# How "realistic" should a World be?



## Shasjas (Jan 26, 2012)

I'm a bit stuck here. 
Many tips and guides I read about world building encourage a very realistic world for fantasy, so its almost like earth in medieval times (or whatever time period it's based off) but with slightly different land formations, different creatures, and the addition of magic.

Now I agree with that to some extent, however I feel like I'm missing opportunity to make a completely crazy and fantastical world, with strange shaped mountains, floating islands and all that sort of thing.

So I just want to hear some opinions on just how far to push into the more fantastic side of world creation.


----------



## Devor (Jan 26, 2012)

Set whatever boundaries you want for your world, and then be as realistic as you can within those boundaries. Flying mountains? Awesome.  So what do you do about agriculture? Figure that out, and the world becomes more rich.


----------



## Chilari (Jan 26, 2012)

I think those sites you've been reading have been getting muddled with their terminology. There's a big difference between "realistic" and "believable". Stick with "believable" - anything is believable is it's presented with flair. It's about suspension of disbelief with fantasy. Provided you make your world consistent, provided it follows the rules you create for it, and provided you treat it as though it were real when you are writing about it - with all the little details that make fictions sound so appealing - you'll have something believable, even if it isn't realistic.

As for the details - see Devor's post. Work out what you want, and then consider the implications of the situation. Say you've got a landscape with few trees - say they've all been cut down so the land can be farmed - quite apart from the whole erosion thing, lack of trees pushes wood prices up. People can't build with wood if there is none to harvest. Houses are built of stone or mud brick. Anything written is done on stone tablets, scratched onto pottery or into malleable clay, not paper. Only the super-rich can afford tree-lined driveways. You think about how the situation you want affects the society and economy, and you build it into the world, or build the world around it. That's how you make it believable. Forget being "realistic" and just do what you want - within the scope of believability.


----------



## TWErvin2 (Jan 26, 2012)

There isn't an exact line one can cross, becoming too 'unrealistic' for a reader to accept. As long as the story is engaging and the reader is coaxed into suspending disbelief, pretty much anything goes.

Steven Brust's works have floating castles and weapons that devour souls. Stephen R. Donaldson had a leper enter his 'world' bearing a white gold ring that, becuse it was white gold, contained wild magic. C.S. Lewis had talking badgers and foxes. Stephanie Meyer had vampires that sparkle in the sunlight.

Do what's right for the story. Maybe it'll work. Maybe not. But you won't know until you try.


----------



## Codey Amprim (Jan 26, 2012)

Chilari couldn't have said it better. There's a difference between realistic and believable, and how you interpret what is presented. Honestly, I think a lot of world building comes down to tastes - what you like vs. what you dislike - and that will bias your opinion towards whatever is in question.

Personally, I don't like near-omnipotent beings aside from Gods that are everywhere, especially when the hero or heroine can defeat them all with little consequence. I think that's my best attempt at defining what I think of believability* (don't think that's a word) as.

Basically, your world can be as crazy and unique as you want! You just need to be consistent and follow your own rules of the world. I try to steer away from the totally fantastic creatures and land formations, because taking the time to explain them robs  the story and I have a fear of info dumping.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 26, 2012)

I say go for it, the people who try to make up all these rules about how realistic a fantasy world should be, simply don't seem to understand that fantasy means just that!.  Its about taking people on a journey of imagination and showing them fantastical new worlds they never thought possible.

Personally I find fantasy novels that try to be too historically accurate incredibly boring to read.  I love worlds that are outlandish and different, and don't care how unrealistic they are, so long as the story telling immerses me in those worlds.  Look at some of Moorcock's novels. his worlds are sometimes so outlandish they are garish - yet that makes him entertaining to read.

My own world has floating mountains, airships, underwater cities, giant cacti like pods that are dried out to make houses, nomads that live in small houses mounted on top of huge beasts, winged human tribes that live wild in the plains, and any other weird idea I care to come up with.  The chapter I was working on last night has a floating island in the middle of a huge canyon, which is seen while traveling on the back of a giant beast with a house on its back.

Having said that I am also in the planning stages of a novel that is set in Victorian London  - but with elves and dwarves ect, in this case some degree of realism would be needed, though it won't be London as we know it today!


----------



## Shasjas (Jan 27, 2012)

Ah, that makes much more sense to me. 
So its more about believability than being almost historically accurate and realistic, so taking a cool imaginative idea and making sure that the consequences of that idea interact with the world in a realistic way, rather than them being quite realistic in the first place.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 27, 2012)

Shasjas, have you ever read The Neverending Story by Michael Ende??

With my own stories, I go for totally unrealistic worlds that could be described as dream-like or perhaps like something taken from surrealist paintings... I simply love the idea of Fantasy as something truly fantastic, and in my opinion, what really matters is to take my readers and immerse them in my stories and my worlds- Whether they think that it's believable or not, really lacks of importance for me.


----------



## Devor (Jan 27, 2012)

Sheilawisz said:


> With my own stories, I go for totally unrealistic worlds that could be described as dream-like or perhaps like something taken from surrealist paintings... I simply love the idea of Fantasy as something truly fantastic, and in my opinion, what really matters is to take my readers and immerse them in my stories and my worlds- Whether they think that it's believable or not, really lacks of importance for me.



You've talked a lot about your writing, Sheilawisz, and I hope you don't feel left out when I and others give answers like the one above.  The world you talk about writing in requires a higher suspension of disbelief, and I think that's best achieved through a voice and tone that's, well, fun - almost comedic - and tough to maintain throughout.  It's my impression that even a lot of "fun" writers have a mostly believable world to fall back on for when the fun dips or stops or doesn't deliver.  But I always just assume, unless told otherwise, that people are engaged in dramatic writing, and the comments above are pretty much the standard answer for a drama.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 27, 2012)

@Devor: No problem- I have always known, since my first days here in Mythic Scribes, that what I write is almost a different genre and not at all the style of Fantasy that most of you are writing!! That's alright, we can have many different points of view and our differences can help all of us with our writing and storytelling talents =)


----------



## Reaver (Jan 27, 2012)

My writing falls into the same spectrum as Sheila and the guitarman's.  The world in which my fantasy stories take place is inhabited by all sorts of unconventional cultures, races, creatures, etc. I even have a race of beings who travel at the speed of thought.  I personally enjoy all types of fantasy, whether they're "grounded" in reality or not is of no importance. When I pick up a fantasy or sci-fi book, I want an escape from this world..even though it's only for a short while.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 28, 2012)

In The Neverending Story, the world of Fantastica extends endlessly in all directions and its features follow no natural order: Mountains can be _just there_ without a geological cause, and when travelling, you can leave a searing hot desert to suddenly find yourself in a landscape of snow and ice everywhere =)

The underground of Fantastica is composed by memories that were lost in the real world (you can actually go mining for lost memories, which can be extracted in the form of crystals showing images) and they have things like a huge sea of fog where special ships travel propulsed by the power of imagination...

At one point of the story, the entire endless world was reduced to a tiny particle of sand... and from that particle, a new endless Fantastica was created- It is possible that something comes into existance suddenly but then it has existed since centuries ago, and humans who visit Fantastica start to slowly lose all their memories until they are lost forever if they cannot travel back to the real world.

Magic is completely unreal and fantastic, without explanations of any kind!!

@Graham and Reaver: Your worlds sound interesting =)


----------



## InsanityStrickenWriter (Jan 28, 2012)

Sheila, reading your posts from my position of lurkdom is really urging me to read the Neverending Story. 

On topic-
I don't think even believability matters too much, depending on the style you're writing with. If you can get the narration to point and laugh at the ridiculousness with the reader, then the stupid, unbelievable things can switch from being incredibly irritating to being, actually, quite funny.


----------



## Shasjas (Jan 28, 2012)

InsanityStrickenWriter said:


> Sheila, reading your posts from my position of lurkdom is really urging me to read the Neverending Story.
> 
> On topic-
> I don't think even believability matters too much, depending on the style you're writing with. If you can get the narration to point and laugh at the ridiculousness with the reader, then the stupid, unbelievable things can switch from being incredibly irritating to being, actually, quite funny.



sure, if you're trying to do a fantasy comedy, but I don't think that works for a more "serious" story.


----------



## InsanityStrickenWriter (Jan 28, 2012)

Shasjas said:


> sure, if you're trying to do a fantasy comedy, but I don't think that works for a more "serious" story.



True, that's partly why I said it depended on the style. But even serious stories can do with a bit of comedy every now and then, in my opinion. And the narrator could simply find the whole thing incredibly irritating as would the reader, rather than pointing and laughing at it. So long as the reader doesn't get left feeling as if something ridiculous has happened, but no one has noticed it, with even the narrator seemingly oblivious.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 29, 2012)

You don't have to write comedy to have fantastical worlds, in fact I find it a bit condescending to be told that the only way I can make my magical worlds work is to make them funny!

This idea that fantasy worlds have to be ultra realistic is actually a very modern one.  Its as if fantasy writers have become embarrassed that they are writing about worlds that don't exist.  As a more mature reader/writer I grew up with fantastical worlds, and happily suspended belief to immerse myself in the stories.

If I wanted hard realism I'd read historical fiction, not Fantasy!  And therein lies he problem for me, the more fantasy drifts towards a historical fiction point of view, the more you lose the magic of amazing fantasy worlds.  I'm not saying there isn't a big market for realistic fantasy, but there is also still a big market for more magical fantasy that doesn't have to resort to humour to be enjoyable.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 29, 2012)

@Graham: I agree totally with you!! Thanks for that post- I am also sure that there is market for stories like mine, not everything has to be "believable and realistic" in Fantasy =)

@Insanity: I really recommend The Neverending Story- So, what other posts from me have you found interesting??


----------



## gerald.parson (Jan 30, 2012)

I myself prefer a realistic culture setting combined with a believable character based wrapped in fantasy. I think history (our history) has provided us with enough clay to sculpt damn near anything. Some elements match well with others, some don't. This is just me of course.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 30, 2012)

gerald.parson said:


> I myself prefer a realistic culture setting combined with a believable character based wrapped in fantasy. I think history (our history) has provided us with enough clay to sculpt damn near anything. Some elements match well with others, some don't. This is just me of course.


and which part of our history do elves, dwarves, goblins and orcs come from?  they are derived from our mythology sure, but not from real history 

create a high fantasy with any of the above and at least 50% of your world will not be based on human culture or history

Edit:  I'm not saying that human culture isn't a treasure trove of inspiration, but you still need to use your imagination to be a fantasy artist/writer otherwise your just a historical writer.  Fantasy by definition is about made up things.


----------



## Jess A (Jan 30, 2012)

I was once told by a co-worker that 'research for fantasy books is a stupid idea because fantasy isn't real'. I was speechless! Yes, fantasy is ... well, fantasy. But our job as writers is to create a world that is 'realistic' enough to make the reader _believe_ that the floating mountains and talking animals _could_ exist!

The reason why I do research is because I want to know how long it would take a horse to travel a day and how much it should or shouldn't carry to make good time. I want to know a bit about historical economies so that I can make up my own, viable economy. I need to know the limits and boundaries of my world. If I want my horses to be able to carry more and travel longer than a normal horse, I'll make up a species that is similar to a horse but is stronger and has more stamina. 

Fantasy is and always will be about 'what if'. What if dragons existed? What if people could shape-shift? Write it convincingly, and the reader will simply sink into your world with pleasure and with ease.


----------



## gerald.parson (Jan 30, 2012)

So having elves, dwarves goblins, and orcs determines whats fantasy and whats not? kinda cliche dont ya think?
Ever hear of A song of Fire and Ice? The presence of little green creature does not determine if something is fantasy, or "high fantasy".
But to expand about what I was saying, you look at our history to see how things like cultures and turmoils developed and unfolded, how certain thing became predominate and others obscure. I guess it all depends on how deep you go into your world. 





grahamguitarman said:


> and which part of our history do elves, dwarves, goblins and orcs come from?  they are derived from our mythology sure, but not from real history
> 
> create a high fantasy with any of the above and at least 50% of your world will not be based on human culture or history
> 
> Edit:  I'm not saying that human culture isn't a treasure trove of inspiration, but you still need to use your imagination to be a fantasy artist/writer otherwise your just a historical writer.  Fantasy by definition is about made up things.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 30, 2012)

gerald.parson said:


> So having elves, dwarves goblins, and orcs determines whats fantasy and whats not? kinda cliche dont ya think?
> Ever hear of A song of Fire and Ice? The presence of little green creature does not determine if something is fantasy, or "high fantasy".
> But to expand about what I was saying, you look at our history to see how things like cultures and turmoils developed and unfolded, how certain thing became predominate and others obscure. I guess it all depends on how deep you go into your world.




I wasn't saying fantasy is defined by elves and dwarves, I was simply using them to illustrate my point because they are more commonly used, would my point have made more sense if I'd said gobblesnaffers and wiggleworts?  

To say that a good understanding of history and culture is not needed to be able to write a good fantasy would be ridiculous.  But at what point does the search for historical minutae become obsessive?  If you have spent twice as much time researching historical accuracy than you have actually writing your fantasy story then I think you have probably gone a bit too far!

Like anything else in life, its about balance, too much insistence on minute accurate historical detail in a fantasy world is in its way just as questionable as a novel that is simply made up on the fly with no thought for simple practicality and believability.  

For example, knowing how far a horse can travel in a day and how much he can reasonably be expected to carry is sensible stuff to know, as is perhaps some idea of how to care for that horse.  But to spend months researching everything there is to know about the history, anatomy and physiology of horses is probably getting obsessive unless your main character is a farrier!  At the end of the day the horses are only there as a means of realistically getting your character from a to b (this assumes you even have horses in your world).

If people want to waste more time on research than actually writing then that's up to them - its their life.  But to insist that every writer should do the same is wrong.  The original poster wanted to know if it really was necessary to do a mountain of historical research to create a historically realistic medieval world, then wrap it with some fantasy.  And the answer is no! not if you don't want to, all that research is optional not mandatory.  Check out your information to make sure its not silly and impractical of course, but if you don't want to go into detail about how your horses were cared for then don't.  

BTW I got about a quarter of the way through the game of thrones and got bored, not a series I can be bothered to read to be honest, shame I can't take it back and get a refund!.


----------



## Devor (Jan 30, 2012)

grahamguitarman said:


> If people want to waste more time on research than actually writing then that's up to them - its their life.  But to insist that every writer should do the same is wrong.  The original poster wanted to know if it really was necessary to do a mountain of historical research to create a historically realistic medieval world, then wrap it with some fantasy.  And the answer is no! not if you don't want to, all that research is optional not mandatory.  Check out your information to make sure its not silly and impractical of course, but if you don't want to go into detail about how your horses were cared for then don't.



I disagree, a little  Some works require a lot more research and others much less.  If you're writing about the life of a blacksmith, you need to do more research than others.  But I do think there's some basics that every fantasy author needs to understand if just to avoid making some basic mistakes.  The thing is, if that information was ever compiled with fantasy writers in mind, I think the time spent on that research could be squashed into a couple of hours.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 30, 2012)

Devor said:


> I disagree, a little  Some works require a lot more research and others much less.  If you're writing about the life of a blacksmith, you need to do more research than others.  But I do think there's some basics that every fantasy author needs to understand if just to avoid making some basic mistakes.  The thing is, if that information was ever compiled with fantasy writers in mind, I think the time spent on that research could be squashed into a couple of hours.



Which is why I said unless you were writing about a farrier with the horses example, but blacksmith ect would be just the same - its specialist so you need a bit more research.

And yes wouldn't it be great to have all that basic info to hand as a single resource, it would indeed cut research times down considerably 

maybe a project our members could collaborate on?  someone with basic horse knowledge could contribute simple horse care info, someone with swordmaking skills could provide basic info on sword-making ect.  Not huge detailed essays, just the basic simple info that should never really be wrong in a fantasy novel.  If people wanted more detailed info then they would have to do more research themselves!


----------



## gerald.parson (Jan 30, 2012)

I agree with you 100% You did a better job illustrating my point than I did. When I was saying that our own history provides us with a great amount of material, what I was trying to say is fantasy writers dont always have to follow the same cliche' molds for everything, they can look to our history to see how the political engine works, if their book is geared towards that. just as an example.


grahamguitarman said:


> I wasn't saying fantasy is defined by elves and dwarves, I was simply using them to illustrate my point because they are more commonly used, would my point have made more sense if I'd said gobblesnaffers and wiggleworts?
> 
> To say that a good understanding of history and culture is not needed to be able to write a good fantasy would be ridiculous.  But at what point does the search for historical minutae become obsessive?  If you have spent twice as much time researching historical accuracy than you have actually writing your fantasy story then I think you have probably gone a bit too far!
> 
> ...


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 30, 2012)

After all, what really is important is not how realistic or unrealistic a Fantasy world should be: What really matters is that you feel comfortable with the world that you have created!! If you like a very realistic world and you want to make it as real as possible doing loads of research, that's okay- If you love truly fantastical dream-like worlds and that's what you want, then go for it!! =)


----------



## Jess A (Jan 31, 2012)

grahamguitarman said:


> BTW I got about a quarter of the way through the game of thrones and got bored, not a series I can be bothered to read to be honest, shame I can't take it back and get a refund!.



Take it to a book exchange.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 31, 2012)

I bought it on Kindle


----------



## Jabrosky (Jan 31, 2012)

My novel's world is realistic in the sense that there's no magic or supernatural stuff (though there is still a belief in those things). On the other hand, I have dinosaurs coexisting with ancient African civilizations, and sometimes the people even ride them.


----------



## Dark Huntress (Jan 31, 2012)

Shasjas said:


> I'm a bit stuck here.
> Many tips and guides I read about world building encourage a very realistic world for fantasy, so its almost like earth in medieval times (or whatever time period it's based off) but with slightly different land formations, different creatures, and the addition of magic.
> 
> Now I agree with that to some extent, however I feel like I'm missing opportunity to make a completely crazy and fantastical world, with strange shaped mountains, floating islands and all that sort of thing.
> ...



A realistic fantasy...now what is wrong with that sentence? In my book, everything. The whole point of fantasy, to me, is the exploration of the authors imagination using the elements of  magic or supernatural phenomena. 

When I read fantasy I am looking for an adventure that is not realistic. I want a world that isn't a identical reflection of the world I inhabit. I read fantasy to escape, to live the 'what if's, and to experience a realm where anything is possible.

I love medieval fantasy as a setting only because it removes our technical world and allows me to live with dragons, in castles or be a commoner in a hamlet. I am not checking to compare this setting with actual history. 

The author need not impress me with how real his story is. I am not looking for that. Just show me the magic. 

If I want realism I'll watch the Discovery channel.


----------



## Devor (Jan 31, 2012)

Dark Huntress said:


> When I read fantasy I am looking for an adventure that is not realistic. I want a world that isn't a identical reflection of the world I inhabit. I read fantasy to escape, to live the 'what if's, and to experience a realm where anything is possible.



I think maybe realism to the author and realism to the reader are different things.  Certain things _have_ to be realistic, from the author's point of view, if only so that the reader won't notice them amid the magic.  Suspension of disbelief can only go so far; at some point, if you don't have a society that is realistic and complex - not in the magic but in the makeup - your readers start to notice.

At the top of the list for me?  _Realistic human behavior_, then realistically complex societies, followed by believable action and a realistic handling of logistical issues such as time and distance.  That's what I mean by realism; I think that's what a lot of people here mean, too.


----------



## void141 (Jan 31, 2012)

In my opinion, the less real a fantasy world is, the better. Of course, the less real without compromising the story, and doing crazy stuff just for the sake of it. As a good example I will mention something that is not a book, but still is a good example - The Elder Scrolls game series. To me, Morrowind will always be ten times better than any of the other games partly because of its world. The setting in Oblivion and Skyrim (as well as the previous two games) is almost realistically medieval, and that is what makes those games inferior. Once again, this is only my opinion.


----------



## Reaver (Jan 31, 2012)

Dark Huntress said:


> A realistic fantasy...now what is wrong with that sentence?
> 
> If I want realism I'll watch the Discovery channel.



I couldn't agree more, Huntress.  By the way this last part is an excellent segue for me to remind everyone to chime in on my "WTF is up with the History Channel?" thread in the Chit-Chat Forum. :wink:


----------



## Travisimo (Feb 1, 2012)

Personally, I try to keep mine within the pre-existing limits set by "real" nature.

Of course, there are exceptions that might seem too amazing, but remain within the bounds of nature. Natural phenomena, like there are on Earth.... The people however, are different. Cultures are as alien as I can possibly make them, for example.


----------



## ascanius (Feb 2, 2012)

Shasjas said:


> I'm a bit stuck here.
> Many tips and guides I read about world building encourage a very realistic world for fantasy, so its almost like earth in medieval times (or whatever time period it's based off) but with slightly different land formations, different creatures, and the addition of magic.
> 
> Now I agree with that to some extent, however I feel like I'm missing opportunity to make a completely crazy and fantastical world, with strange shaped mountains, floating islands and all that sort of thing.
> ...


I have read many similar tips and guides that all encourage a very realistic world.  Then I read this. A Way With Worlds - Entire Column Listing  I have read every single article, some more than once.  What I took away from this was that the world needs to be believable.  It doesn't matter how crazy the world is, if the laws of physics are all backward and strange, it still needs to be believable.  That doesn't mean believable in the context of our own world but in the context of that world.  What is I think is meant by believable is that aspects of the world need to be grounded in something to keep the reader and the author on the same page, hehe.  It is the same way basketball players must all know the rules of the game.  Imagine how confused people would be if all the sudden, a player starts kicking the ball like in soccer and scores seven points in one shot.  All of the sudden the game doesn't make any sense by the rules established at the beginning of the game.  Hence the rules, or world building, they are needed in detail so that when a difficult situation arises the characters don't start kicking the ball and score seven points.  It is the details that keep the story grounded in the reality of the world.  It is the rules that create a continuity of believability in the world.


----------



## sashamerideth (Feb 2, 2012)

Internal consistency is my watchword for realism. I know they are somewhat seperate, but if I take liberties or overlook something that isn't sensible, it should always be that way.


----------



## Shasjas (Feb 3, 2012)

thanks for everyones input.



ascanius said:


> I have read many similar tips and guides that all encourage a very realistic world.  Then I read this. A Way With Worlds - Entire Column Listing  I have read every single article, some more than once.  What I took away from this was that the world needs to be believable.  It doesn't matter how crazy the world is, if the laws of physics are all backward and strange, it still needs to be believable.  That doesn't mean believable in the context of our own world but in the context of that world.  What is I think is meant by believable is that aspects of the world need to be grounded in something to keep the reader and the author on the same page, hehe.  It is the same way basketball players must all know the rules of the game.  Imagine how confused people would be if all the sudden, a player starts kicking the ball like in soccer and scores seven points in one shot.  All of the sudden the game doesn't make any sense by the rules established at the beginning of the game.  Hence the rules, or world building, they are needed in detail so that when a difficult situation arises the characters don't start kicking the ball and score seven points.  It is the details that keep the story grounded in the reality of the world.  It is the rules that create a continuity of believability in the world.



thanks for that link, it looks pretty useful


----------



## Gwynneth White (Feb 6, 2012)

The first thing I thought about when I read your post was Terry Pratchett's Discworld. He didn't exactly stick to any known formula, did he? And think how brilliant it is. I sometimes think that we get too bogged down with what should and shouldn't be in a fantasy world. Why must it always be medieval? Why cannot it be futuristic - with out slipping into Sci-fi? I personally think that there are enough readers with diverse tastes who will lap anything original and well-executed.


----------



## Ghost (Feb 7, 2012)

Whether a novel is fantastic or realistic, I prefer it sticks with one the whole way through. I don't mind realistic peppered with the fantastic. I also don't mind a fantastic story framed by a realistic one. There are some novels that drastically shift into the outlandish, and it leaves me scratching my head. When something is "too fantastic" for me to go along with, it's usually because the new development doesn't fit what I expect of the setting, the plot is too convoluted/idiotic, or the characters' behavior doesn't make any kind of sense. I'm okay with walking trees, flying castles, singing flowers, and talking dragons. Add a Starbucks into the mix, and I'm no longer on the same page as the author. Literally, because I'm rereading the last few pages trying to figure out how the hell that happened.

I agree that fantastic worlds don't need to be humorous. I think it does a disservice to the genre to say so. I'd like to read books featuring bizarre, unrealistic settings combined with interesting, believable, _relateable_ characters.

I really don't see how there could be a cut off for how fantastic a world can be. I'd look at it as a balancing act between amazing concepts and timeless themes. As wondrous as the setting is, the basic story still needs to be one worth telling. There's a trend toward low fantasy with a basis in real world mechanics, but so what? Write something people connect with. It doesn't have to be on trend. It doesn't need to follow obscure guides written by people most of us never heard of. It needs to be your story the way you see it.

This is only my opinion, and it may offend some, but I think those who dismiss certain fantasy settings as too fantastic or too realistic are missing the point. It's fantasy. It can be whatever we want it to be. The important part is how you tell it.


----------



## Author T.O. Goodwin (Feb 7, 2012)

A world from your own soul and mind is of your own design and yours alone and can be any form you desire. Never pay attention to so called proper form. It is not art worthy and certainly not world creation worthy. Tolken did a fine job intermingling worlds that were both magical yet set with the familiar such as he allowed for our worlds indeginous flora and fauna. This allowed for the reader to assimilate themselves into his stories by way of association. Great device for writing fantasy. It is my firm belief however, that when creating fantasy worlds one rule stands true and will always pan out in the writing itself. Always be true to your own style and inventions and create wherever your mind takes you. Technical stuff is for the editors and so forth to worry about. One just needs to write and create. That is all.


----------



## Devor (Feb 7, 2012)

Ouroboros said:


> I agree that fantastic worlds don't need to be humorous. I think it does a disservice to the genre to say so.



I think that the "fantasy = humor" thing sort of started with something I said, and I just want to be clear that it isn't at all what I meant.

_Fun_ writing helps to suspend disbelief, so if absolutely crazy and unbelievable things are happening, a fun - almost humorous - tone helps the writer to achieve that.  But I didn't at all mean to imply that just having "fantasy setting" fits that description.  And even then, I didn't mean to say it was ever required.  Just want to be clear.


----------



## RChabot (Feb 26, 2019)

whatever you build should have/maintain logical consistency. Even fantasy worlds have 'rules' to maintain logical consistency they don't have to match our rules but they should remain consistent in that world.


----------



## Ragkuun (Mar 29, 2019)

Sheilawisz said:


> In The Neverending Story, the world of Fantastica extends endlessly in all directions and its features follow no natural order: Mountains can be _just there_ without a geological cause, and when travelling, you can leave a searing hot desert to suddenly find yourself in a landscape of snow and ice everywhere =)
> 
> The underground of Fantastica is composed by memories that were lost in the real world (you can actually go mining for lost memories, which can be extracted in the form of crystals showing images) and they have things like a huge sea of fog where special ships travel propulsed by the power of imagination...
> 
> ...


See this is just too whimsical for me. Its not grounded in anything. The only thing grounding it, is it's ungroundedness which is sort of unsettling for me. When anything is possible, why should I care? It seems to me this becomes a consequence-less form of story telling where things can be fixed with "magic" that is boundless. It'd be like writing a story about an omnipotent and omnipresent God who can do anything and everything at anytime. What's the point?


Edit: I hope this isn't coming off as harsh, I think maybe that style just isn't my cup of tea. I write extremely realistic low fantasy stories which are more my forte


----------



## Hir i-Chorvath (Apr 13, 2019)

I think that a world should be at least semi-realistic. When you have a new world you have to take the cause and effect pattern into consideration. Such as how does it affect the actions of the people if there are 'flying mountains' or is it just a nonconsequential happening?


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 14, 2019)

A world can be most anything. Read some John Brunner, or Philip Jose Farmer. What matters isn't the world, it's the story-telling. Get that right, and you can pull off the greatest magical feat of them all: pulling in a reader.


----------



## Mythopoet (Apr 14, 2019)

You're talking about fantasy. Strike the word "should" from your vocabulary. The only important question is how realistic you want your world to be.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 15, 2019)

Hir i-Chorvath said:


> I think that a world should be at least semi-realistic. When you have a new world you have to take the cause and effect pattern into consideration. Such as how does it affect the actions of the people if there are 'flying mountains' or is it just a nonconsequential happening?



There's no substantial effect because they don't have airplanes yet.


----------



## D. Gray Warrior (May 13, 2019)

Fantasy isn’t supposed to be realistic, but it should be believable and consistent. For me, the issue is when writers don’t put thought into how the elements of their world would interact and affect each other and avoid plotholes.


----------



## elemtilas (May 13, 2019)

D. Gray Warrior said:


> Fantasy isn’t supposed to be realistic, but it should be believable and consistent. For me, the issue is when writers don’t put thought into how the elements of their world would interact and affect each other and avoid plotholes.



Plotholes I don't like, but aren't a deal breaker. For me that's really more a matter of story planning rather than nature of the world.

I don't care much for realism in worldbuilding, fantasy in particular, but SF as well. Believability is one of the two keys, and whether you make a believable world through internal consistency or internal inconsistency is all good.  Writing a good story is of course the other key. And these have to be turned at the same time for the story to work well. If your worldbuilding really and truly sucks, I'm not going to read your story no matter how good it might be.  If your world is awesome but your writing sucks, I'll at least try and struggle through, to admire the world for what it is and in spite of the writing. But I won't come back for more.


----------



## Mythopoet (May 15, 2019)

D. Gray Warrior said:


> Fantasy isn’t supposed to be realistic, but it should be believable and consistent.



People nowadays don't even know what really crazy, unbelievable fantasy looks like. We take it for granted that early 20th century writers started creating more believable worlds and storylines. Modern fantasy is, by default, much more realistic, consistent and believable than any of the fantasy written by mankind for thousands of years. Read the original myths (not the retellings where the author strives to make it more sensical) or any fantasy books written before the 1800s and you're going to come across some seriously insane stuff compared to what anyone writes today. 

I'm currently reading a fantasy novel written in the 1700s and let me tell you, it doesn't make a lick of sense. It's all over the place and entirely unbelievable. Not that it's bad. It has a certain crazy charm. But your average fantasy reader these days would be totally stumped. 

I think what I'm trying to say is just don't worry about it that much because to be honest a certain amount of consistency and plausibility are pretty much built into the modern mindset. You can't help but write a more realistic fantasy than most of history ever knew.


----------



## elemtilas (May 20, 2019)

Mythopoet said:


> I'm currently reading a fantasy novel written in the 1700s and let me tell you, it doesn't make a lick of sense.



Sounds good to me!

What is it?


----------



## Mythopoet (May 20, 2019)

Lamekis


----------



## elemtilas (May 20, 2019)

Mythopoet said:


> Lamekis



Merci!

You know I'm going to be on the lookout for that!


----------



## Dina (May 22, 2019)

I've always found the mechanics of a world to be nowhere near as important as the way the story is told. If you are happy with the way your world turned out, it will show in your writing. What I mean is, if you believe in your world, the reader will believe as well.


----------



## Esudeath (Jun 2, 2019)

Think of how wild adventure time is but how good its worldbuilding is. Nothing has to be serious its just a really big preference for most. It doesnt mean that you are any less serious also


----------

