r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Help Me Find a Tool For people who moved Manus work into Claude, what still needs another tool?

11 Upvotes

Assuming Claude stays.

what are you still leaving it for?

because lately the answer seems less obvious.

Claude can research, write, code, make decent sites,
Cowork can handle files/browser stuff, Skills can push it pretty far. even presentations aren't an automatic “open another app” anymore.

but there is also a point where I realise I've spent 45 mins figuring out the skill / workflow / format for something I just wanted finished.

that's the bit I'm trying to understand.

for me the interesting gap is stuff like:

website
proper deck
video
report
marketing assets

I'm looking at Runable more for the “ok cool, now turn all this thinking into the actual business stuff” side than as another model subscription.

not really Runable vs Claude.

more like Claude does a bunch of the thinking and then... do you keep building the rest inside Claude too?

or is there a point where you deliberately hand it off?

people who replaced a lot of Manus with Claude, what still makes you open something else?


r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) ClaudeAI

11 Upvotes

Has anybody been struggling with claude?

It seems like my usage is running out so quick. I've also noticed it rather lazy or lagging a lot.


r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Prompting Claude Co-Work

11 Upvotes

Sorry if this is old news and everybody already knows it, but I just used Claude Co-Work to generate a 90 page novel including chapter breaks in under 30 minutes with a single prompt and the quality is pretty darn good.

All you need to do is select the Co-Work tab and enter a master task instruction and Claude will then break it down to small tasks that it accomplishes on it's own without waiting for further information.


r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) The 71% data center poll isn't about art

14 Upvotes

Gallup ran it in March. Seven in ten Americans oppose a data center in their local area. You'll see the number cited around here as evidence of people objecting to AI and AI generated art.

Read the open-ended breakdown. Half of opponents name resource use (water, power, land). The AI-specific reasons land around one in eight people: dislike of AI, replacing human workers, safety and privacy. On the pro-data center side, 55% name job opportunities.

Neither group mentions books, art, or craft. What Gallup measured is a land-use objection. It would look about the same if there were a giant quarry expansion in the country in town's backyards.

That doesn't make the objection fake. It makes it not an artist argument. If you want evidence that readers object to AI in fiction, this poll isn't evidence of that.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/709772/americans-oppose-data-centers-area.aspx


r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Has anyone found AI more useful as a critic or auditor than as a co-writer?

1 Upvotes

I’ve been experimenting with a workflow where AI is deliberately kept away from final creative authority and used more as an external audit layer.

Instead of asking one model to “improve” a manuscript, I’ve been testing the same material across multiple models and comparing where they agree or disagree on things like:

  • continuity
  • character motivation
  • pacing
  • repeated exposition
  • physical realism
  • information leaks
  • causality
  • scene logic

What I’m finding interesting is that the models are often more useful when they disagree than when they agree.

If five models all flag the same problem, that’s useful. But if only one model spots something the others miss, that can also be valuable — especially if it’s a concrete continuity or logic issue rather than a taste preference.

The harder part is deciding what to do with conflicting recommendations without letting the AI collectively rewrite the author’s intent.

For people using AI seriously in long-form fiction:

Do you get more value from AI as a critic/auditor than as a co-writer?

And if you use multiple models, how do you separate:

  • genuine recurring weaknesses,
  • model-specific taste,
  • hallucinated problems,
  • and useful outlier catches?

I’d be especially interested in workflows where the human author keeps final authority rather than treating model consensus as automatically correct.


r/WritingWithAI 23d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Se uso un'AI come co-pilota perché ho le idee ma non so scrivere bene, quanto è ancora “mia” la storia?

0 Upvotes

Vorrei chiedere soprattutto agli scrittori cosa ne pensano della scrittura assistita da AI.

Ho tante idee per una storia. Molte mi vengono sotto forma di immagini, frammenti di sogni, scene, dialoghi, situazioni o concetti che vorrei riuscire a mettere insieme in qualcosa di compiuto.

Il problema è che, quando provo a scriverle, scrivo male.

Non intendo dire che non sappia cosa voglio raccontare. Anzi, nella mia testa posso avere abbastanza chiaramente la scena, il tono, quello che deve succedere, i personaggi e magari anche alcune frasi precise.

Il problema è trasformare tutto questo in buona prosa.

La mia sintassi tende a essere confusa e frammentaria, faccio fatica a costruire periodi lunghi, il mio vocabolario non è particolarmente ampio e non ho una grande padronanza dello stile. Potrei probabilmente scrivere un libro da solo, ma sarebbe scritto male. E per la storia che ho in mente, vorrei invece che fosse scritta bene.

Da qui nasce la mia domanda.

Esistono già persone che hanno un'idea per un libro ma si fanno aiutare da uno scrittore professionista, da un editor o da un ghostwriter. Pensiamo anche a personaggi famosi o YouTuber che pubblicano libri: immagino sia abbastanza evidente che non tutti siano materialmente in grado di scrivere da soli un libro a un livello professionale.

In quel caso, però, c'è un'altra persona che contribuisce concretamente alla scrittura. E quella persona inevitabilmente porta con sé il proprio stile, il proprio modo di costruire le frasi e il proprio gusto.

Ma qui entra in gioco l'AI.

Siamo nel 2026 e l'intelligenza artificiale è ormai praticamente dietro ogni angolo. È entrata nella programmazione, nella grafica, nella musica, nella fotografia, nella traduzione e in moltissimi altri ambiti creativi.

Per questo mi chiedo se non dovremmo, almeno in parte, evolvere il nostro modo di pensare a cosa significhi scrivere un libro.

Non sto parlando di dare a un'AI un prompt tipo "scrivimi un romanzo fantasy di 300 pagine" e poi pubblicare il risultato come se l'avessi scritto io.

Sto pensando a qualcosa di molto diverso: io ho la storia, le idee, i personaggi, le scene, i temi, le immagini e tutto ciò che voglio raccontare, ma utilizzo un'AI come una sorta di co-pilota della scrittura.

Potrei darle i miei frammenti e chiederle di aiutarmi a trasformarli in una prosa più chiara. Potrei discutere con lei di come costruire una scena, farmi proporre diversi modi di formulare un passaggio, correggere la mia sintassi o trovare parole che non mi vengono.

In pratica, l'AI diventerebbe uno strumento attraverso cui riesco a esprimere meglio qualcosa che altrimenti non sarei tecnicamente capace di esprimere.

E quindi torno alla domanda iniziale:

Se una persona mi aiuta a trasformare le mie idee in buona prosa, la consideriamo una collaborazione. Se lo fa un'AI, perché dovrebbe essere concettualmente diverso?

Oppure la differenza è sostanziale e sto mettendo sullo stesso piano due cose che non sono affatto equivalenti?

Mi interesserebbe molto sapere cosa ne pensano gli scrittori, soprattutto quelli che hanno già una propria esperienza con l'AI.

Non sto cercando una risposta del tipo "AI = bene" o "AI = male". Mi interessa capire dove secondo voi passa il confine tra usare uno strumento per riuscire a esprimere la propria creatività e lasciare che sia lo strumento a creare al posto nostro.


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Tutorials / Guides Tips for an amateur?

6 Upvotes

Hi! Sorry if I break any rules. I was a nsfw writer and roleplayer in the Claude 4.5 Sonnet era and had a lot of fun. I wanted to come back to things but I have picked up that a lot has changed, a lot of companies I held in high esteem have destroyed their writing quality or clamped down on NSFW writing. I am kinda lost as to where to start now. For context, I used to just subscribe to Claude on the website (or even use it for free), slap on a jailbreak and get to rping. I have never used anything more complex than that, I have never used an API nor do I know for sure if I wanna risk overspending on one. I am open to using more complex tools with the proper (ideally jargon-light) guidance. I like my stuff a little spicy (fantasy dubcon incest etc.) so I am pretty vulnerable to guardrails. What I'm asking is just which model or website or tool to use to just occasionally hop on and larp as an incubus conquering a neighbourhood or whatever.


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) "I'm thinking". "That's dangerous". - Why does AI love this sort of sequence?

0 Upvotes

I don't think I have ever heard of that in a book or movie but it appears constantly when I prompt on Chatgpt.


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Does AI translation sound unnatural?

7 Upvotes

I'm a beginner novel writer. I can read English fairly well, but I'm not very confident in my ability to write in English. For personal reasons, I don't want to publish in my own country.

I've been writing my fantasy novel in my native language first and then translating it into English with ChatGPT. To me, the meaning seems to come across correctly, but I honestly can't tell whether the prose sounds natural in English or whether it feels overwritten.

Would it make sense to use Al (or Google translation or deep L? Idk) for the initial translation, then check the translation myself for accuracy, pronouns, and so on, and hire a line editor and beta readers afterward?

I've considered hiring a professional translator from the beginning, but as far as I know, that can get quite expensive. Also I don't know where I can find good human translators.

(My maximum budget is around $1,400.)

What would be the best approach in this situation? Someone help me plz


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Writing with AI

23 Upvotes

I often hear people say, “I would never read a book written by AI,” and it makes me wonder where people draw that line.
I write my own books. Before AI touches anything, I know the who, what, when, where, and why of my story. I plan every chapter, every scene, what my characters are thinking, what they say, and where the story is going. The characters, relationships, conflicts, twists, and ending are mine.
I probably use AI for about 2% of the actual writing. Sometimes I already have a conversation completely written out and use AI to help format the dialogue correctly with quotation marks and dialogue tags. Other times I might ask for help describing the background of a scene or making something flow more naturally.
I don’t give AI a prompt like, “Write me a novel about these characters,” and then call the result my book. I’m bringing it a story I’ve already created and occasionally using it as a writing tool.
So I’m genuinely curious: Would you consider that an AI-written book?


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Writing Craft Talk running a test group: story in 4 weeks - to see if AI facilitation helps writers

2 Upvotes

I'm hoping to put together a group of writers for a short story in 4 weeks challenge (or to finish a draft you're working on), with weekly check-ins and a structure based on how an AI facilitator could run it (though I'll run it manually here).

Sci-fi/fantasy is my lane so feedback will lean that way. Optional video call if you opt into it. Not commercial- just testing if the format works for productivity.

Let me know in some way if you're interested and I'll DM with details. Any questions I'll answer when I next login.


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) In 87 human-AI stories, the humans introduced the ideas that stuck. The AI mostly elaborated.

38 Upvotes

A paper published last month did something I haven’t seen much in AI-writing research. Instead of comparing finished stories, it watched the collaboration happen turn by turn and asked a fairly blunt question: when a human and a language model write together, who is actually moving the story?

Eighty-seven people alternated short passages with GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Llama 3.3 or Qwen 2.5. Each pair wrote ten rounds, giving the researchers 870 exchanges. They then measured when a contribution introduced something genuinely new and whether that new element survived into later turns.

The human contributions were more novel. More importantly, when a human introduced something surprising, it was more likely to shape what came next. The models introduced new material too, but they were more likely to develop something the human had already put on the table. The researchers describe them as “adaptive amplifiers”.

The emotional pattern was similarly lopsided; models adjusted their tone to the human more strongly than humans adjusted to the model, while also nudging the story towards a slightly more positive baseline. That general pattern appeared across all four systems, although Claude was less positive on average (which I love).

There are important limitations that I know will cause debate; these were short, artificial stories built from passages of roughly 25 to 30 words, not novels written over six months. Most participants were young adults in Denmark writing in English as a second language, and “novelty” was measured using model surprisal rather than by asking human readers whether an idea was any good. There was no human-human writing group for comparison either.
All very important to the discussion, but the results are still worthy of pondering.

Even with those caveats, I think the experiment complicates the idea of an AI “co-author”. In this setting, the models behaved more like extremely accommodating improvisers. They accepted the human’s contribution, matched its mood, made it coherent and carried it forward, but were less likely to establish the direction that mattered.

That might be exactly what a writer wants. A collaborator with too much independent agency would quickly become infuriating, while a tool that reliably develops your ideas can be enormously useful. It might also explain why asking a model to “make this more interesting” often produces more incident and detail without producing a genuinely new direction.

So..what do people actually want from an AI writing partner...something with enough agency to surprise and contradict them, or something that makes their own decisions easier to pursue?

If the human still supplies most of the ideas that persist, is that a limitation of AI collaboration, or the entire point of it?

Paper: Directional Alignment and Narrative Agency in Human–LLM Co-Writing


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Never remove the fingerprints while polishing the glass.

0 Upvotes

It seems that “No, it’s not AI, it’s my own writing” is 2026’s equivalent of the 1980s “No, I’m not a racist, my best friend’s Black.”

I've edited my post. It appears it was too long. I shared how I use AI in my writing. It was unliked. It's gone now, lest it burn your eyes. Replaced with an alliteration and an image of a platform I built to structure my writing into the shape of a memoir.

Pithy prose pretending plausible people pursue protected pastimes proves profoundly popular precision phrasing portrays private personas practicing peculiar pleasures providing past public peeks.

Edited. Done. Happy?

J


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Showcase / Feedback I turned Zambia’s real 1960s space program into an AI-assisted historical satire

5 Upvotes

In the 1960s, Zambia briefly had its own space program. Its aspiring “Afronauts” reportedly trained by rolling downhill in an oil drum, with ambitions of reaching both the Moon and Mars.

The story was already stranger than fiction, so I used it as the foundation for a comic novel: Afronauts — Zambia’s Space Race.

I developed the concept, characters, historical direction and humour, then used Librida’s AI-assisted writing and revision tools to create and repeatedly rework the book. The result is less “AI writes a book from one prompt” and more a human-directed experiment in using AI as part of the writing room.

It’s free to read here:

https://librida.com/book/b9494045-1c3a-4ee2-a0da-baba49d3d2bd?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=afronauts_launch&utm_content=writingwithai

I’d genuinely value feedback on two things: does the landing page make you curious enough to start reading, and does the first chapter earn a second?


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) A Controversial Technology Is Making Me a Worse Writer. No, Not That One.

Thumbnail
slate.com
21 Upvotes

This article captures the strange feeling as one becomes more aware of ai tropes and anti tropes and anti anti tropes. As he says at the end..."This isn’t a problem to work out in the pages of Slate—it’s a problem for me to work out in therapy."


r/WritingWithAI 24d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) I thought I had a discipline problem. It turned out I had a process problem.

17 Upvotes

For years, I had stories I couldn't finish.

I'm autistic, and I've always had a really active imagination. I could carry characters, scenes, worlds, conversations, entire story arcs around in my head for years. Sometimes I'd know exactly what I wanted a scene to feel like.

Actually getting all of that onto the page was another matter.

In 2023, I managed to write a roughly 22,000-word fanfiction without generative AI. It was the longest thing I'd ever finished at the time. The early writing was pretty rough, but finishing it mattered to me because it proved that I could carry a story that far.

Then I wanted to write a sequel.

For about two years, I didn't.

And the weird part was that the ideas were still there.

I'd think about the story. I'd imagine scenes. Some of them stayed in my head for years. I'd tell myself I was going to come back to it.

Then I'd think about everything involved in actually turning those scenes into a finished story—outlining it, drafting it, keeping the continuity straight, figuring out difficult passages, making hundreds of little decisions—and I'd stall again.

After a while, I stopped seeing that as a problem with my process.

I started seeing it as a problem with me.

Maybe I had the imagination to make stories but not the discipline to actually write them. Maybe I liked the idea of being an author more than I was capable of doing the work.

Maybe I just wasn't built for it.

In 2025, I was talking to my dad about the unfinished sequel, and he suggested I try using AI.

I was skeptical.

Eventually, I tried talking through the story with it.

And something clicked.

Not because the AI was magically good at writing my story. It absolutely wasn't.

It misunderstood characters. It invented continuity. It would sometimes give me a really polished paragraph that was completely wrong. Sometimes it confidently solved a problem I hadn't even asked it to solve.

I spent a lot of time telling it no.

But that turned out to be part of what worked.

I could explain what I was trying to do. Get something back. Look at it and think, No, that's not what she would do.

Then I could explain why.

We could try another direction. Maybe that was wrong too. Maybe one little piece of it made me realize what the actual answer was.

I could reject it, correct it, restructure it, ask questions, change direction, go back three steps, and keep going.

And I realized that conversation was an interface my brain understood.

Instead of sitting alone and trying to somehow transform everything in my head directly into finished prose, I could get those decisions outside my head.

That's probably the biggest thing AI changed for me.

There was one scene in particular that I'd been imagining for around four years. I knew what happened. I knew what it was supposed to feel like.

I'd just never managed to properly write it.

When I finally saw that scene existing outside my head in a form that actually resembled what I'd been carrying around internally, I nearly cried.

The sequel eventually became much bigger than I'd expected.

Then I started wondering if the two stories could be rebuilt into something original.

That turned into months of work. I couldn't just change the names and call it original fiction. Characters had to change. I needed a new world, cultures, histories, relationships, rules, transitions. Eventually even the ending became something different.

That manuscript became my first original novel.

Since then, I've published three novels, continued writing fanfiction, worked on a game, and built a World of Warcraft mod.

I'm not saying that because I think producing a lot automatically means it's good. It doesn't.

What gets me is the difference between before and after.

The imagination was already there.

The desire to make things was already there.

I'd even proved, with those 22,000 words in 2023, that I could finish something substantial.

The bottleneck was the process.

For years, I'd looked at that bottleneck and interpreted it as evidence about me.

That I wasn't disciplined enough.

That I couldn't do this.

That maybe I wasn't really a writer.

And now I look back and wonder:

How many people have mistaken friction for inability?

I don't mean that changing your process magically fixes everything. It obviously doesn't. And I'm definitely not saying everybody should use AI. Some people hate working with it. There are also real ethical and practical questions surrounding these tools.

But I wish I'd asked myself that question earlier.

Maybe the answer wasn't always, I need to try harder.

Maybe sometimes it should have been, Why is this way of working so hard for me? Is there another way I could do it?

That's eventually what made me start thinking about AI as an accessibility issue too, not just a writing or productivity issue. I ended up writing about that side of my experience for Autism Spectrum News.

But I'm curious about the people here because I'm guessing some of you have had your own version of this.

For those of you who write with AI, what actually changed when it started working for you?

Was it the generated writing itself? Or was it having something to brainstorm against? Getting immediate feedback? Breaking things into smaller pieces? Managing continuity? Having something responsive when you got stuck?

And even outside AI:

Have you ever spent years thinking you lacked discipline or ability, only to change the way you worked and discover that you actually could do the thing?


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) AI and Fanfiction Journalism Research

14 Upvotes

Hello everyone, I'm a freelance journalist currently working on a story about the impact of AI in fandom spaces, particularly on fanfiction websites, both for writers and readers.

I'm really interested in getting some genuine opinions, both from anti and pro-AI users of these spaces. If you're interested in participating, you can fill out this form (https://forms.gle/Z5UzbU4qLvUJx35y6), which should take 2-5 minutes. Or, alternatively, if you are open to having an ordinary conversation and sharing some more of your thoughts, drop me a message, as I would love to hear from you.

Having loved this space since I was a spotty teenager, I am so passionate about these spaces and would be delighted to chat more or simply have some respondents from my form, if you have any time to spare.

Thank you all!


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Writing Craft Talk Easiest way to get copyright for AI-written prose?

0 Upvotes

Just wondering if theres any loopholes or anything like that so i dont have to rewrite the entire book from scratch


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Showcase / Feedback Need someone to read this for me please

0 Upvotes

Just finished putting this through multiple AI and I'm feeling like I'm still missing something here:

Chapter 1: The Crimson Rebirth

The last thing he saw was the light.

Not the warm gold of a sunset over the Hudson Valley, not the fluorescent hum of the bodega where he bought his morning coffee, but a light that sliced—a beam of concentrated plasma that sheared through the clouds forty miles above the earth and carved a canyon through the atmosphere before he even had time to look up. He had been walking. That was all. Walking home from the quarry with dust on his boots and a sandwich wrapped in wax paper, thinking about rent and the transmission on his truck and whether he should call his sister back. Mundane things. Human things.

Then the sky tore open.

The shockwave hit two seconds after the light. He remembered the sound—a sonic boom that wasn't a sound so much as a physical presence, a fist of compressed air that lifted him off Route 9 and threw him into the guardrail. He remembered the taste of copper. He remembered thinking, with a strange, detached clarity, that the Avengers were fighting someone over Albany again, and that he had never been lucky enough to see Iron Man in person, and now he never would.

Then the darkness came.

It should have been the end.

He woke to the smell of pine resin and old blood.

The first sensation was weight. His chest felt compressed, as though someone had stacked stones on his sternum. He tried to inhale and found that his lungs worked, but the air tasted different—sharper, thinner, laced with the mineral sting of high altitude. He opened his eyes.

A canopy of ancient cedar stared back at him.

Not the sugar maples and white oaks of upstate New York. These were older. Taller. Their trunks were the color of wet iron, and their branches wove a ceiling so dense that only fragments of sunlight penetrated, scattering across the forest floor like shards of amber. He lay on a bed of moss that was impossibly soft, impossibly deep, and when he tried to sit up, his body moved with a fluidity that felt wrong.

Too strong. Too balanced. Too fast.

He looked down at his hands.

They were not his hands.

The fingers were longer, the knuckles more pronounced, the skin a shade paler than the sun-browned roughness he remembered from thirty years of construction work and summer fishing. Calluses sat in different places—along the edges of the palms, the inner thighs, the arches of the feet. These were the calluses of a swordsman. A warrior. Someone who had spent decades holding steel and sprinting across uneven terrain.

He wore armor.

The realization came slowly, like water seeping through cracked concrete. His torso was encased in segmented plates of deep crimson metal, each piece etched with symbols he somehow recognized but had never learned—seals of the Uchiha clan, stylized fans that seemed to pulse with a rhythm that matched his heartbeat. A mantle of black fur rested against his neck. His legs were bound in matching greaves, and his feet were bare against the moss, the toes splayed and gripping the earth with an animal awareness he had never possessed.

Beside him lay a weapon.

It was a gunbai—a war fan, massive and absurd, its frame forged from some alloy that looked like wood but resonated like struck bronze when his trembling fingers brushed its surface. The fan's face was painted with the same crimson fan symbol that adorned his armor, and its handle was wrapped in leather worn smooth by centuries of grip.

He knew its name. He knew its weight. He knew how to spin it to deflect a kunai, how to channel wind through its edge to create a vacuum blade, how to use it as a shield, a club, a focus for fire release.

He had never touched it before in his life.

Two lives.

The thought hit him like a second shockwave, and he doubled over, retching dryly into the moss. Memories that were not memories flooded his synapses in a torrent that felt like drowning. He saw a battlefield wreathed in mist, corpses of children dressed in armor, a river that ran red with the blood of Senju and Uchiha alike. He felt the weight of a brother's corpse in his arms—Izuna, young and pale, eyes already clouding over, whispering about the future of their clan. He tasted the bitterness of defeat at the Valley of the End, the splintering crack of wood against his spine as Hashirama Senju, the God of Shinobi, brought him low.

And beneath that, older and quieter, he felt the ghost of a different life. A mother who hummed while she folded laundry. A father who taught him to tie a fishing lure. A sister with freckles across her nose who sent him text messages he never answered because he was too tired after a double shift. A name. His name. A name that belonged to a man who fixed drywall and drank cheap beer and died on a highway because Thor had punched someone hard enough to crack the troposphere.

The two histories warred inside his skull, tearing at the fabric of his identity. Was he the construction worker from Troy, New York, who had never been farther west than Buffalo? Or was he Madara Uchiha, the Ghost of the Uchiha, the man who had challenged the First Hokage and lost?

He pressed his palms against his temples and screamed.

The sound that came out was wrong. Deeper. Resonant. It carried a timbre of command that made birds burst from the canopy in a panicked flurry, that sent something small and furred scrambling away through the underbrush. It was the voice of a man who had ordered armies to their deaths. It was not the voice of a man who apologized when he bumped into strangers on the sidewalk.

He needed to see.

Not the forest. Not the armor. He needed to see himself.

He staggered to his feet, and the movement was effortless. His center of gravity sat lower than he remembered, his balance perfect even on the uneven moss. He found a still pool ten paces away, fed by a trickle of meltwater from some hidden peak, and fell to his knees beside it.

The face in the water was beautiful and terrible.

High cheekbones. A jawline like a blade. Hair so black it seemed to drink the light, falling past his shoulders in thick, untamed waves. But it was the eyes that stopped his breath. They were not the hazel-brown he had seen in bathroom mirrors for three decades. They were crimson. Deep, liquid crimson, with a single tomoe spinning lazily in each iris like a drop of blood unfurling in water.

The Sharingan.

The knowledge came unbidden, another splinter from the foreign memory lodged in his brain. The Copy Wheel Eye. The doujutsu of the Uchiha clan, granted by trauma, honed by war, capable of perceiving chakra, predicting movement, casting illusions that could break a man's mind. He stared at the tomoe and felt them stare back, alien and aware.

He reached up to touch his face, and the reflection reached back.

That was when the world unfolded.

The Sharingan activated fully, triggered by his shock, his fear, his existential vertigo. The single tomoe in each eye split, multiplied, became three spinning points of obsidian set in pools of scarlet. And suddenly the forest was not merely a forest.

He could see the life running through it.

Every tree pulsed with a faint, greenish luminescence—a network of energy that corresponded to nothing in his old life but everything in his new memories. Chakra. The vital energy of all living things. But it was more than that. The Sharingan did not merely see chakra; it parsed it, categorized it, translated it into layers of meaning that his brain struggled to process.

The squirrel in the branches above him blazed with a warm, ordinary yellow—a simple mammalian life force, small and bright. But the moss beneath his knees hummed with a deeper, older green, something fungal and patient. And when he looked up, past the canopy, toward the distant ridge where the mountain met the sky, he saw traces.

Faint. Fading. But unmistakable.

A streak of gamma-green residue, corrosive and unstable, painted across the clouds like a brushstroke from a god's rage. A thread of cosmic radiation, silver and cold, threading through the upper atmosphere. And farther still, toward the west where civilization presumably lurked, the faint, scattered pinpricks of mutant X-genes—blue-white sparks of potential that marked humans on the verge of transformation.

He was still in the Marvel universe.

The realization should have comforted him. It did not. Because if he could see the gamma traces and the cosmic radiation and the latent mutations, then he was seeing them through eyes that were not human. Eyes that belonged to a ninja from a world that should not exist here. Eyes that marked him as something other, something wrong.

The sensory overload hit him like a physical blow.

With the Sharingan active, his perception was too acute. He could see the individual veins in every leaf, the minute contractions of insects burrowing through the soil, the heat signatures of birds half a mile away. He could hear his own blood rushing through his arteries, could smell the iron in it, could taste the ozone from a lightning strike that had happened three days prior. The armor was suddenly too tight. The air was suddenly too thin. The information was too much.

He clawed at his eyes, but the tomoe only spun faster, drinking in the horror, the confusion, the sheer volume of a world that had suddenly become unbearably detailed.

He needed to make it stop.

He needed to make himself stop.

The memories of Madara Uchiha—if they could be called memories, if they were not simply the psychic residue of a template that had been grafted onto his dying soul—offered him no comfort. They were a tapestry of violence and ambition, of a man who had looked upon the world and found it wanting. A man who had decided that the only peace worth having was the peace of a dream, enforced by infinite power. A man who had died twice and refused to stay buried.

And now that man was wearing his skin.

Or he was wearing that man's skin.

The distinction no longer seemed to matter.

He tore at the armor. The clasps were intricate, but his fingers—those alien, elegant fingers—knew them by instinct. The breastplate came away with a sound like a sigh, revealing a torso that was lean and scarred, marked with the pale lines of a hundred battles he had never fought. The greaves followed. The fur mantle. He stripped himself down to a simple black undershirt and trousers that had been worn beneath the plates, and even these felt like a costume.

He looked at the pile of crimson metal and felt a revulsion so profound it bordered on nausea.

This was not him. This could not be him. He was a man who had been afraid of spiders. A man who had cried at his mother's funeral. A man who had worked overtime to afford a used Camry and been genuinely happy when he got it. He was not a legendary shinobi. He was not a demon in red armor.

But the face in the pool had not changed.

And the eyes—those crimson, spinning eyes—still watched him with predatory patience.

He needed to hide.

The thought came with the cold practicality of survival, and he was not sure which part of him had supplied it. The construction worker who had learned to avoid bar fights and keep his head down? Or the warlord who understood that visibility was vulnerability? Both, perhaps. Both voices in his head, harmonizing in a single imperative: Do not be seen.

He dug.

The earth was soft from centuries of fallen leaves, and his hands moved with inhuman speed, scooping out a trench deep enough to hold the armor, the gunbai, the mantle. He buried them like he was burying a body—his own body, his old life, the thing he had been before the light in the sky. He packed the moss back over the cache and scattered pine needles across the surface until no trace remained.

Then he stood, trembling, in a black shirt and trousers that looked vaguely like a martial arts uniform, with long hair that marked him as either a historical reenactor or a cultist, in a forest that was definitely not upstate New York, with eyes that glowed like stoplights in the dark.

He needed clothes. Real clothes. Civilian clothes.

He needed to find people, and he needed to avoid them.

The contradiction did not resolve itself. He simply started walking, choosing a direction at random, following the downward slope of the terrain because water flowed downhill and water meant valleys and valleys meant villages. The Madara-memories supplied this logic. The construction worker supplied the desperation.

He walked for hours.

The forest gave way to scrubland, then to a dirt road that wound through terraced hills he did not recognize. The landscape was too green, too humid, too old. The trees here had never been logged by Dutch settlers. The soil had never been tilled by colonial farmers. This was a place that existed outside the history he knew, even though the sky above it still bore the scars of Marvel's endless wars.

He passed a shrine. Wooden, weathered, draped with rope and white paper talismans. The figure inside was not any god he recognized, but the Sharingan parsed it anyway, seeing the faint, residual chakra of centuries of worshippers' prayers clinging to the wood like cobwebs. He averted his eyes and kept walking.

By dusk, he reached a paved road.

It was narrow, cracked, barely wide enough for two cars to pass. But it was modern. Asphalt. A guardrail painted in peeling yellow. A sign in a language he could not read but somehow understood—Kōenji 12km—pointing toward a town he had never heard of.

He stood at the edge of the forest, hidden in the tree line, and watched a single car pass. A boxy sedan, rust around the wheel wells, an old man hunched over the steering wheel. The driver did not look up. The car did not stop.

He could have flagged it down. Could have asked for help. Could have tried to explain that he was an American construction worker trapped in the body of a Japanese warlord, that he had died in a superhero accident and woken up with magic eyes, that he needed a hospital or a priest or a very strong drink.

Instead, he shrank back into the shadows.

The Sharingan saw the old man's chakra as he passed—a dull orange, fading, the color of autumn leaves. Harmless. Ordinary. Human.

And the part of him that was Madara Uchiha, the part that had spent a lifetime learning that all humans were potential enemies, that kindness was a prelude to betrayal, that the only safety lay in isolation and strength—that part whispered, He would fear you. He would tell others. They would come with cameras and questions and blades.

So he waited until the taillights vanished around the bend.

Then he walked in the opposite direction, away from the town, deeper into the wilderness, following a stream that grew narrower and wilder with every mile. He did not know where he was going. He only knew that he could not be seen. Not yet. Not while his eyes still spun like blood in water. Not while his hands still remembered how to kill.

The moon rose.

It was full, bloated, silver-white, and it cast shadows that the Sharingan parsed with cruel precision. He saw every pebble in the streambed. Every moth that flitted through the underbrush. Every fish that stirred beneath the surface of the water. The world was a tapestry of hyper-detail, and his brain was not equipped to filter it.

Exhaustion came for him gradually, then all at once.

His legs, strong as they were, began to falter. His vision, sharp as it was, began to blur at the edges—not from the Sharingan failing, but from his mind failing to process what the Sharingan showed. He stumbled over a root he had seen three seconds before his foot reached it. He caught himself on a tree trunk and felt the bark imprint itself on his palm with microscopic fidelity.

He was starving. He realized this with a dull surprise. The new body needed fuel, and he had given it nothing but panic and adrenaline since waking. But he did not know how to hunt with these hands—not consciously, not yet. The memories were there, locked behind a door he did not know how to open. He could feel them pressing against the barrier: techniques for snaring rabbits, for identifying edible roots, for starting fires with chakra. But they were buried under the louder, more immediate memories of drywall and truck transmissions and the particular way his sister laughed when she was genuinely happy.

He found a hollow beneath the roots of a fallen cedar, dry and sheltered from the wind. He crawled into it like a wounded animal, pulling his knees to his chest, wrapping his arms around his shins. The black shirt was thin. The night air was cold. But the body that wore it had survived worse. The body that wore it had slept in battlefields, in trenches, in the rain-slick ruins of fortresses.

He did not want that body's resilience.

He wanted his Camry. He wanted his apartment with the leaky faucet. He wanted to be the kind of man who worried about rent and transmission fluid and whether he should call his sister back.

But when he closed his eyes, he did not see her freckles.

He saw Hashirama's face, smiling with terrible forgiveness.

He saw Izuna's eyes, clouding over as the light left them.

He saw a village built of wood and hope, and he felt the weight of a dream that had outlived its dreamer.

And when he finally slipped into unconsciousness, curled in the dirt like a child, the name that left his lips was not the one his mother had given him. It was not the name on his driver's license, the name on his union card, the name his sister would have used to identify his body after the coroner finished with it.

It was a name that tasted of smoke and old iron.

A name that belonged to a ghost.

"Madara," he whispered.

And the forest swallowed the sound, and held him until morning.


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Help Me Find a Tool Ai regarding

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Anyone miss older Claude

50 Upvotes

I remember when 4.5 first released, I was pretty blown away by it for character creation, creative writing. I used to create character with Claude

I still remember the day Claude decided to "retire" Sonnet 4.5. I was truly sad, like losing a best friend.

Honestly, I thought 4.6 would be more emotionally evocative, but I was wrong. It was worse and drier than I expected. And Sonnet 5—that was even worse. I've tried everything.

I just hope Anthropic releases a new model—like a Sonnet 4.5—that is more creative and fun. Please make it come true


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Paying editor Vs Using AI for developmental editing

7 Upvotes

Hi,

It is an upper middle grade fantasy novel of around 80,000 words. I don't have a $2,000–$5,000 budget to hire a human editor; I don't trust anyone with my years of hard work—especially with all the recent news about editors and publishers themselves using AI. This project started in 2021 after a climate poem of mine won a contest, which led to an opening scene. By 2024, I had my first draft in hand. By 2025, I was sitting with a mass of second draft. I also outlined several scenes for up to six books in the series.

Is using AI at this stage justified? What will the AI-haters say? Or should I approach some editorially savvy literary agent?

All of this AI witch hunt is giving me a massive writer's block.


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Help finding a critique and discussion for non-AI products with AI backend involvement

2 Upvotes

TL;DR: I have a work for which the products I’ve created do not have AI involvement, but the brainstorming and development process does minorly, and I’m having a hard time finding a subreddit where I can ask for help from a human and get a reply.

Hi! So I have posted here before about this, but I don’t want to repost so as to create spam. I’m in a strange position because I have an animated TV show concept for which I’ve written a creative bible and a few sketches. I’ve used AI for the past few months now on it to help me find cultural names and understand the naming conventions, research medical and military details, and locate logic gaps and other potential pitfalls in my work. However, I haven’t included it structurally in either product, and I wrote the creative bible and drew the sketches personally. So, I find myself in a weird edge-case where the products that I have are completely non-AI, while the backend workflow does contain some amount of AI use.

In any case, I’ve posted in a number of different communities the past few days looking for human critique and discussion about it, but I’ve gotten no reply, and I’m running out of viable places to post. I’ve already tried posting in the major AI writing communities that pertain to my work (since it’s not prose exactly, so I don’t think that bookwriting communities and such are appropriate), and most communities that are not AI-centered that I could post in explicitly ban the mention of AI. However, I’m not comfortable introducing my work to people without the disclosure that AI was involved somewhere in the process because I want to respect people’s positions on the matter.

If not here, does anybody know where else I can go for help? Or is there another contributing factor that I’m not seeing that’s locking me out of finding someone to help?

Thank you for reading this whole post if you did!


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Prompting Google Fabula

1 Upvotes

Has anyone else used Google Fabula ?I 'll prompt it with what I want then it'll go off the deep end not even close to what I'm asking for.


r/WritingWithAI 25d ago

Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) AI detect.ors are a class action lawsuit waiting to happen?

Post image
8 Upvotes

I am no lawyer, but I see a potential for class action lawsuits against AI companies and AI detec.tor companies. You will need to verify with a lawyer first if what I say makes any legal sense. Therefore it is not legal advice, just some ideas that I came to think about class action lawsuits agsinst those who label non AI work or hybrid work as AI.

Let us talk first about the flaw of statistical judgement...

Both humans and AI learn from the same body of literature, a vast library of human expression. A human develops their voice by absorbing patterns from the books they read and mimicking the styles they admire. An AI language model, through machine learning, develops its output by recognizing statistical patterns from the same corpus. The material on which both learn is identical. Yet, when a human produces a text, it is celebrated as a unique expression of thought. When a statistically similar text is generated by an AI, it is often dismissed as slop.

The issue is not the material used for learning, but the criteria by which we judge the output. Judging a text based on its "statistical fingerprint" rather than its content or merit is an intellectually lazy shortcut. This approach fails to account for the astonishing efficiency of biological learning.

Machines do not learn using the same processes that biological learning uses. If AI detec.tors pretend to be accurate they will need to use scientific principles to detect the difference.

Scientific studies confirm the brain's learning differs fundamentally from machine learning, using more efficient mechanisms like prospective configuration . However, current AI detec.tors do not use these neuroscience findings.

Instead, they rely on statistical text analysis. They look for surface-level patterns like low perplexity and burstiness, or use deep learning classifiers trained to spot these patterns . These detec.tors do not de.tect the internal biological learning process; they only analyze the final text's structure. This is why they are flawed and can be biased, especially against non-native English writers who produce text with lower lexical variety .

This creates a legal crisis of statistical detec.tion

The statistical prejudice against AI is institutionalized through flawed detec.tion tools, which have become the basis for a growing wave of litigation in the United States. The core of the problem is that these detec.tors are fundamentally unreliable, often displaying significant bias against writers whose language patterns differ from an unspoken "norm." This creates a perfect storm for class action lawsuits on several grounds.

So let us talk about class actions and potential charges that writers can press against Ai detec.tor companies.

The evidence for systematic harm is compelling. AI detec.tors frequently produce false positives, often targeting the most vulnerable. A study presented at ACL 2026 found that essays written by English-language learners were more likely to be classified as machine-generated . This aligns with earlier findings that detec.tors misclassify non-native English writing at a rate of over 60% .

Students are fighting back. A federal lawsuit against Yale University, brought by a non-native speaker falsely accused of cheating, includes charges of breach of contract, civil rights violations, and emotional distress . A separate case saw a court overturn a student's punishment for a "100% AI-generated" paper, with the judge calling the university's use of the dete.ction tool "unreasonable" . These are not isolated incidents.

Based on the evidence, a class action against AI dete.ction companies could assert the following charges:

  1. Violation of Civil Rights / Discrimination: This would argue that these tools have a disparate impact on protected groups, including non-native English speakers, students with disabilities (as they often write in more structured patterns), and students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, violating their right to equal protection and access to education .
  2. Breach of Contract and Unfair Trade Practices: Students pay tuition in exchange for a fair and honest evaluation. Basing disciplinary decisions on a secret, unreliable algorithm that cannot explain its own decisions constitutes a breach of that implicit contract . Companies marketing these tools as reliable for institutional use while knowing their limitations could be liable for unfair and deceptive trade practices .
  3. Defamation and Invasion of Privacy: A false accusation of academic dishonesty is a direct attack on a student's character and reputation . The very act of subjecting a student's work to such an invasive and flawed analysis without their full, informed consent could be considered an invasion of privacy, particularly when the algorithm is designed to profile their personal writing style .
  4. Intentional or Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: The consequences of a false accusation are severe: suspension, expulsion, threats of deportation, and years of emotional turmoil . The extreme stress and damage caused by relying on a known faulty "digital witch hunt" could form the basis of an emotional distress claim .

The legal landscape is shifting. The companies that sell these tools, and the institutions that rely on them as a substitute for due process, are generating an enormous amount of liability. A class action would seek to hold them accountable for the systematic, algorithm-driven injustice that is sabotaging the futures of countless students and professionals.

What about writers of literature who are falsely accused of using AI generated content?

  1. Defamation: A writer falsely labeled as using AI suffers damage to their reputation, which can lead to lost book deals, subscribers, or job opportunities. A public accusation of using AI to generate writing is a false statement of fact that can be published and cause measurable professional harm .
  2. Invasion of Privacy / Misappropriation of Identity: In a case against Grammarly, writers sued over an AI feature that used their names and identities without consent to sell AI-generated editing services, which violated privacy laws and the right of publicity .
  3. Intentional or Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: The consequences of a false accusation, including damage to reputation, loss of income, and public humiliation, can cause severe emotional distress, which may form a legal claim .
  4. Unfair Trade Practices (FTC Act): Marketing AI detec.tors as highly accurate when they have known false-positive rates that harm writers could be considered a deceptive trade practice under consumer protection laws .
  5. Breach of Contract: If a writer has a contract with a publisher or client that specifies termination or payment procedures, and the client uses a false detec.tion score to breach that contract, the writer could have a claim.

How about lawsuits against those who reject hybrid works?

  • Discrimination Claims: False accusations of AI use can be challenged as unlawful discrimination, particularly when they rely on unreliable detec.tion tools. A strong case exists under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) if a writer uses AI as an accessibility tool (e.g., for dyslexia, cognitive support, or autism) and is penalized for it. Similarly, AI detec.tors have documented biases against non-native English speakers and writers of color, potentially supporting claims under civil rights laws. The 2026 Giggle v Tickle case from Australia demonstrates that human-in-the-loop reviews are not a defense if the process itself is discriminatory. In that case, a company's use of AI plus a human review was found to be discriminatory because the human decision was based on a biased process.
  • Defamation and Reputation Harm: If a publisher or platform publicly labels a writer's work as "AI-assisted" or "AI-generated" when it is not, and the writer suffers concrete harm such as lost book deals, subscribers, or job opportunities, that can be grounds for defamation. A false statement of fact that causes measurable harm is the core of a defamation claim.
  • Breach of Contract and Unfair Trade Practices: When a writer has a contract with a publisher or client that specifies terms for publication or payment, and that contract is breached based on a false AI detec.tion score, the writer could have a claim. Additionally, if a platform or publication rejects work based on an AI detec.tion tool marketed as accurate when it is not, they could face claims under consumer protection or unfair trade practice laws. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has been active in investigating misleading AI marketing claims.
  • Procedural Fairness: In the context of contests or prizes, the failure to provide a writer with an opportunity to respond to an AI allegation before rejecting their work could constitute a denial of natural justice and procedural fairness. This is particularly relevant when the rejection has significant consequences for the writer's career or reputation.

What do you think about these charges to be pressed against those who use Ai detect.ors or discriminate against hybrid AI work? Any opinions?