GenericOonorio




























  1. I imagine part of it is the antiquated moral purity angle. A story about a person who casually disregards the concept of humanity and fucks with their own anatomy is inherently going to have some themes about what makes someone/something human as well as the flexibility of identity, and unfortunately that sort of subject matter really rustles the jimmies of crusty old people.

  2. If enough people think something is a god then it's a god. It's just a title with the implication of representing some greater idea or concept to a large amount of people - nothing about that requires any sort of actual divinity or intent on the part of the god. A rock could be a god as long as a bunch of people feel it embodies a concept important to them.

  3. It can help, but it's definitely not necessary. Maps by all means can help visualize the world you're making, but so can concept art, illustrations, comics, animations or any other kind of visual art really. Hell, even well made non-visual art can do that job.

  4. I can't genuinely wrap my head around how you could think that progressive themes/societal commentary hasn't be done well unless you've been exposed solely to the godawful corporate side of it. What pieces of fiction or media are you going off of as your prevalent exposure to the concept here?

  5. I enjoy it a lot when creators delve more into the subcultures and individuality of their world's different species/civilizations, but I also understand Planet of Hats is an inevitability in storytelling if a creator's goal isn't specifically to avoid it.

  6. Absolutely! A lot of this community prefers to consume their worldbuilding with visuals like maps and art and infographics!

  7. To be frank I don't exactly have much confidence that all one million of the individuals that (supposedly) browse this sub to unanimously agree to keep the spirit and identity of the sub intact without tangible moderation. Self-moderation is a pretty idea on paper, but in reality it's impossible in any large scale.

  8. World building is making a fictional world, full-stop. It doesn't matter what size or scale the building is being done at, any amount is by definition building a world. There is no arbitrary 'minimum scale required' or whatever for what you're doing to constitute world building.

  9. I start small and stay small. I want the maps I make to be stylized illustrations that actually show what the location looks like and not just a bunch of lines with pretty colors and vague symbols on it, so I have to keep things relatively small-scale to enable the level of detail that begets. Obviously they aren't 1 to 1 maps or whatever, but I prefer to have something visually interesting and evocative over complete accuracy.

  10. Easily the lads over at Love-De-Lic/Punchline/Onion Games. They do such a wonderful job making really fun, comedic and absurd worlds that have a deeply personal and emotional meaning underneath all the cartooniness.

  11. If you’re seriously considering nukes not being viable for the job then I feel like the regeneration factor is the problem here. Maybe tone it down a little so that these creatures can’t magically come back from complete vaporization.

  12. Actually balancing magic solves most of these problems. Setting your limit for magic to '1 mage = 1 trebuchet' for instance is fucking bonkers given the vast difference between a single person with colorful pajamas and an entire siege engine team. The same can be said for most of the other examples you gave - the issue isn't that the magic is an option, it's just blatantly overpowered in every case.

  13. My worlds are largely sandboxes for me to have fun with character design, so I sorta just go all over the place when populating my worlds. I like having every person look wildly different by designing each of them from the ground up as their own proverbial race. The only real unifying factor between the broader population is that they share an art style or a general theme.

  14. If their powers are cataclysmic in use then it's realistic to me that people with powers just wouldn't use them. Most people don't want to destroy the world, so even if some person has an apocalyptic ability they probably wouldn't make use of it in the interest of not obliterating everything that they could feasibly be fighting for.

  15. You are the execute decision maker when it comes to your world, so you could just have it so there just aren't any evil people with those sorts of powers. As long characters like that aren't common its not really beyond reason that it just hasn't happened yet.

  16. Yea, but they’re more like dioramas. I enjoy making stylized little drawings that communicate the gist of my worlds’ structures rather than presenting the exact layout of them. The audience doesn’t need to know how everything is connected in exact numbers, they just need to know what/where everything is relative to one another.

  17. I try to make every area in my worlds vastly different from one another so that the ideas I have can't drift away from whichever one I'm focusing on at any given moment. The large distinction between the premise and aesthetics of each area makes it easier to separate them in my head, which naturally keeps the ideas I have for them from cross-contaminating.

  18. Nah, just have fun with it. Constantly serious names get exhausting pretty quickly, it's nice to break up that monotony with some goofy names now and then.

  19. For bikini armor specifically I don't think there is one that won't make me roll my eyes at the H O R N Y, but in regards to the broader scope of absurd armor choices the excuse of 'the wearer just genuinely likes the aesthetic of it' usually works for me. People wear stupid and impractical shit all the time in real life for the sake of self-expression, I can accept that fictional people would do the same.

  20. Personally I'd say your premise here cleanly hops over the edge line, but that's not really a problem to me. As it is the thing I take more issue with is that the order of events doesn't really make sense, though that may just be a result of it being summarized. Your MC is helped by some elven master as a child to cope with his trauma, but he also ends up being a serial killer some years later in spite of that? What the hell did his master teach him? Did he mean to teach him that, or did your MC just grossly misinterpret and somehow the master didn't notice?

  21. No his teacher didn’t directly teach him to act this way. When he found him, he had just been through so much that the only way he could get through to him was through training. He trained him in Elven swordsmanship, and also taught him about the Elven beliefs and their way of living, as well as his own personal beliefs and experiences. His master in the “current” time doesn’t 100% condone his actions, and at times they’ll argue over it, but he knows there isn’t a way to make him stop.

  22. That clears it up some, but I still have some issue with how you've described the dynamic between your MC and their master. Saying that he doesn't stop your MC because there isn't a way to just doesn't make sense to me because there very blatantly is - he could kill him. If the master disagreed with him and he actually cared enough about his convictions to do something about it then he could at least try to find a way to take the MC's life, and thus stop his actions from continuing.

  23. I’d follow through with what I’m doing right now and just finish making something tangible with it. Anything short of that will never properly communicate the vision I have for my work.

  24. Assuming that one happened I imagine they'd all die, or at least be in misery during it. The Known Lands are the only place that experiences weather and seasons in the way we're used to, and even then it's a very tame version of it in comparison. If the whole world got cold for an extended period of time there's not really anything they could do to prepare, they'd be pretty fucked after a couple months.

  25. Yeah, I asked the question because, IIRC, that's how Neanderthals died out. They were too strong for their own good.

  26. No worries, it's something interesting to consider for when I make characters that live in colder environments.

  27. You only need to establish internal consistency at minimum. You can go about making your world realistic if you want to, but nobody will bat an eye if you make an unrealistic and absurd world as long as it doesn't contradict itself. And even then and inconsistent world can still be internally consistent.

  28. The two both influence one another constantly with my projects. I don't ever make parts of the world without also thinking of stories to tie into them, and inversely when I'm writing out stories I tend to develop the world around them.

  29. A mix of option 1 and 2 on your list makes the most sense to me considering that's how humans work, and humans are just sapient monkey people. Nothing keeps most people from eating the meat of other non-sapient animal species, so it's not beyond reason to assume a similar outlook would exist in a different meat-eating sapient animal.

  30. Being in tune with nature doesn't mean they can't figure out a way to do mass production without burning fossil fuels or whatever. They'd just have eco-friendly factories, either in realistic or fantasy flavor.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin