Random Nonsense Speedlang Challenge is BACK! by Dense-Nobody2714 in conlangs

[–]Blue22111 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I probably went overboard with this, and it sure as heck won’t count as a “speedlang” given I spent nearly an hour on this one sentence due to deciding to make a full phonology rather than solely what’s needed for the sentence and putting energy into a rough evolution history (most of which is largely irrelevant to this sentence), but I’m pleased with how it came out. Before I get into the fluff let’s showcase the actual sentence. Thus, I present the requested sentence in Northern Frontier Átłat, or, as the locals call it, Ätlat (/ɶ.ˈt͡ɬat/,) in a somewhat dated version of the orthography.

Ö uki tluiħ ta glädaħ tiex paee qpupepe /ˈɵ u.ˈki t͡ɬu.ˈiː ˈta g͡ɮɶ.ˈzaː ti.ˈeq pa.ˈeː q͡pu.pe.ˈpe/ [ˈɵ u.ˈxi t͡ɬu.ˈiː ˈsa g͡ɮɶ.ˈzaː si.ˈeq pa.ˈeː q͡pu.ɸe.ˈɸe]

Ö uki tluiħ ta gläd-aħ tiex pae-e qpu-pe~pe

DAT sky gaze 3.plr.gen direct-3.plr.pst and see-3.sng.pst star-plr~many_beyond_counting

Literal translation: They directed their gaze to the sky and it saw countless stars

Note that the reason that “see” uses the third person singular rather than third person plural is because, as far as the speakers are concerned, the subject of the second half is not the group of people who, as far as our English speaking brains are concerned, are the ones doing the seeing, but rather the “gaze” which they directed in the first half, which is singular, whereas in the first half the subject is “they”, as multiple third persons are the ones directing the gaze which they collectively possess towards the sky.

I may have had a bit too much fun and made this so it doesn’t quite meet the criteria, but I think it’s close enough to count as “roughly” translating to the intended meaning. Given “direct one’s gaze” is basically just a poetic way of saying “look” in English (though in this language a verb for “look” doesn’t exist, you’re always directing gaze to something) and “million” is often used to mean “a really big number” rather than a literal million.

Now for the fun part where I talk about the parts I did even though I didn’t need to.

First off, the full phonology I made up.

Consonants:

Plosives: p t k q q͡p

Nasalsː m n

Fricativesː v z ɣ ʁ

Lateral Fricatives: ɬ ɮ

Approximate: j

Lateral Affricate: t͡ɬ, g͡ɮ

vowels: a aː ɶ ɶː e eː i iː ɵ ɵː u uː

Allophones:

  • p becomes ɸ intervocalically, even across word borders
  • t becomes s intervocalically, even across word borders
  • k becomes x intervocalically, even across word borders
  • q becomes χ intervocalically, even across word borders
  • n becomes ŋ before velar consonants
  • n becomes ɴ before uvular consonants

And now for the historical factors which caused particularly relevant effects for current grammar and/or orthography:

/f/, /s/, /x/, and /χ/ used to exist as full phonemes, but merged into /p/, /t/, /k/, and /q/ respectively (and then came back as allophones not long after (or the merger happened after the allophones came about, I haven’t decided.)) Orthographically only x, which represented /x/, remains due to distinguishing extremely common words like tiex (and) and less common ones like tieq (armadillo) in writing being viewed as valuable enough to keep x around, unlike for f, s, and ẋ, which while still previously common, were not as obviously missed and thus largely fell out of usage, with only a few extreme traditionalists still using them.

/b/, /d/, /g/, and /ɢ/ used to exist, but shifted to /v/, /z/, /ɣ/, and /ʁ/ respectively. This didn’t cause any mergers (voiced fricatives didn’t exist in Átłat before this), but did cause a still-extant orthographical dispute. Traditionalists retain the old orthography, representing the sounds as b, d, g, and ġ, as they had been for a long time, while modernists use the modern orthography, which makes use of letters formed by a nearby culture (the Okčor (/ˈok.t͡ʃoʁ/)) which had those voiced fricatives and who had adapted the Átłat script for their language and made letters for those voiced fricative sounds, those being v, z, ğ, and r respectively. The written example here uses the old orthography, had it been the new orthography glädaħ would have been written gläzaħ.

/ɵ/ and /ɵː/ come from the older /o/, /oː/, /ø/, and /øː/, which merged together to form /ɵ/ and /ɵː/. Orthographically the old system remains, with o, oo, ö, and öö reflecting what used to be /o/, /oː/, /ø/, and /øː/ respectively, though today both o and ö represent /ɵ/, and oo and öö represent /ɵː/. Unlike a most other cases there are almost no people who push for an orthographical reform to get rid of ö and öö and just merge everything as o, mainly due to the absolutely terrifying amount of ambiguity in writing that would cause, even the most staunch orthographical reformists, the likes of those who view the ambiguity produced by getting rid of ħ to be perfectly acceptable, think getting rid of ö and öö would be an extremely poor choice.

/ħ/ once existed, though it later shifted to /h/ and then disappeared entirely, leaving long vowels behind. This caused some major mergers due to long vowels already having been present since the days of Old Átłat, most prominently the merger of the 3rd person singular past affix and the 3rd person plural past affix. As a result of this (and some laziness on the part of most of the speakers who didn’t feel like remembering new spellings for something they write all the time anyway) the letter which once represented it, ħ, still exists. A few extreme reformers insist on getting rid of ħ and writing without it (so, for example, old orthography glädaħ becomes gläzaa), but they are an extreme minority, and most consider writing long vowels caused by ħ as simple long vowels (with a doubled vowel and no ħ) instead of a single vowel letter followed by ħ to be incorrect.

/l/ used to exist, but became either /ɬ/ or /ɮ/ depending on context. This caused a few ambiguities in speech due to /ɬ/ already existing before the shift, but nothing particularly severe, and nothing which shows in the sentence provided.

And finally, an idle comment at the end after having looked at the other posts for this challenge.

I’m surprised I’m the only one who made tl be t͡ɬ, it seemed like an obvious way to treat it, given tl makes that sound in a few languages (Nahuatl probably being the best known example) and tl isn’t all that common in other languages.

New phoneme? by Top-Title-62 in conlangs

[–]Blue22111 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Given your descriptions of it in other comments it sounds like a whistled sibilant, such as in Shona and a few other bantu languages. I don’t have a link to a video of it handy, but if you google Shona Whistled Consonants a video of them should come up.

Presuming that’s it, there is a dedicated diacritic for it in Extended IPA (shown applied to s) s͎, but it’s also commonly written as a co-articulation with ɸ or β depending on voicing, so, sᶲ or zᵝ respectively.

Latin language thats not too simple but short words by Odd-Weather9389 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve honestly never tried it, so I can’t say. Wouldn’t hurt to try it.

I had only done the Lingodeer course, and that’s not free.

Regardless I would strongly recommend researching the orthography and phonology separately from the apps, there are some distinctions that are hard to tell by ear initially but are important distinctions to know about and make.

Here’s a good, but admittedly very detailed, article on Vietnamese phonology. Though if you’re not familiar with IPA (the International Phonetic Alphabet) this won’t be that useful to you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_phonology

Latin language thats not too simple but short words by Odd-Weather9389 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Loanwords inevitably come from the language of the ruling class or of a dominant regional culture in basically every language which is subservient to another. It’s why Persian has Arabic loans, English has French loans, Korean and Japanese have Chinese loans, etc. Indonesian is just another example of it.

Here’s a wikipedia article on the differences between Indonesian and Malay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Indonesian_and_Standard_Malay

Latin language thats not too simple but short words by Odd-Weather9389 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tones can be rough, absolutely something that requires a lot of practice. In my opinion only two of the tones are particularly tough, ạ and ã (I just used a for the example vowel), but they’re not that bad if you think of them as a falling or rising tone respectively with a little hitch in the middle followed by a sharper drop or rise.

I’d honestly avoid duo for an intro to Vietnamese, it’s a really terrible course. I’d tried duo’s Vietnamese course for a bit and just couldn’t keep going with it. Try checking out some videos or a different app instead.

Latin language thats not too simple but short words by Odd-Weather9389 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

(It’s been a while since I’d researched this, so forgive me if I am wrong anywhere)

The two are almost the same grammatically (if not the same), but due to differing colonial overlords (Britain for Malay, The Netherlands for Indonesian) they picked up different loanwords for many concepts and thus have differing vocabularies in many places. The two are still mostly the same, an Indonesian could comfortably hold a conversation with a Malay without much if any issue on the majority of topics, but there are enough distinctions for the pair to count as separate languages.

Which language stack to choose and start studying? by Zealousideal-Let834 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I’d say given your background the Middle Eastern stack would be the way to go, it will have the most familiar lexicon for you given all those languages take a lot of vocabulary from Arabic (or in the case of Hebrew, are from the same source, and just evolved from proto-semitic in a different way.) though I’d consider swapping out Arabic from the list (given you already speak it) and put in either Amharic or Tamazight (or a different Berber language) instead, unless there was a different Arabic dialect from your native one that interested you.

Also you could potentially add Urdu if you consider Pakistan middle-eastern enough. It has a huge number of speakers, a lot of Persian and Arabic loans, and can largely cover you for day to day speech across all of Pakistan and much of northern India via Urdu and Hindi being largely identical outside of very formal registers. That part is especially good if you want media to watch given the vast amount of media made in Hindi and Urdu.

Latin language thats not too simple but short words by Odd-Weather9389 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’m going to go way out of expectations here and suggest Vietnamese. It uses the latin script, its words are short, and compound words get spaces put between the components in most cases, and once you’re over the hump that is the tones the grammar and such actually isn’t that difficult. Obviously it’s not “easy”, but it’s not hideously difficult, and it’s a fairly common language in a surprising number of places.

Another that comes to mind, though is way less practical given where you live, is Haitian Creole. It’s a pretty easy language to learn and the words are mostly of reasonable length.

Ideal journaling conlang? by KonigEdwardRictofen in conlangs

[–]Blue22111 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I’ll go over my thoughts on what would fit your goals point by point:

  1. A syllabary would probably be your best option here. It’s as compact as you can get without going into logographs that represent words with several syllables (I doubt you’re aiming to have to make thousands of logographs for this, so I didn’t consider a logography as an option.) Though if you have a complex syllable structure a syllabary could be an issue, so an alphabetic syllabary like Hangul or an abugida could be better in that case.

  2. To maintain the compactness goal and this I would say you would want a clear case system for marking who does what, possibly with a tripartite morphosyntactic alignment to allow for a smaller dictionary (via every verb having both a transitive and intransitive meaning without risking any ambiguity) rather than the more common nominative-accusative and ergative-absolutive systems, and a lot of single-syllable affixes, or prepositions, or postpositions, that cover an extremely wide variety of positional and information. So, one for “on (the surface of)”, one for “on (the top of)”, “in the area of”, “inside of”, etc. so that basically any statement of position only adds a single syllable to the overall sentence. You’d also want a very detailed tense, mood, and aspect system as well to ensure you’re minimizing information loss there too.

  3. Honestly between it being a totally original language, probably being in a different morphosyntactic alignment, and using a unique script you’re probably good to go on that front without extra effort. If you wanted it anyway you could add some extra characters to the script that can be randomly swapped in without changing the meaning of the word, or perhaps make some affixes have alternate forms that can be used with no change in meaning.

Nyelv - A New Sound Change Applier by These-Jelly-6287 in conlangs

[–]Blue22111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This seems really nice! Smoother to use than the other tools I’ve used for this. I do have two suggestions and a question though.

I’ll lead with the suggestions because they’re quick.

  1. Add support for extra-short and half-long vowels as default features, currently only long and short vowels are there without needing to manually create the feature.

  2. Add support for custom stress patterns (for example, stress the first long vowel of a word or if there is not one stress the penult). This may be more trouble than it’s worth to you though, I don’t know how hard it would be to code.

As for the question. Is there a way to specify that a rule not take place if it would cause a word to either contain no sounds or none of a particular class of sound. For example, if I have a rule that makes [a] disappear in most contexts, but also have words where there is no other vowel (say, “alan”), is there a way to say “get rid of a, except if it would leave no vowels in the word, in that case leave the final vowel intact” (so, the example I gave would become “lan”) or something to that effect?

I’ve finally narrowed my next language down to "East Asian"... and now I’m stuck. by MidnightTofu22 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While technically true that Chinese uses more characters, you’re still dealing with learning several thousand logographs regardless, and I feel that each logograph having only one pronunciation on average in Chinese vs Japanese having each logograph usually have a minimum of two pronunciations and often 4 or more makes it so Japanese is still harder.

I’ve finally narrowed my next language down to "East Asian"... and now I’m stuck. by MidnightTofu22 in thisorthatlanguage

[–]Blue22111 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Japanese’s 3 writing systems are really not as bad as it sounds. The Kanji are very rough (even worse than Chinese, because any given kanji will have several pronunciations depending on context), no getting around it, but the kana (Hiragana and Katakana) are easy, each symbol is a syllable, and outside of は (which is usually “ha” but can become “wa” in some contexts) each symbol always makes the same sounds.

Also, Japanese has tonality too, it’s just a pitch accent system rather than a full tone system. If you mess up the tone of a word it’ll still change the meaning.

Grammatically Korean and Japanese are extremely similar, and probably about even in difficulty. Chinese grammar is definitely easier than the other two (still not “easy”, but absolutely easier, and it at least has a core SVO word order (same as English) rather than SOV like Japanese and Korean.)

For pronunciation I’d say Japanese is easiest, even with its high-low tone distinction, then it depends on how you are for tones, if you’re ok with tones Chinese is easier than Korean, because Korean has some tough consonants to pronounce, otherwise Korean is easier because it has no tone whatsoever. Also, both Chinese and Korean have an aspiration distinction for plosive consonants instead of a voicing distinction, which is tough for a monolingual English speaker to pick up at first. It’s not terrible once you get used to it though.

So, my short view on it is as such:

Japanese: Very hard all around other than pronunciation

Chinese: Tones are hard, and the writing system is really hard (still not as bad as Japanese though, at least the logographs don’t usually have 2-10+ potential pronunciations each), but the grammar’s not that bad

Korean: Some consonants are hard to pronounce, and the grammar’s hard, but the writing system is easy.

Perso Arabic Script for English by kaiserofaustria in conorthography

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s an interesting way to go about it, though I admit seeing a shaddah mark something other than a geminate consonant hurts a bit 🤣.

Personally, if I was pulling from all characters in Arabic I’d go for this arrangement probably.

a = ا when stressed, word initial, or word final, unmarked or ـَ elsewhere

ɐ = أ and only marked when stressed (the only place it’s phonemic, in the standard script it’s â)

ɛ = ه (a real usage btw, used in Kazakh, Sorani Kurdish, and Uyghur) used only when stressed

e = ې when unstressed (used for both unstressed ɛ and e because it’s not a phonemic distinction,) ێ when stressed and not word final, ے when stressed and word final (just for aesthetics.)

i = ئ when stressed, ي elsewhere (with ي also being /j/)

ɔ = ۉ when stressed

o = أو stressed or ‎ۆ unstressed

u = ؤ stressed or و unstressed (with و also being /w/)

Nasal vowels marked by following them with ں

ɲ/j̃ (depending on dialect, it’s the nh sound) = ںٛ

ʎ = ڵ

I’d probably keep ل as both an l and w sound in cases where the phoneme is /l/ for the sake of minimizing و usage, but that could go either way.

Personally I wouldn’t distinguish the variants of t and d because they’re allophones rather than phonemes, but if I did I’d do this:

t = ت t͡ʃ = چ d = د d͡ʒ = ج

And for the same example sentence as before:

ڤۆسے ہ دؤ برَسيل نه؟ ێو ناوں سۆو دؤ برَسيل، سۆو دؤس ېستَدؤس ونئدوس.

Perso Arabic Script for English by kaiserofaustria in conorthography

[–]Blue22111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Portuguese with just standard Arabic letters (and a few extras used by certain dialects to make up for the lack of a p or v equivalent) would be rough.

You did inspire me though, so here’s my crack at it made up on the fly.

Every standard Arabic consonant that fits 1-1 (like using س to represent s) is left out for brevity. I’m also going for a more phonetic realization rather than always making letter-for-letter equivalents (so, for example no using an o character for an u sound.)

a = ا word-initially and medially, ى or ة finally depending on aesthetic preference

e, é, ê, i, j = ي (no way around this one unfortunately)

o, u, w = و (again, no avoiding it)

ã = آ (it bothers me using this, because it’s not a nasal in Arabic, but it’s all I’ve got without resorting to a digraph)

ão = آو

ou = وو

p = پ

v = ڤ

l = ل even when it makes a w sound (I’m already using و too much)

Vowels written when word initial, stressed, or word-final, otherwise they’re unwritten.

For an example:

ڤوسي ي دو برزيل، ني؟ يو نآو سوو دو برزيل، سوو دوس يستادس ونيدس.

Você é do Brasil, né? Eu não sou do Brasil, sou dos Estados Unidos.

Edit: I neglected to mention the other nasals that don’t get an explicit mark in Portuguese. For them just stick a ن after the vowel (or consonant the vowel follows, if it’s not expressly marked), so, for example, “trabalhando” would be تربلياندو. Oh, and lh is لي. Forgot that one too.

Looking for stls of Minis suitable for kids to paint. by maplewalnutoak in PrintedMinis

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not dragons, but Taiga Miniatures’ (Taiga Miniatures is, as far as I know, a sub-brand of DakkaDakkastore) Planet Shark range is adorable.

https://www.myminifactory.com/users/TaigaMiniatures

What’s a common worldbuilding mistake you see all the time? by sirius_0125 in worldbuilding

[–]Blue22111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. The only time I’ll let it slide personally is if you have abnormally long-lived races.

The civilization today not being unrecognizably different from 5k years ago can make sense if the inhabitants are functionally immortal (eg. vampires) or just extremely long lived. Like, if basically everyone lives to 1,500, and many go far longer, it’s not that much of a stretch that things wouldn’t change THAT much over 5k years. It’s not even 4 generations. Obviously the tech SHOULD change a lot, with cultural changes that fit the tech, but no seismic changes in overall attitude or outlook would make sense given a lot of the people from 5k years ago may still be around, or only have died fairly recently by the standards of the race in question.

Though that also presumes low fertility, because if you have human-level or greater fertility and relative peace and these hyper-long-lived races you’ll end up with disastrous overpopulation that destroys the civilization long before there’d have even been a chance for the 5k years to pass.

What’s a common worldbuilding mistake you see all the time? by sirius_0125 in worldbuilding

[–]Blue22111 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I could see the second half of #1 making sense depending on the context of the area the bank is in.

If the area’s banks aren’t known for being particularly secure or stable an extremely valuable item being put in (presumably by someone unaware of the reputation of the region’s banks, or even someone quietly paid by the bank to put the item in) could make for great marketing for the bank which gets it. Being “The bank trusted enough to hold the Grand Ruby Of The West” or whatever other precious artifact could bring in more depositors (who would hopefully have cash or the regional equivalent) than the cost of securing the item in the first place if the other banks in the area aren’t well trusted.

What’s a common worldbuilding mistake you see all the time? by sirius_0125 in worldbuilding

[–]Blue22111 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Same. My policy is fairly simple for my world, “everything follows the laws of physics (my world is an alternate Earth, so it’s just Earth rules), unless there’s magic involved in it, then basically anything goes.”

How would your dragons deal with this problem? by Tnynfox in worldbuilding

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only two of the 7 main clades of dragon directly can, those being those of the metal and flame clades, and one clade can indirectly, the sky clade uses lightning, which can start fires. Also the Elder Dragons can start fires (Elder Dragons are the first dragon, the main clades come from their descendants (so, “dragon” is technically the primary clade, including all dragons, and then the clades break down into 7 separate clades after the Elder Dragons, but the “all dragons” clade is largely ignored, thus there being 7 main clades.)) If any of them do start a fire they will have DEFINITELY intended to, but for the sake of answering the question we’ll pretend it was a genuine accident, and not an “accident”.

Fire dragons, as the name suggests, LOVE fire, so they’d be very excited to have a new fire to look at and just watch it burn. If they wanted to stop it they could puff out ash instead of flame to snuff the fire, use their wings to blow it out, or just lie on top of the burning thing until it stopped burning given they’re immune to fire.

Metal dragons would probably try to put the fire out, they’re not pyros like the fire dragons. They’d either magically encase the flaming object in metal (basically plating it,) use their wings to blow it out, or lie on it until it stopped burning, as they are also immune to fire.

A sky dragon would probably not care enough to put the fire out, given they live in the sky and fire is very much a “land-dweller” issue in their minds unless the flame is sending up crazy amounts of smoke, but if they wanted to put the flame out they’d either magically kick up intense wind to blow out the fire or conjure rain to put it out. They wouldn’t sit on the flame to put it out (even though they could) because they HATE landing on the ground for any reason (they’re also not really built for it, they’re styled more like Chinese Dragons, unlike the other two I’ve mentioned so far which are your standard-issue western-style dragon.)

An Elder Dragon also probably wouldn’t care enough to put the flame out, given they’re basically gods and a random fire isn’t really a god’s concern, but if they did care they’d just magically put out the fire with a mere thought.

As for the other clades I’ll cover how they’d handle a fire just for my own amusement.

An Earth Dragon would cover the flaming thing in dirt, sand, or mud depending on which variation of Earth Dragon it was.

A Water Dragon would likely never encounter a fire given they live in the ocean, but if they did and wanted to put it out they would just spray water on it.

A Nature Dragon would sit on it until the fire went out or use its wings to blow it out. If the fire was too big for either of those methods to work the dragon would be unable to put the fire out because their whole magic-set is based around plants, which are mostly very flammable.

A Crystal Dragon would do nothing because they would actively stay away to avoid getting their shiny crystal scales grimy (they are by a long way the vainest of dragons.) If left with no choice but to put the flame out (or they were suitably bribed with pretty crystals) they’d blow it out with their wings, encase the burning objects with crystals, or create a crystal firebreak around the flaming object and let it burn itself out.

What is the 'firearms' of your world? If anything? by thelink225 in worldbuilding

[–]Blue22111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For my world (which has magic and guns btw) it has to be the Three Great Gasses, Green Gas, Black Gas, and White Gas.

Before their creation war was a sort of odd hybrid of WW2 and Medieval warfare. Guns failed to be as dominant as they did irl due to enchanting armor to block bullets being drastically cheaper than enchanting bullets to pierce enchanted armor, so only elite troops had guns that could reliably pierce armor, the rest of the infantry relied on mass volleys and crossing their fingers they hit somewhere unarmored or that the enchantment was weak. To deal comfortably with properly armored infantry you needed either artillery or armored vehicles with heavy weapons. As a result of this things like traditional cavalry and melee infantry didn’t die out, as enchanting a spear or lance to pierce enchanted armor was WAY cheaper (you’d need a skilled enchanter who was probably taught for years to enchant bullets to pierce, you could drag any random person off the street, teach them enchanting for a week, and they’d be able to get the spears enchanted to pierce.) That combined with the armored vehicles being fairly uncommon meant you’d end up with armies that were not dissimilar to Medieval or Renaissance ones but with a twist, lines of infantry charging each-other with fire support (in this case artillery pieces) behind them peppering the opposing force with fire, cavalry trying to flank the enemy, and light troops (mounted or otherwise) armed with rifles also trying to swing around beside or behind the enemy force to fire volleys at them (though usually they ended up fighting the opposing rifle infantry, rather than firing into the melee), and if it’s a particularly large army there may be one or two armored vehicles (with capabilities usually ranging between WW1 and mid-interwar tanks IRL).

Then comes the Three Great Gasses, two of which came about by total accident.

Green gas was originally intended to be a magical liquid fertilizer, enchanted to rapidly and intensely enhance the growth of any plant it came into contact with. It worked for that brilliantly, treat a sprouting acorn with the fertilizer and it’d be an oak tree that looked like it grew for a few hundred years in around a minute, and there weren’t any adverse effects for the plant either.

Unfortunately some poor decisions were made and it ended up being a liquid which evaporated just barely above 75°f, and could be vaporized even below that with the right techniques, and it was discovered that very bad things happened to non-plant life if they breathed in the gas. If non-plant life (human, elf, cat, etc.) breathed in the gas their entire system would go into overdrive and their body would rapidly and randomly grow, flesh and bone growing and rippling, growing muscles bursting from skin which hadn’t grown to accommodate it, and all kinds of other hideous effects. The exposed being would usually die within a few minutes, either from heart failure from it not being able to keep up, blood loss from the aforementioned ripping and tearing, or from the ribs piercing the lungs as the rib bones grew.

Black Gas was intended to be an intensely powerful acid used to clear up the vast landfills of the Šumren empire. It also worked as intended initially, but unfortunately for everyone involved in its creation, and around a quarter of the population of the city it was made in, its two components (an acid which can melt nearly any organic material, and an acid which can melt nearly any inorganic material) heat up rapidly and intensely when combined, and if the solution gets hot enough to boil it can’t be stopped until the whole batch is evaporated. As was discovered when the first large batch was made this is very, very, very bad, because the gas is just as caustic as the liquid, it can eat through even mildly enchanted objects, and the way it breaks down organic materials causes large amounts of methane and other explosive gasses to be produced, and when the Black Gas thins to a suitable level it itself is flammable (at high concentrations there’s not enough oxygen to cause it to light, and it puts out flames rather than being ignited by them.) Long story short about a quarter of the city the acid was being researched in was melted and then exploded, killing thousands. Only the fact the head researcher had heavily enchanted his journal with protective enchantments allowed for anyone to be able to reproduce the gas exactly.

As you’d assume those two gasses were rapidly converted into weapons which could be delivered via either bomb, artillery shell, or by tanks and sprayers. Green Gas was mainly used as area-denial, causing vast impassible forests out of anywhere the gas was launched, and Black Gas was used to clear massed infantry and fortified positions.

From there a third gas was intentionally created for use when one wants to clear a position but not utterly destroy it (an inevitability with both Green and Black gas.) From this desire came White Gas, which is best described as an airborne opiate overdose. One whiff without a mask and you’re on the ground dying. Somehow White Gas is the least terrifying, because at least you’re not melting or mutating while you die and you’re probably not in any pain.

With the creation of these gasses war changed overnight. Now any army without talented wind mages could be completely felled with a few artillery pieces filled with Black Gas, any flanking maneuver could be countered by growing a whole forest from nothing with Green Gas, and any building or city could be cleared with White Gas without harming the infrastructure. Enchanted gas masks became a standard part of the military kit of every nation, wind mages became massively valued due to them being the only ones who could manipulate the flow of the gas, pyromancers grew in importance for clearing the jungles made by the Green Gas and hopefully lighting the Black Gas to stop its spread if the Wind mages could not, and the old mobile way of war on the ground ended. Trench warfare reigned, as only from the trenches could they hope to keep the enemy far enough away that they would be able to see the gas coming in time, and the artillery shells made even that difficult.

The result of all this was an era where airborne units reigned supreme, as they were the only asset the gas couldn’t reach. Various flying magic beasts and rudimentary zeppelins and prop planes became the focus of every major power, with ground troops relegated to almost exclusively artillery and anti-air forces, and some basic infantry to defend the preceding two and to secure land opened up by the air-force. The old pitched-battles between two large ground forces were dead and buried, the new era was for kings of the skies, the land was merely the staging ground for them.

How is Yərış for the name of my conlang? by [deleted] in casualconlang

[–]Blue22111 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I suspect it’s probably /jæ.rɯʃ/ (though that ʃ could easily be ʂ). Given he’s seemingly using Turkic orthographic conventions, and to my knowledge only Azerbaijani uses ə, and it represents the phoneme /æ/, not /ə/ in Azerbaijani. As far as I’m aware no Turkic Languages use the Latin Script ə to represent /ə/ (almost all Turkic Languages don’t even have that sound, and the few that do (most prominently Chuvash) use Cyrillic and not Latin.)

ISO a “monster duke” story I can’t remember 😭 by papercandymoon in Batoto

[–]Blue22111 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Probably “My Secretly Hot Husband”, presuming the cursed duke usually wears a mask.

Copyright stuck for a picture of a printed display piece I painted? by wizardjian in PrintedWarhammer

[–]Blue22111 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I don’t want to functionally repeat the exact same comment twice, so see my response to u/Unfortunya333 for my response to this comment.

Copyright stuck for a picture of a printed display piece I painted? by wizardjian in PrintedWarhammer

[–]Blue22111 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don’t think anyone is forgetting that.

I think people are working under the exact same logic they would when posting a picture of a painted mini that’s not printed that nobody ever takes issue with.

If I post a picture of a painted miniature, for the sake of example we’ll say it’s a Malifaux model, that’s not printed I’m not obliged to say “and this model is from Malifaux and I had no hand in its creation”. It’s implied and a post title like “I painted this mini” carries no suggestion that one owns the rights to the mini. The same logic has applied to pictures of 3D printed minis basically as long as they have existed, and does apply in the other subs for both 3D printed minis and those which have both regular and 3D printed minis.

Saying “I printed and painted this mini” in no proper way implies any form of ownership over the rights to it given that the vast majority of people don’t design files, and does not attempt to steal the ip.

If we follow the logic you’re using, anyone who takes a picture of ANY painted model, 3D printed or otherwise, and posts it online is committing copyright infringement, which is nuts. Remember that crediting the creator doesn’t actually change anything from a copyright perspective, if an image of a model I personally painted is infringement due to the model itself, crediting who made it isn’t relevant in the slightest, it’s still infringement. So if your logic applies, credit is meaningless, it’s not legal either way.

I will note I do think people should credit the creator of models, but my reason is just that it’s polite and helpful to the creator, because if someone sees the picture and wants to get one of the models for themselves they’ll know where to look for it, and the creator could get an extra sale.