to start...
I guess what I'm saying is your world building and setting need to make sense, otherwise you leave these weird open questions that annoy people. I genuinely think that the book shouldn't be set on earth. It could have the same supposed themes and be on an entirely new world. It's the easiest fix -- not that the book really gives any suggestion that it's earth beyond the prologue any way...
(TL:DR -- I caught the end of an episode of The Walking Dead, one of the ones where they have Eugene making bullets for the Saviors, and I was feeling sassy, so here we are... Though, actually, as I'm writing this I've just thought that I'm reading Empire of the Damned at the moment and they even have flintlock pistols in that, and that book is basically a medieval time fantasy with no machines/electricity and listen, I'll talk shit about Jay Kristoff writing like an edgelord, but the book is genuinely enjoyable)
Not even tagging this random thought because, in the grand scheme of things, this is a quibble. I like stories with deep world building that makes sense. The Age of Scorpius does not have that, and this is only scratching the surface of why I think the world building is fatally flawed.
The Stages of Writing & Editing (and Why They Matter)
Originally when I started this post a few weeks ago, I was going to go back through Age of Scorpius and highlight things, but I honestly can't be bothered anymore. Winter has admitted that he didn't follow a normal editing process given the time line stated, and the fact that the manuscript wasn't reread until after release. But, because I know there are writers following me/this tag/this endless drama I'm going to post this so you can see how the editing stages usually work, and you can infer whatever you want from it and from what we now know.
If you want to write a good book, I would suggest following the tried and tested method. Some people do these stages in slightly different orders -- you find what works for you and stick with it, I guess?
I don't work in the industry, I'm just a person who writes a lot... I'll be honest, I must have at least 20k hours at this point, so I'm going to call myself a double-master. (Triple master if I include my masters degree.)
But, yeah, the point of this tumblr was to offer words of advice to people scared of writing the next Age of Scorpius, so here's some of that. (And, yeah, I guess I was a little sassy too.)
The Zero Draft
A zero draft bridges the gap between a novel plan and a full draft. It's where you can get most of the story out, but in the most basic of ways without worrying about things like style or flow. The point of this draft is to get a rough version of the story, from start to finish with all the little events you think you want in between. It's essentially an in depth road map to follow when you start the first draft. You don't have to use a zero draft, but if you struggle with planning or need a template to follow for your first draft, this is a great way to do it. A zero draft is essentially rough as fuck and that's fine.
The First Draft
This is where you start to try — it won't be perfect and should never be the version published. The first draft is where you start to add the details and build out the characters. It should be the whole story as you originally want to tell it, but you shouldn't get too attached to it. The best advice is to finish this draft and then step away from it for a little while (at least a few weeks but months is better — go write something else in the meantime). Then you go back to it with your red pen and a fresh pair of eyes.
The first draft is also rough as fuck and you shouldn't worry about that, because no one else will ever see it. You are not special, your first draft is not as good as you think it is. Remain humble and carry on.
The Second Draft
This is where you start to polish things. After rereading your first draft you should (hopefully) notice plenty of things that need to be fixed, altered, or removed. (If you don't, then I'd suggest putting it away again and giving yourself long enough to remove your head from your arse.) For this draft you should have your first draft next to you, and you should work on recrafting that draft. Do not completely start again. If you start again, you're just writing a new first draft. The second draft is where you should start caring about stylistic choices but you also need to be pragmatic. If you come across the most beautiful line of prose ever written but the scene itself is useless, then you need to get rid of it. Same for character interactions. You can't get attached to something if it has no utility to the plot.
The Third Draft/Beta Readers
This sometimes happens before Developmental Edits, sometimes it happens after. Some people have more rounds of editing before getting here.
Depending on how you feel about your second draft, this is where you might want to consider bringing in beta readers. A beta reader is someone who will be honest with you about what you have written — they'll tell you if they hate the characters or if they find part of the book slow. They'll also tell you if the book is unreadable dog water. A lot of authors will give beta readers questionnaires, so if they're worried that a certain character is weak or the magic makes no sense, they can directly ask for their betas opinions. At the end of beta reading, you'll want to go back through your manuscript and implement changes based on feedback. Again, this shouldn't involve entirely rewriting, you should be working from the previous draft — in some cases you might have to rewrite entire scenes, or make changes to characters that involve going through almost every single page. But beta's are your every day readers, if they have massive issues, then other readers will likely have the same issues.
Writers use beta's at varying stages depending on a lot of things and what they feel they need feedback on. You can find people to beta your work for free (usually in exchange for reading their work and offering similar opinions -- there's loads on reddit). Some people use beta reading as a litmus test — if the beta's seem happy, then you can spend money on a Developmental Edit. (Some dev editors will ask you to have your work beta'd before they'll even read it.)
Sensitivity Readers
It's also around now that you can think about sensitivity readers if any aspect of your books might cross lines/be overly upsetting/cause harm to a marginalised group. If you're planning on burying your gays or throwing in SA as backstory you need sensitivity readers regardless of your own identity or past. As with beta readers, you might need to make some alterations to certain scenes/characters based on this feedback.
Or not, if you don't care about upsetting people.
You can do this later, but if you get opinions early on, then you won't be too married to ideas when people tell you that you're being offensive.
The Developmental Edits
Developmental/Structural Edits look at the book as a whole, focusing on things like plot structure, character arcs, and the flow of the book. They look for logical inconsistencies (e.g. putting a dragon into a world that has no reason to have dragons) as well as scenes that feel clunky and repetitive that take the reader out of the story (e.g. your protagonist constantly falling asleep).
Sometimes a dev edit will recommend reordering the book. Sometimes it will recommend completely removing certain plot points or scenes because they don't work within the narrative or the setting. I've even heard of dev editors suggesting whole characters be removed from a story because they were useless and took up too much space on the page.
A developmental edit is the most substantial and time consuming part of the editing process and usually, if implemented correctly, involves removing and rewriting huge swathes of the novel. It involves changing character dialogue so each character has a unique voice and serves a purpose to the story. Dev edits are a massive undertaking, so if your dev editor tells you that your book isn't even ready for a dev edit, you need to listen. These edits are not easy fixes — it's not just a case of correcting a couple of sentences. If you have, for example, a world where the ruling class are the most oppressed for no understandable reason, you'll probably be told to change that (also, that's a sensitivity reader issue because... yikes). If you have settings that make no sense, or a magic system that seems to just work however the author needs it to, then a dev editor will suggest that it's changed.
A lot of the time this is a back and forth process, not just one and done. And, yes, it's fucking expensive (a lot of dev editors charge by the word count), but dev editors are arguably the most important when it comes to your actual story. Dev editors make sure your book work on a story level and a logical level. Skip this step at your peril.
Dev edits need to be completed before any other edits take place. (So, no, you can't copy edit and dev edit at the same time.)
The Line Edits
This poor editor has the task of going through every single line of your work, making sure it's actually readable, and ensuring that every sentence serves its purpose (they make sure people know if your woods are eternally inhabitable or not). They make sure your descriptions are understandable and consistent — they make sure you don't have a wyvern in one paragraph and a dragon in the next (because any fantasy reader will tell you that these are two entirely different creatures). They help you tighten your prose and cut the fat, so you don't have long, bloated sentences with several million commas (unless you're Evelyn Waugh, I guess?).
Again, line edits mean going through your manuscript with a fine tooth comb, making corrections, rereading every single word to make sure that it's necessary.
After dev edits and line edits, you might find that your manuscript is significantly shorter — that's not a bad thing fyi, it just means that you won't be wasting your reader's time with unnecessary drivel.
Copy Editing
You usually do this after line editing. This is where you correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation — and, personally, I don't believe you can do this in the line edit phase because you're still rewriting during line edits. You should always check after rewriting something. Spell checking as you go is a dangerous game meant only for college students an hour before their deadline.
Copy edits also make sure words are being used correctly and consistently e.g. if your character has a short broadsword (which isn't a thing -- a broadsword is a thing, and a short sword is a thing) you probably shouldn't call it a longsword later on.
This stage is just rereading the manuscript and tweaking things, it shouldn't really involve any rewriting, just occasionally changing out a word or moving some punctuation around to shorten/alter sentence flow.
Proof Reading
The last editing stage (mostly, depending on what you do next). This is essentially making sure that there are no errors that have slipped through the cracks. Again, this involves rereading everything.
ARC Readers
Some people will do this before/during the copy/proof stages (and just let readers know that some mistakes might still be present). Usually, this shouldn't result in any changes to the manuscript, unless you suddenly receive dozens of complaints — in which case, maybe hold off on releasing your work and try to fix things. But, usually, by that stage it's too late. However, if you skipped the sensitivity reader stage, this is also where you might find out that you've fucked up in that department.
In Conclusion
Again, do with this as you will, but throughout this process, you should reread your manuscript at least 5 times at the absolute bare minimum (though honestly, I think you should be looking at closer to 10-20 times cover to cover -- listen, no one ever said writing a novel was easy). If you do everything you're supposed to do, there is no I didn't realise it was bad until it was too late.
The reason that most people use different editors is because it's better to have more trained eyes on a writing project during development. Everyone will notice different things and have different opinions without getting too close to your work. Through the whole process, aside from yourself, you should have 2-3 trained editors reading your work, 2+ beta readers, and however many ARC readers you choose to go with.
I guess the moral of the story is to reread your work. A lot.
But still, you can go through this process and still have a book that people don't enjoy, and that's where taking your failures as a grown up comes in. Most first books are weak but, if you follow a good editing process and put out something halfway decent, readers will be prepared to give you grace and allow you to get better with your next book.
Oh, excuse me while I address just a couple of things...
(and yes, I'm using Winter's he/him pronouns. No, there is no reason not to and, no, I won't put up with people being transphobic asshats. I will still tag things with the 'Audra Winter' tag because that was what the book was released under and, as Milo says, Audra was only ever a penname and never who he was.)
Despite Goodreads reviews for Age of Scorpius being nuked at least twice that I know of, I'd just like to point out, the the book was reviewing poorly well before the 28th of July. The first 1 star review was on the 7th of July -- most reviews left from that month are 1 or 2 stars, and they are not kind. Winter also fails to mention the amount of hate this other indie author received because of his TikTok response. While, yes, it must have sucked for Winter to find out that people didn't like the book, to paint this as being the tipping point or the malicious act of a fellow author without taking accountability for the shit Winter's 'fans' gave him is vile. This is hypocritical. And, honestly, I saw the TT he's talking about, Winter wasn't attacked, Winter was given valuable advice and, yet again, he's shown incapable of accepting it. It wasn't a lecture, considering everything the author in question was VERY gentle about it. This is the crux of the issue and what Winter needs to learn -- he needs to get out of the influencer mentality that anyone that doesn't agree is a hater.
So, which is it? You're all similar and facing a similar struggle or that one big, mean indie author was the cause of your downfall? What about Lauren Roberts and Rebecca Yarros? Are you suddenly similar to them after allowing your editor to use your platform to shit all over them for having the audacity to (checks notes) write books that were better received than yours?
I was going to touch on the comments about the editors and the refund Winter allegedly received but, if I'm entirely honest, I can't be bothered, because Winter says it all;
I think that speaks for itself, because;
Developmental edits take more than a month for a book that size. And, honestly, I'm of the opinion that Winter received the 6 pages of notes from the dev editor as stated in Meredith Novaco's video and those notes were in lieu of a full dev edit because the manuscript was not even at the stage where it could be done. As I've said several times, the world building is broken and the plot does not work, it all needs completely redoing and dev edits would not save it. (Just a theory from someone who's read it -- though for Winter's sake, I hope he's being honest because putting that out there, after making sure everyone knew who the editors were, is a lawsuit waiting to happen if it's factually incorrect.)
Also, how did he implement these edits without reading the book until after release? You need to reread in order to edit and redraft.
I've been writing long enough now that, a week or so after writing something, I can read it back and will usually find a sentence or two that I can sharpen. When you write, you quickly learn to spot mistakes. If Winter was so shocked and upset by his own writing, why did it take so long to notice? (Oh, I know, because of the stress of a self imposed deadline, which still feels so off to me. These edits shouldn't have been happening up to the second that the book was sent to be printed -- and I'm still iffy about the timeline on that.)
I don't want to touch on the mental health aspect of it all because I don't doubt what Winter has been through and, yes, I feel some sympathy. But I do want to say that this is not really the way to deal with it. What Winter needs to do is step back, stop doing anything publicly while he learns to navigate the sort of situations that he keeps finding himself in because, sorry to say, that is the life of everyone in the spotlight. No author or creative is universally loved. You need to learn to handle it before throwing yourself back into the deep end. You need to learn the lessons that so many people have been eager to try and explain to you. Learn to write and edit your book, learn to fix the world-building, and learn to cope with the fact that some people will always hate your work (and, yes, hate you as a person --because that's just how the world is).
One last thing I want to highlight is this part;
What people have asked for is for Winter to be realistic (though to be honest, I don't think I've ever seen him be genuine either). A book takes a lot of work. A lot of grown-up, hard work. People were irritated by the 10 years of mastery bullshit, and the years of experience in the industry, and forming your own creative studio before even stopping to see if your book would be successful. Be real. Be realistic. Writing as a child is rarely anything more than that, and that's fine. Children's toys and ideas are fun, but when you're an adult, you either need to put them away or allow them to grow. It isn't realistic to say you've been working on a book since you were 12 and expect it to be good if it hasn't grown.
But, you know what I think most people want Winter to be? Apologetic. Say you're sorry. Stop trying to pass the buck. Stop blaming other people -- as an indie you are the last say, you decide when your book is ready for the world. Stop throwing pity parties. Log off and do the work, stop the patreon bullshit (because that is just taking peoples' money), and focus on creating a world that makes sense, character's that are compelling, and a story that people want to enjoy.
You put yourself out there. You wrote and published the book. You are the only one who can deal with your mental health problems. You set your deadlines. And, honestly, I say this with all the goodwill in the world, aim for a 2027 rerelease. Refund the people who still don't have their books, and start over. Give yourself time to do it right because, otherwise, this time next year, you're going to be back in exactly the same place, and I guarantee you will not get a third attempt at this.
I feel silly for not really thinking about it until now but someone on a Good Reads review mentioned it and now I can't stop thinking about it. Why would anyone create a sword that makes people immortal?? Surely the last thing you want is for people to not only survive, but become invulnerable when you stab them?
Also, what are the limitations? Is disembowelment okay now? Would you survive a decapitation? I have questions.
This has to be the most useless sword in existence...
I'm trying so hard not to even think about how none of the magic system makes sense -- don't even start me on the update about star light in blood, or whatever it was. Its nuclear fusion that creates 'star light'. Though, actually, it might make more sense if they were all radioactive mutants...
I know none of you actually have the answer to this but I have to ask... why?
Just put it in the book. The book is where the world-building goes -- in fact, I'd argue that at least 50% of the books purpose is to contain the world-building. Stop taking peoples money for things that BELONG IN THE BOOK and then expecting them to pay for the book.
Is this their 'revolutionary new way of doing things' where they explain everything that's going to be in the book before for book releases? Make it make sense, someone, please.
I've read pretty much all of the reviews posted, and there were only a couple that I'd say didn't really class as reviews. I think at this point Goodreads knows that it's not a good book, so I have to wonder if someone is going in and reporting all the meaner reviews? But it also looks like a lot of the much older reviews have vanished too? I stopped keeping track because I thought that they'd stopped messing with people's reviews but it's just... strange. If it's deleting bad reviews then the Reads With Rachel one should have been taken down because it's not technically a review.
Anyway, all this to say, if you had a review up on Goodreads, you might want to check it's still there. Also fuck Goodreads, Pagebound is better.
