Hey there, Megrim here for the Big Review! I picked this one since there are a lot of subs for this novel, so I can come back and read more chapters in the future XD Since this is a competition and all, I figured I ought to pull out the stops and do a more thorough line-by-line analysis in addition to my usual closing comments. So, be warned... this is going to be really long! :S I couldn't think of an easy way to do it, so I'm going to refer to paragraphs by number.
Para 1: This of course deserves extra attention since it's the opener for your novel (sort of). My first impression was that I didn't like the use of passive voice. The bowstring WAS drawn back and released. I don't think this is one of the situations where passive voice is helpful. It makes the bowstring, well, passive--it's not doing the doing. It's the object, rather than the subject, and the verb is "was" instead of something more vivid. I always say that verbs are one of our strongest descriptive tools, so I'd say don't waste one on "was" (or looked or caused) unless that's absolutely the best way to make the sentence work.
My other thought is that this paragraph (and the rest of the chapter) could be tightened. Sometimes a lot of words are used to get across a fairly simple concept. In this para, two fairly long sentences are used to describe the one action of the arrow hitting its target. This should be a fast, sudden action (whzzz--thk! done!), so the long-winded description kind of slows down the pace. It makes me spend a lot of time picturing the nuances of this scene. For example the target is described as "target fifty yards away" AND "the wooden board," when I only needed one of those to know the target was there. This sort of writing, imo, loses the forest for the trees; instead of breezing through, easily imagining what you want me to, I have to slow down and think a lot (this applies to a lot of the piece, but I'm using this as an example). My approach to writing is to make it as "invisible" as possible, so the reader's attention is on the story and characters. Focusing on the prose itself as a beautiful and interesting thing is a valid approach (like Charles Dickens style), but I don't think that's the kind of story you're trying to tell here.
Para 2: This is a dense paragraph, with a lot of concepts put in one big chunk. It oscillates between past and present (with the ache having bothered him, coming and going), and it also oscillates with the depth of the POV. Later on, the chapter sinks into Sam's POV consistently, but here it's more omniscient at times, like we're not feeling and thinking along with him so much as observing from outside. Instead of Sam, he's "the archer," so clearly at this point, he's not the one telling the story, but rather some third party narrator. Similarly, "Suddenly, he cried out in pain," sounds like someone else listening in and being surprised by the suddenness. Yet, in other parts, we have direct thoughts ("His shoulder!") that indicate a deeper POV. I think the narrative needs to make up its mind. My personal vote is always for limited over omniscient, because I like sharing a deep emotional connection with the MC.
I'll also mention here that I don't understand what the injury is about. I thought it had some significance, like something did this to him (curse?), but it ended up not being mentioned in this chapter as anything more than a nuisance. I thought it was weird that it gave out so suddenly, enough to cripple him, but then wasn't given much more attention.
Para 3: Here, too, it's more omniscient, taking the POV of the cat. That's fine, but I guess I just don't like head hopping because I don't write in omniscient and rarely read it. The last thing I read in omniscient was Dune, and it was before I knew enough about writing to notice.
Para 4: This is where I'll bring up another over-arching thing that I noticed while reading. Much of this chapter is overwritten. I checked google for a specific definition and it said "to write too elaborately or innately." I would also add that it often involves being inefficient or redundant. I'm of the writing camp that goes for everything being crisp, smooth, efficient, tight, and quick. Sentences that I really like are the ones where I think, above all else, "This writing is crisp."
So what makes it crisp? Cutting away the fat, and then cutting more. Slicing and dicing ruthlessly, combining things you thought were already trimmed to the best of your ability. I don't mean getting rid of vivid language, so much as using it strategically for effectiveness. For instance, an adverb, to me, is usually a sign I haven't found the best verb yet. By turning the two words (hurriedly went) into one (hurried, scurried, scrambled), it's more efficient/tight/trim, AND more vivid (got rid of the "blah" word "went"). Same if I turn a pile of adjectives into a single strong verb ("The bright blue ocean was breathtaking beneath the glowing orange-and-red sunset," vs, "The ocean glittered under the setting sun.") This gets back to my point about verbs being our best friend.
Often you use a lot of "loud" words close together or in places that the focus wouldn't normally be. I'm not sure if this is 100% related to being crisp and efficient, but it does relate to overwriting and being smooth and fast. When you say "He trekked up a gentle slope adorned with," the striking language is pulling my attention to the trekking and adorning, instead of what you probably want--the actual image of pines and moss-covered boulders. At the end of the day, that latter part is what's going to give the atmosphere to the setting. The more unusual words you use, the more they dilute each other out, so my recommendation is to reduce them and only use one or two in key places, like in my ocean example above.
Ahead, the appealing lodge smiled cheerfully at the weary man.
"Appealing lodge," "smiled," and "cheerfully," all stand out on their own, so throwing them at us back to back really makes me stop and examine this sentence. I'd also argue that this is telling rather than showing, because I have nothing concrete to picture, only your word that the lodge is, in fact, charming. What about it is appealing and cheery? Smoke in the chimney and chickens on the doorstep? What do you want me to picture in my head when you say a building "smiled" at him?
Para 5: After I read this, I had to come back here and check the details, because I found the transition a bit abrupt/confusing. It's a lodge, so I pictured an inn with at least a few if not lots of people, and I imagined him coming in to the big fire running in the lounge or bar. Thus I got quite confused when they talked about him being a lone hermit. I think some more details would help clarify what the room around him, or the house in general, is like.
Mind your verbs--like I've been saying, they can do so much more for you. "was," "caused." Some sentences here do a great job--"hammered," "drenched."
I found this paragraph hard to read because the succession of short sentences made it feel choppy. I think some of them could be combined, and that would kill two birds with one stone--not only would it give the para a better rhythm, it would mean cutting and tightening. For instance, I think there is more detail here than needed to get across what he's doing, and lots of repetition with the weather. This would be another example of where the word overwritten really came to mind. The last sentence especially feels over the top for the actual action its describing.
Para 6: Honestly I think you could cut like half of this chapter out without losing any content. I've heard some writing advice that says ideally, every single sentence forwards plot, setting, and character. Realistically, I think you're doing good if most of your sentences hit two out of the three. One way or the other, my rule is to try to make your sentences do more than one thing at a time. For example you can describe setting with a sentence, but the way you phrase it can show character by how they perceive everything they're looking at.
His thoughts wandered to his unfortunate injury while he was pouring out the measurements.
Take this sentence, for example. What does it do for us? Tells us he thinks of his injury. That will be obvious as soon as we get to the next sentence and he actually starts thinking about it. If you delete it, is anything lost? My rule of thumb is that if a sentence/paragraph/scene can be deleted without altering the meaning of what's around it, it probably should be.
Wrinkles had begun to disseminate over his face and neck.
I would call this a good example of overwriting, or purple prose. "Disseminate" really stands out, so it kind of breaks the flow while reading. It's not something that easily and naturally fits with what you're describing. So instead of me focuing on the wrinkles, I'm focusing on the disseminating, and trying to make my understanding of that word fit in this context.
He recounted the time about a decade ago when he was forced to stop gymnastics. His daily morning jog through the forest was currently a morning walk.
This came across as very telly to me. I think it's because of the "he recounted." It doesn't sound quite... conversational? Like, it's not showing us his actual thought, a specific memory associated with the gymnastics, but it's telling us he's thinking about a specific memory without going into detail.
Para 7:
Sorrowfully, he looked up into the heavens and prayed silently.
Watch out for adverbs. A lot of people are blindly anti-adverb, but there's a very good reason for it. I hope my explanation of efficiency and strong verbs is convincing enough. Adverbs are okay, but only when that better verb doesn't exist.
This paragraph is largely an infodump. We need the information here, it would seem, so the trick becomes how to get that across without sounding like an infodump. I think it comes down to avoiding a "lecturer" tone of informing the reader. Here, it's basically, "This happened, that happened, FYI." Consider how he might phrase it in his head, as he's thinking to himself. Some of it is going to have to be left for the reader to read between the lines. Think of it as picking out which breadcrumbs to show us so that we can infer the bigger picture.
Conversation with Matthew: I liked this and didn't have much issue with it. The only thing I noticed was that it strays a bit into "As you know..." territory, where they talk about something that both characters know both characters know. The line about Sam's last task involving saving a species is the biggest offender.
I got a little confused about what Ordadus is. At first I thought it was the angel who he was expecting to see. Then the line about Ordadus's human population made it sound like a place. Then he has to prepare them for Ordadus? Is it... an ordeal/ritual? A person again? Not sure.
The bit about asking Matthew for a drink seemed out of place. We went into summary mode so I thought that was going to sum up the rest of the conversation, so having that sudden break for two lines of dialogue, and then "resuming" summary mode seemed odd. It doesn't seem like that brief exchange actually accomplishes anything (plot, character, or setting), so I'd suggest cutting it.
Near the end, again I was thinking, "Watch out for all those adverbs." Also the bit about the Donkey Boy could be trimmed/tightened and made more conversational just like I was talking about with the other sections.
Closing Comments
Setting: I found the setting was placed in large chunks and then not really reinforced in other areas. It didn't help that I skimmed through the chunks because the sentence structure was quite choppy (those bunches of short sentences), so it didn't really stick that well in the first place. You might want to consider smoothing out the initial descriptions, and then also incorporating some through the dialogue and rest of the scene. Interacting with objects around them can help to anchor us to the story world, keep us picturing specific surroundings, while the dialogue progresses.
Character: I think Sam's character was presented well. He's older and losing confidence, where he was once strong and fit. It looks like he has a challenge ahead of him and will need to regain that confidence, and find a way to work around his slowing down with age.
Plot: Since this is a prologue, I'm not sure how to assess it for a hook. All I can say is assume that a percentage of your readers will skip this entirely, and make sure the first chapter compensates. I think the suggestion of training two young people is a nice hook and I'm interested to meet these people and find out what happens. If this were a first chapter, I'd complain that it ends on too sedentary a note, comfortable in front of a cosy fireplace, but being a prolgoue I have no idea how much that matters. If there's a way to end with some greater tension, go for it, if not, I have no idea.
Phew! Thanks for sharing, and hopefully one of these days I'll get back here to do ch1, because I really want to meet the other MCs! Cheers
(Wow...I didn't know fantabulous was actually a word!!! 
Points: 23295
Reviews: 264
Donate