the guy who pulls the lever, gassing both

>>7692225
Yes.

A mix of both

i have a loose outline but switch and mix as needed

>>7692225
i do all my writing during drug fuelled marathon sessions... a week later i seat down to edit, most of the time its like someone else wrote it, dont remember anything

>>7692255
dude weed lmao

Pantsers?

We used the scientist and the mystic. Most good writers should be a mix of both. Towards the end of the semester I tried doing a story in each style. The mystic was the easiest.

>>7692359
The way I see it, its easier to be a "mystic" or "pantser" once you've internalized the mechanics of writing, that being conflict, characterization, etc.

Once you hit that point you simply "let the story run off your arm" as Gene Wolfe puts it.

>>7692266
i think it's dude adderall lmao

>>7692225
I've experimented with both methods and found that if I spend a lot of time constructing the story and characters beforehand, things generally come out a lot more fleshed. It also gives me enough time to digest the story and make changes as needed. For example, on reflection I might realise that there is a common link or thread that went unnoticed, and then take action to develop that theme more fully. It's also helpful to see what you're working towards. It then allows you to play with foreshadowing and develop scenes so they build tension towards something greater further down the line.

I think you can't really be too rigid or fluid either way. If you've created something complex with a lot of subplots and themes, you'll end up getting lost and the whole structure will fall apart. Likewise, if you're too rigid, the whole thing can come across as quite stifling and boring.

However, there's no real right or wrong route at the end of the day. It all comes down to what works best for you and what creates the better story when it's all finished.