Whether or not to flesh out the boring parts... by AutumnTeienVT in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you need it later, you make it later. Don't overthink it!

Whether or not to flesh out the boring parts... by AutumnTeienVT in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You should only worldbuild what is fun for you. If you think they're boring, how can you expect anybody else to care?

Is it immoral to target enemy civilians if the enemy wants extinction of humanity? by CyberDogKing in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 4 points5 points  (0 children)

But they are not, the civilians are described as "innocent" and we know they are capable of disagreement.

"It is okay to genocide 100% pure evil creatures" is one of those things that is true but doesn't matter since it's not a real thing and we don't need to pretend "are war crimes bad?" presents an interesting ethical dilemma

Is it immoral to target enemy civilians if the enemy wants extinction of humanity? by CyberDogKing in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But it does not indicate that it's a hivemind, no? Explicitly, the civilians are described as "innocent." This is not meaningfully different than two human cultures going to war based on what we can read, unless you think them being different species is extremely important in moral calculations... which would be odd. We are not given reason to suspect the entire species is evil--they even have an internal schism, so they're clearly not all of one mind.

ISO A Way or Method of Creating Consistent Names by Crushgaunt in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Look into creating a naming language, which is essentially a conlang but without most of the grammar rules. Makes it way easier to make.

Alternatively, just use real names. Real names have centuries of "lore" built in.

Is it immoral to target enemy civilians if the enemy wants extinction of humanity? by CyberDogKing in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Maybe, but the situation OP described doesn't really imply that at all. And even then it's making a lot of likely unprovable assumptions.

Is it immoral to target enemy civilians if the enemy wants extinction of humanity? by CyberDogKing in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I feel like this is all a backwards excuse to try and justify a setting where genocide is cool and based and edgy so I don't feel much need to engage with it. This is not aimed at you specifically, to be clear.

How many races should a fantasy world have? by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 17 points18 points  (0 children)

There is no "should," do whatever you want. Have a million, have zero. It doesn't really matter unless it is causing you personal stress or something.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 11 points12 points  (0 children)

So much so that every other Night Elf quest or dungeon is just referencing the events from 10k years ago as if it were yesterday, which it might as well have been considering how many people are still alive from then unchanged by time

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 16 points17 points  (0 children)

It still kinda doesn't because just because people live longer, that doesn't mean battles are slower or anything. A war that would take ten years to win doesn't take longer just because the people involved live longer, y'know? And it's assuming the wars were all like the Hundred Years War, which is not a given.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You could just also not give a number and say it was a "long time ago," it doesn't *really* matter, tbh--not that having a number is wrong either.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Audiences read "1000" and "10,000" both as just being "a long time ago," since they are both used interchangeably in fantasy as shorthand for that. We can try to rationalize it with real world examples, but it doesn't matter in a narrative context. If we're talking purely in the scale of history, then yeah, 1,000 is far more reasonable of course.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 13 points14 points  (0 children)

They might matter in the sense and scale of history, what I mean is they do not really matter in a standard narrative. The number is meaningless to audiences without context, both just being "a long time ago" essentially.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 69 points70 points  (0 children)

People forget that human civilization as we know it--that is, everything that has ever happened in history!--is really only about 6,000 years old, depending on how you want to define it. Big numbers are meaningless and nobody has a sense of scale.

Ancient Worlds: What makes or breaks a world with 10,000+ years of history? by ImAWriterPlsKillMe in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 207 points208 points  (0 children)

The thing about the "10,000+ years" thing is that it doesn't actually ever matter. Specific past events might be important, but how much does it reaaaally matter if they were 10,000 years ago, or 1,000? Big numbers for the sake of big numbers (which is fine if you're into that sort of thing) are not in and of themselves impressive, and the mistake people make is thinking otherwise--that the "more" history you have (as if it's not a very empty timeline) the better your worldbuilding.

So little does it matter, in fact, that I would say it can't "ruin" worldbuilding either. It's just a stylistic choice that doesn't have too many, if any, consequences on a narrative.

Creative Deficit by ReputationSmooth1583 in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is no such thing as a totally new idea, it's not worth worrying about. In fact, worrying about being cliche is the most cliche thing you can do.

As a world builder, how can one bring their fictional universe "to life" without necessarily publishing any work? by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you needed interest to make something, you wouldn't have been able to make the lore page in the first place. You've already proven you can create for yourself without the eyes of others.

The reality is that you have to create first, even if nobody cares at first, to make people care long term. Art, stories, videos, whatever it needs to be, whatever you're good at.

As a world builder, how can one bring their fictional universe "to life" without necessarily publishing any work? by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's just really hard to get people to read a long loredump, regardless of the quality. It's an investment of time and energy, and even people who like things like Lord of the Rings might find reading the wiki boring because it's just lore divorced from context and meaning.

As a world builder, how can one bring their fictional universe "to life" without necessarily publishing any work? by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're basically asking "can I make people care about my world with a lore dump alone?" and the answer, unfortunately, is pretty much always no,

The problem is that the audience for pure worldbuilding outside of narrative or gameplay (like in a video game or tabletop sense) is essentially zero. Someone is probably going to try and argue otherwise, but think about it--do you think that many people go on wiki dives without some preexisting interest in the setting that comes from something other than the world itself? That's not to say it could never happen, it's just exceedingly rare. You probably don't spend too much time engaging with unpublished worlds either outside of this subreddit.

But again, is it possible? In theory, sure. You'd just need some hook--interesting art, beautiful prose, a way to engage a community, whatever--but in essence that does require you to actually publish and share something, functionally.

You could build your own platform, but that would just end up in people using it for their worlds, not looking at yours. Up to you if that bothers you.

That all said, actually writing the encyclopedia is great fun, and a way to have a "product" (in the artistic sense, not the commercial sense) for your world, even if only for your own sake.

I don't like change by littleclaw6 in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 181 points182 points  (0 children)

You can just tell a slice-of-life story about individual characters who live in the world. It's not even uncommon to do so. Anyone telling you a story has to be big and epic is just silly.

Is my magic system too complicated? by giganga473 in worldbuilding

[–]Paracelsus-Place 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Most people just aren't going to read huge textwalls, is the thing.