I did say I'd be mighty delayed, now, didn't I? As is the norm, following shall be compiled my reviews/critiques of all the entries.
 
Letter grades are provided to give a sense of relative scaling, but are not objectively measured. A poor grade can just as well be caused by poor writing as it can be by a poorly constructed plot. Try not to let me discourage you—I consider myself a harsh critic, but ultimately I do want all of you to succeed.
 
>C
[hider=Entry #1: His Greatness]It's a very simple and straightforward poem, which while not necessarily a bad thing, does make it difficult for it to stand out.
 
For the most part, the vocabulary is equally simple and straightforward—in poetry every word counts, and so one shouldn't be afraid to play with the lexicon a little. It's especially important to use a consistent lexicon, and as such, I feel that more words akin to [COLOR=#999966]thrall[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#999966]thane[/COLOR] could have done a good job of giving this poem its own tone and feel. Words like [COLOR=#999966]wonderful[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#999966]great[/COLOR] are extremely generic, and including their cousins [COLOR=#999966]wonder[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#999966]greatness[/COLOR] as well makes them all the cheaper.
 
The greatest fault to this poem, however, is in its lack of cohesion. There are a number of very effective verses utilizing parallel structure, such as verses one, eight, and nine. [color=#CCCCCC][i](Verses seven and ten came close to achieving parallel structure; the former needed to end in [COLOR=#555555]is unmatched[/COLOR], and the latter in [COLOR=#555555]shall be burned[/COLOR], so that they would repeat the patterns of their respective verses.)[/i][/color] However, these verses are only effective independently—there is next to nothing tying any one verse in this poem to any of the other verses, which prevents it from attaining any sort of natural progression. This could have been attained in one of two ways: conceptually, or rhetorically.
 
As mentioned above, each verse acts largely independently of the others, and this is ultimately why it fails to achieve conceptual progression. Many verses are redundant. For example, [COLOR=#999966]wrapped in the shroud of royalty[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#999966]wearing a woolen cape[/COLOR], while providing different information, both seem to describe his cloak. Similarly, the two parts of the fifth verse both roughly say that he is above other things, without either providing any distinction between the heights, or designating that the heights build off of one another. [color=#CCCCCC][i](That being said, the verse come close to doing so rhetorically with its parallel structure. The juxtaposition of the antonyms [COLOR=#666633]lower[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#666633]higher[/COLOR] would have been more effective, however, had one not been a noun while the other an adjective.)[/i][/color]
 
Without any clear structure, metre, or rhyming scheme, neither did it foster progression rhetorically. It came close, however. Verses two, four, six, and eleven follow roughly the same pattern, all ending with [COLOR=#999966]a leader[/COLOR]. That being said, the first two such cases used the verb [COLOR=#999966]stand[/COLOR], whereas the last two used the far weaker verb [COLOR=#999966]is[/COLOR], greatly diminishing the effect. [color=#CCCCCC][i](Had this been an attempt to mark the conceptual progression of the leader's qualities from being a result of his position—standing above others—to being inherent of his person—being above others—the pattern would have to have been used more consistently throughout the poem, in order to properly translate the intentionality of it.)[/i][/color]
 
Considering the prevalence of parallel structure in the poem itself, it does not seem that there is a difficulty in utilizing compositional techniques. All that is needed is for these techniques to be used with greater purpose and intent, so as to push forward a cohesive meaning.[/hider]
>C+
[hider=Entry #2: A Short Mention]Tons of repetition, and redundancy, and absurdity. Evidently, this entry is a satire, and for that reason alone, it can embrace these faults wholeheartedly. There are a few interesting concepts described in there, and in particular the over-the-top second section, in which a typical far-fetched tale is told of his deeds, was quite entertaining.
 
The first part dragged on a bit in similes. Understandably, this was almost certainly intentional due to the structure of the entry, but paired with unnecessary repetition—such as the use of [COLOR=#999966]deafened[/COLOR] for two separate senses—made it more of a chore than it ought to have been. In addition, the transition between the two parts, which bear significant differences in style—descriptive vs narrative, among other things—was quite abrupt. Had this entry been framed better, either by identifying the narrator or by elaborating on the role of the audience, it would have been much easier to make this transition.
 
The moment that stood out most was "[COLOR=#999966]I was brought to tears of everlasting joy, which drove my body to draught, which could only be quenched by his words and wisdom.[/COLOR]" The full circle this creates is most clever. The self-reference to heresy near the beginning was also quite interesting, and its rather early placement helped to solidify this entry as a satire.
 
Of course, the entry as a whole was ripe with run-on sentences, but it is clear that it was not written with a polished end-product in mind. What it attempts to do, it does well enough. If a bit difficult to follow at times—grammar does have its uses.[/hider]
>B+
[hider=Entry #3: Ode to King Han]Good use of rhyming scheme—even within verses!—and metre make of this an entertaining read regardless of content. And the content only makes it better!
 
First of all, the tone of the poem was consistent in both story and vocabulary. While some words were quaint, their simplicity was used seemingly purposefully, evoking perhaps the language used by a typical storyteller speaking to those less educated. Never did a word seem out of place amidst its kin, and even phrases worked towards its 'antique' feel, such as the reversed [COLOR=#999966]did he[/COLOR] and the alternative [COLOR=#999966]for always[/COLOR].
 
The constant reiteration, both of those that provide slight variations in connotation—such as cunning, clever, and smart—and of opposites—such as [COLOR=#999966]oldest to youngest[/COLOR], [COLOR=#999966]tall[/COLOR] and [COLOR=#999966]small[/COLOR]—help to show the reach of his benevolence goes. He both encompasses all good traits, and he encompasses all forms of people. An ideal leader, in any and every context.
 
Very few verses feel as though they could use retouching. Notably, the start of the second to last stanza seems to be structured so as to follow a progression, from the king fighting his foes, to him defeating them, to him taking rest. However, because [COLOR=#999966]did he conquer[/COLOR] is written to evoke a past not removed from [COLOR=#999966]found defeat[/COLOR]—not to mention conquering and defeating being synonyms in this context—makes of this a false progression.
 
Nevertheless, this poem does not fail to inspire, and deserves the preceding praising galore.
 
Aside, I disagree somewhat with [@mdk]. The [I]only[/I] verse that bugged me in terms of rhythm was the one ending in galore, as he mentioned. I much prefer the use of none over no-one, as it is both more consistent with the 'antique' tone of the piece, and with the later use of the same word. In general I'm just more lenient with rhythm, I guess, as when singing one can alter the way certain phrases or words are uttered to render the difference in syllabic length immaterial.[/hider]
>B
[hider=Entry #4: Officer's Lounge]Quite nicely written, and the atmosphere of brooding political subterfuge was very effective in making this short scene a compelling one. Unfortunately, neither Velko nor John were given much of a chance to expand upon their respective characters, but both Tyler and Washington were interesting. The foreshadowing provided wasn't particularly effective—[I]something[/I] was up, but it wasn't at all clear whether this was supposed to be tense or not.
 
Due to a lack of compositional issues in this story, the sources of complaint come from the plot itself. Specifically, the ending left far more questions unanswered than it ought to, despite being something of a cliffhanger. First, the exchanged smiles seems to imply that the two were mutually aware of the potential threat, but there is no other indication given that the two have anything to do with one another. Quite the opposite, really, as even the internal narration explicitly questioned Washington's core identity. Second, the reader—knowing [I]very[/I] little of Velko and the two Generals—does not have any real way of knowing whether or not the assassination was successful. Evidently she managed to kill a few targets, but there is no way of knowing who the primary targets were—seeing as she fired randomly—nor the consequences of those men's deaths.
 
Cliffhangers are quite fine, to be clear. It is, however, typical to address the important questions that are to be left unanswered, instead of just leaving the whole thing open to interpretation. That is to say, if a question is important and unanswered by the cliffhanger, it is a good idea to have the narration or the characters point out as much, explicitly or implicitly as the case may be.
 
Still, very good framing and atmosphere. All the pieces were in play, there was just a lack of explanation as to why they were in motion.[/hider]
>A
[hider=Entry #5: Firebrand]Amazing, simply amazing.

There is not a fault to be found, not a criticism to be made here. To even attempt to deconstruct the piece enough to properly praise it would be an attempt in vain. Noting here that particularly touching was when he at first abandoned the third task—had he completed it with as much determination as the first two, this story would surely have been much weaker.

It would have been nice to know more about the world, the barbarians, the King-Priest—but this is a short story, not a novella. And for that, all that is contained suffices.

I do have a love for fairy tales.[/hider]
>C+
[hider=Entry #6: So You Want a Revolution]The introduction was odd. Very much so, and without really achieving what it should have, making it largely detrimental. Essentially, it should be there as a framing device, grounding the later narration and creating a sense of relatability with the story's participants. Because of this, the fact that its contents are irrelevant to the story is relatively unimportant. The reason it fails is instead that it doesn't relate to the story, even outside its spoken content.

It appears evident that the two characters conversing are the narrator and Avery. The issue with this, is that it is [i]Avery[/i] that is given all the attention. The narrator's lines are all reactionary, and of little interest, while Avery gets to talk about Kelsall. [color=#CCCCCC][i](Note that because Kelsall is the one being referred to is not a redeeming factor, as his status as a pervert has no bearing on how he is perceived in any other part of the story.)[/i][/color] While he does have a few moments in the main narrative, he is shipped off to fight at the airport rather quickly, rendering the personality he was so graciously gifted pointless. Avery is not an important character. [color=#CCCCCC][i](By the way, it isn't mentioned that Avery had left the group during the split until the conclusion itself, which lead to initial confusion.)[/i][/color]

In addition, the conversation exists as a very odd framing device, considering the format of the story. Despite being called a journal, the narrator implies that he is writing of these events long after they have taken place. The conversation, taking place outside this contained narrative, should thus logically take place at the same time as the writing. This could most easily have been rectified by making it a part of the journal, used as a framing device by the narrator himself. [color=#CCCCCC][i](Of note, it doesn't really make sense for either a journal or a short-story to contain chapters—especially when there's only one.)[/i][/color] There are a few other inconsistencies with the journal format; for example, the use of present tense in the line "[color=999966]And then it happens. The hammer comes down. I hear a scuffle. gunshots.[/color]" Putting oneself back into the moment though verb tense is more typical of verbal storytelling than written. In this case, it is especially notable because the use of simple past is already achieving this function in comparison to the past perfect of the first couple paragraphs.

More generally, the story was pretty good, and evoked well the inner conflict of the narrator. It reads more like a memoir than a journal, though, especially with the actions being written in a narrative format. The strongest aspect of the writing is the juxtaposition of long and short sentences—such as in "[color=#999966]We fell in behind the wall of the second building and watched intently as Kelsall took a peek around the corner. He motioned. We followed.[/color]" The build-up of tension is sustained by the following quick burst, jolting us towards the real action. In a similar vein, the entire noise-making scene was very effective, with the song verses helping to maintain tension by sustaining the tension. The distension cause by the poster was also well timed.

Finally, the introspection tended to drag on sometimes, repeating itself in different words—all over the paragraph about exceptionalism—and sometimes a bit heavy-handed—see the Snickers. Overall it conveyed powerful concepts well, but it could have been far more efficient, and far more cohesive.[/hider]
>??
[hider=Entry #7: Quests of the Glorious Leader]I don't know how to go about critiquing this, and so I won't. [color=#CCCCCC][i](I could, of course, but it take a lot of time to get in the right mindset for it, and I don't think the result would be of much value.)[/i][/color]

So instead of a critique, you'll have to settle for just my review!

The first time I read it, it was interesting. Dragged on for too long, but there were a couple hints that implied something was amiss—even before the resistance was revealed, I could tell the bandits were hired help. It was okay on its own, but not quite "good".

Once I read the lines between the lines, my appreciation for it grew tremendously. While some meta-text was weird, it was overall very entertaining, and a great way to close of the roleplaying from the older thread! I'm happy you went with this route. A fun read.

I admit, I didn't realize I was supposed to highlight the text until I started to read the reviews—after all, I was on mobile. I do have a suggestion that I feel could have helped with this: make each verse of the "highlight" end stanza a different shade of grey, progressing from invisible to white. This would have kept the hint at the end of the entry, while making it much easier to catch on to the formatting choice.[/hider]
>C+
[hider=Entry #8: Marble's Mission]The most accurate way to describe this entry would have to be eccentric. The action jumps around between scenes, settings, and tones with a wanton abandon, making it difficult to keep track of just what is going on at any given moment.

The narration suffered from a number of issues. First, the narrator was rather inconsistent.  It roughly followed Marble's persepctive—as demonstrated by lines such as "[color=#999966]How could anyone say such a thing about Her?[/color]" and "[color=#999966]Just as he thought that,[/color]" which tie the narration to his inner thoughts. In this sense, the reader should only know what Marble or Yang are supposed to know. And yet, it sometimes switches to a more separated narrator, as demonstrated by the description of the two forms, after his split. Throughout this sequence, references to their traits are regularly made with uncertainty, using qualifiers such as [color=#999966]seemed[/color] or [color=#999966]perhaps[/color]—or worst of all, "[color=#999966]as if he were blind[/color]" and "[color=#999966]like he was ready for war.[/color]" Because the reader has for the most part been stuck in their minds, they should know for a [i]fact[/i] whether or not he is blind, or is ready for war.

The descriptions were generally okay, though ofttimes the comparisons were nonsensical. Take "[color=#999966]rolled up the path towards him slowly, like a horse running across an open field.[/color]" As far as the reader knows—again, hard to keep track—he was on a steep slope, on a thin path off the side of a bluff, covered in vines. This does not sound much like an open field. And a horse is quite quick when galloping—horses do not roll slowly. Nothing in this simile matches up.

Compositionally, transitions weren't used effectively. In many paragraphs, a closing sentence was used to introduce what would be relevant to the next paragraph. The problem with this is that paragraphs are designed to each follow on train of thought, a single idea. Most of these closing sentences have nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph preceding them, and would be better off at the beginning of the next paragraph—or even better, as punchy short paragraphs on their own. An example would be the end of the fourth paragraph: "[color=#999966]He hadn't left the Capital much since his induction into the Diamond Knights.[/color]" Generally, this sort of off-hand introduction to the concept of the Diamond Knights is fine, but the fact that he seldom left the Capital had next to nothing to do with the rest of the paragraph before it—which was describing the nature of the train. This makes for a jarring switch of subject, that hampers flow.

Another issue of transitions relates to the description of action. Oftentimes, the word [color=#999966]suddenly[/color] is used in the middle of an otherwise plain paragraph—or even sentence—to indicate the rapidity of action taking place. To be truly effective, [color=#888888]suddenly[/color] must take advantage of paragraph breaks and punctuation to actually [i]break[/i] the flow, or it will simply fall flat. In a sentence such as "[color=#999966]The bird cried out in surprise as it fell, and the statue man was suddenly gone, moving faster than the rain that fell to the ground during a storm,[/color]" by having the word in the middle of a long sentence with clauses on either side, what should be a punchy action is instead dragged out. Consider the effect that this has instead: "[color=#888888]The bird cried out in surprise as it fell, and suddenly—the statue man was gone. Moving faster than the rain that fell to the ground during a storm, ...[/color]" The intentional breaks in the flow help to support the rapid succession of the actions.

Finally, the story was entertaining, but very confusing. Rose was said to be the witch's granddaughter, but also Marlon's mother—and yet Marlon is said to be the witch's grandson? Alice was interesting, but her plot was tangential and had no resolution or explanation. And the rapidity with which Marble switched between goals made for a very hectic plot to follow. A nice read, but it could use a lot of fine-tuning.[/hider]
>B+
[hider=Entry #9: Retribution]Short and sweet, and well-written to boot. The mysteries surrounding the story—the girl's death, the friend's decision to help Alex, the nature of their rivalry—make for an interesting draw. Great atmosphere. Alex an Anna were both complex characters, characters I'd love to know more about. There's really not much I can say about it, as few things are developed enough to really dig into.

The last line was particularly potent.[/hider]
>B
[hider=Entry #10: What's Wrong with Johnny]The introduction was a bit of a drag, the first paragraph in particular feeling like purple prose. While it was helpful in that it established the five boys, it just didn't really draw interest. That being said, it was better on a second read-through, after the reader knows the point from which Johnny is reminiscing, and the initial tonal shift between home and war was very effective.

Once Grant died, the tone seemed to settle into a useful monotone. All the deaths, really, were well presented in that fashion. However, the return from the war felt too flat. It could have used a bit more time to make the transition, and that Johnny was the only survivor wasn't made clear, which weakened the effect of some of the following text, up until Harvey's death was confirmed.

A nice, slow, story, with a compelling narrator. Good work.[/hider]

Despite the clear indication of my ratings, it was ultimately a challenge for me to choose between two powerful entries: [b]Firebrand[/b], and [b]Retribution[/b]. And ultimately, [b]Retribution[/b] takes my [@vote]. I apologize, [@Shorticus], I do consider your entry the best; but [@RomanAria]'s was my favourite. I would be quite happy to see either of you win.