# Worst World Building Tropes



## J Q Kaiser (May 24, 2018)

My fiction tends toward an irreverent and humorous take on sword and sorcery and epic fantasy. I like to think of it as Robert Howard meets Terry Pratchett and then they run head first into Douglas Adams. So when I write I like to look for old fantasy tropes and try to turn them on their heads; do something fun and interesting with them. 

So I am curious, what do you think are the worst (or most tired) tropes of world building? For example, mystical isles shrouded in mist?  Lost civilizations that seemingly pop out of nowhere at just the right moment for the plot?


----------



## Orc Knight (May 24, 2018)

I use pretty much all of them, if only to play with them, though my most loathed is the Damsel in Distress and the Always (Chaotic) Evil races sorts. Sure the name gives the latter away pretty easily. At the end of the day, especially for me, they are still tools to be used. Particularly for my world of Eld which is at times kind of in line with the Pratchett style of dismantling said tropes. Though the mystical islands shrouded in mists is actually a favorite of mine. Because I just know there's got to be either dinosaurs, giant apes or lizard folk waiting on it to cause no end of trouble. As for the civs showing up, usually it seems they were looking for something vaguely like it in the first place.

To take the DiD trope, for about a century, there was a golden knight going around tearing down towers with a DiD in them and saving said damsel before trying to train them with weapons before sending her home. Said knight was both an elf and a woman, twisting it further. Fairly bad tempered princess and eventual queen at that to twist it a little more. As for the evil races, there are some that do seem to play it up, but it's usually comes out of simple survival and revenge turning into horrible things.

An edit for the misty islands: They also have a tendency to have Amazons on them too. Sometimes with the dinosaurs. On Eld, it's the Ever Ember island chain that has the Amazons.


----------



## J Q Kaiser (May 24, 2018)

Orc Knight said:


> I use pretty much all of them, if only to play with them, though my most loathed is the Damsel in Distress and the Always (Chaotic) Evil races sorts.



DiD is obnoxious, but thankfully it seems like most fantasy authors have caught on now. My least favorite are enchanted swords (which always feels a bit too D&D) and, in general, most sorts of racial stereotypes (khajiit has wares; why can't he pursue a career in the arts instead?). 

That said, I've used these. I have a character who stumbles upon (and accidentally cuts himself on) a sword while trying to hide, unfortunately it is a were-sword which turns him into an enchanted (worse yet, talking) sword. 

I also tend to write characters who are struggling against racial expectations and stereotypes. I would type more but I'm stuck on my phone and the tiny keys drive me crazy.


----------



## WooHooMan (May 25, 2018)

A temperate climate.  I'm sick of all the forests and mountains in fantasy.

There's still swamps, deserts, tundras and grasslands to an extent but characters will always end-up wandering through a forest (usually on horseback).
Apparently, deciduous trees are more vital to the genre than magic or mythology.


----------



## Miles Lacey (May 25, 2018)

The worst examples of world building I have encountered have included:

1. Those where the government is an absolute monarchy or a totalitarian dictatorship and the protagonist is connected with them in some way.  
2. The obsession with (supposedly) medieval worlds that owe more to reading too much fantasy stories inspired by Tolkien and _Dungeons & Dragons _rather than basic research.  
3.  Geographical landscapes that lack any real diversity or, worse, are diverse in a way that makes no sense.  
4.  Travel times that are ridiculous.  I'm sorry but it's not going to take at least a month to walk along the coastline the length of the Pacific coast of the United States no matter how good you are.
5.  Architecture that would be nearly impossible to build with the most modern technology, let alone the medieval technology of the world, that is always explained away by claiming it was an advanced race that suddenly disappeared (yes, _Skyrim_, I'm looking at you) or that it was built with the help of magic.  
6.  Doing away with the Abrahamic religions but still retaining the institutions of family, marriage, inheritance, clergy and religious rituals as if these institutions still existed.  
7.  Using sex as a weapon, a form of manipulation or (in the case where rape is used) as a validation for the (usually brutal) actions of the protagonist.  Does anyone actually _enjoy _sex in fantasy stories?  
8.  The portrayal of the poor or lower classes as untrustworthy, criminals, uneducated, stupid or lazy scum who are totally disposable human garbage unless they are members of a secret society, useful to the needs of the protagonist or the secret heir to the throne.
9.  World-building that involve the creation of huge empires and one world governments.  
10.  Info-dumping in the story itself when having a segment between chapters to info-dump (as an example) would serve the function better.  The use of a front page of a newspaper was used by Brandon Sanderson in his _Mistborn: Shadows of Self _novel and provided snippets of information like how the protagonist's actions were perceived in the bigger scheme of things and advertising that illustrated not only the level of technology in this world but the currency used and the cost of things like children's toys. Daniel Killerman's _K is for Killing _(which is an alternative history novel) uses the inane language of bureaucratic documents and excerpts from a school textbook to paint a chilling vision of an alternate America.


----------



## D.G. Laderoute (May 25, 2018)

For  me, it's an undue emphasis on a setting that is some variation on medieval/feudal (north)western Europe. This includes including races that are variations on that region's particular mythologies e.g. elves, dwarves, giants, etc. We can thank Tolkien for this (although, to be fair, he was effectively starting a new genre so HIS world-building was pretty much a blank canvas). We can also thank Dungeons and Dragons, which was essentially a game-ified version of the Lord of the Rings. Now, I realize it's actually more complicated than this, but the effect is the same--legions of books and stories whose settings are much the same. That doesn't mean there can't be some really good stories in this type of setting...it's just that this type of setting is overdone, to the point of becoming a trope.

There are SO many other sources of folklore and mythology available in our world, and many more that could arise from the imaginations of writers. N.K. Jemisin's series that starts with "The Fifth Season" is a good example of this--a uniquely-crafted world that draws a few elements from the "European experience", but is truly original and her own. And, yes, I realize that her stuff is technically categorized as SF, but it "feels" way more like fantasy to me...and if you haven't read it, I highly recommend it. There's a reason her stuff is winning Nebula Awards!


----------



## Yora (May 25, 2018)

In the past there was one (and only one!) huge powerful empire that was super advanced and could do all kinds of amazing things that can't be done anymore. And now it's gone. Groan.


----------



## Ireth (May 25, 2018)

Love triangles, especially where the heroine chooses the love interest who's clearly bad for her. Also, abusive behavior portrayed as normal and romantic.


----------



## Ban (May 25, 2018)

Armour, fortifications and weaponry that is shaped and made in such a way that it actively hinders it from serving its function. It is fine to have silly-looking, oversized swords if they are ceremonial, but you take me out of the fantasy when it is used in combat by a humanoid.


----------



## WooHooMan (May 25, 2018)

Miles Lacey said:


> 5.  Architecture that would be nearly impossible to build with the most modern technology, let alone the medieval technology of the world, that is always explained away by claiming it was an advanced race that suddenly disappeared (yes, _Skyrim_, I'm looking at you) or that it was built with the help of magic.
> 8.  The portrayal of the poor or lower classes as untrustworthy, criminals, uneducated, stupid or lazy scum who are totally disposable human garbage unless they are members of a secret society, useful to the needs of the protagonist or the secret heir to the throne.



I want to build-off of these.
First thing: I dislike how magic use never seems to extend to other fields (like architecture).  It's strange that wizards seem to practice magic just for the sake of practicing magic and not because they want to make advancement in other fields like engineering or solve social problems or anything.

The Dwemer in Elder Scrolls were only able to accomplish their technological feats with the aid of their unique brand of psuedo-magic.  This psuedo-magic and the technology derived from it basically colored all other elements of Dwemer civilizations (from their architecture to their religion).  And since their magic was the reason for their advancement, it makes sense that their technology would disappear along with them (and their magic being the cause of their disappearance).
Of course, that's not getting into the actually story of the Dwemer or their role in the Elder Scrolls mythos which both justifies the use of the "vanished advanced race" cliche while also giving greater depth to the overall narrative of the Elder Scrolls.
Dismissing them as a setting cliche meant to explain why there are dungeons in the game seems to be a case of missing the forest for the trees.

Second thing: portrayal of the lower classes as being entirely made out of good people who gallantly suffer the indignity of poverty which is forced upon them by the selfish and exploitative upper class. 
Attaching morality to class is a trope I see everywhere in fiction.


----------



## Devor (May 25, 2018)

WooHooMan said:


> Attaching morality to class is a trope I see everywhere in fiction.



^ This, 100%.  It's not really _fantasy_, but it's the most unrealistic and condescending thing I see in books, movies, and people on facebook.  There's kindness, foolishness, meanness, and some level of smarts in groups of almost all kinds, but especially ones as broad as social class.  That goes for good or bad across the board.


----------



## Chessie2 (May 26, 2018)

Ireth said:


> Love triangles, especially where the heroine chooses the love interest who's clearly bad for her. Also, abusive behavior portrayed as normal and romantic.


Thanks for mentioning this, Ireth. It annoys me SO bad! Like, it just puts this image out there that women choose poorly because lust. So stupid. And dumb. And enraging. ---rant over


----------



## Miles Lacey (May 26, 2018)

In criticising the portrayal of the poor, peasants and commoners I was not suggesting they should be portrayed as paragons of virtue and decency.  Being poor myself and having lived in low income neighbourhoods on and off over the years I can testify first hand that you'll find sinners, saints and everything in-between among the poor.  In my dealings with other classes over the years I can say the same about all classes.  I just wished that fantasy writers would remember this when writing about various classes.

As for the world of _Skyrim _I love the game and the world-building that has gone into it.  I enjoy fighting through the Dwemer ruins and reading about the backstory as to how they came to be but, just because _Skyrim _has incredibly mind-blowing world-building which helps to make the game an amazing one to play, it doesn't mean that it doesn't rehash some bad examples of fantasy world-building.

The whole point of fantasy world building is to create a fantastical world where the imagination is allowed to run free, creatures of all sorts can be found and where magic happens.  They're places where people like myself who want to escape from our lousy everyday existence can escape to for a few hours.  However when you've read your 30th or 40th fantasy book and you're mixing up this story line with that or confusing various worlds because they all seem to be the same quest driven story line set in the same type of pseudo-medieval world the phrase "familiarity breeds contempt" comes to mind.


----------



## TheKillerBs (May 26, 2018)

WooHooMan said:


> A temperate climate.  I'm sick of all the forests and mountains in fantasy.
> 
> There's still swamps, deserts, tundras and grasslands to an extent but characters will always end-up wandering through a forest (usually on horseback).
> Apparently, deciduous trees are more vital to the genre than magic or mythology.


The temperate climate might be because most of fantasy takes place in Europe analogs. And Europe’s climate is mostly temperate forest. 

Also, most of the planet’s non-polar climate was naturally forest until people started clearing out places for farmland.


----------



## Yora (May 26, 2018)

My setting is almost entirely temperate forests, except where it's ocean or high mountains. But I also think you have to spice it up in some ways. It needs to be more than the default generic fantasy environment.


----------



## WooHooMan (May 26, 2018)

Miles Lacey said:


> In criticising the portrayal of the poor, peasants and commoners I was not suggesting they should be portrayed as paragons of virtue and decency.



I wasn't accusing you of suggesting that.  I was adding a related gripe of my own.



Miles Lacey said:


> As for the world of _Skyrim _I love the game and the world-building that has gone into it.  I enjoy fighting through the Dwemer ruins and reading about the backstory as to how they came to be but, just because _Skyrim _has incredibly mind-blowing world-building which helps to make the game an amazing one to play, it doesn't mean that it doesn't rehash some bad examples of fantasy world-building.



Tamriel isn't a bad example of world-building.  It may use familiar conventions but I'd say it uses them well.  It has good execution.
I suspect that Skyrim tried to file away a lot of the uniqueness of the Elder Scrolls setting for the sake of mass appeal.  It's all still there, it's the same Tamriel but it's easy for people to spend hours playing Skyrim and only get a glace of the depth and unqiueness of Tamriel.
I'm thinking you need to play some more Morrowind.



TheKillerBs said:


> The temperate climate might be because most of fantasy takes place in Europe analogs. And Europe’s climate is mostly temperate forest.



And there are posts in this thread complaining about how reliant fantasy is on Europe analogs.


----------



## Yora (May 26, 2018)

Morrowind is awesome. It's like an alien planet, but in fantasy instead of science-fiction. I don't actually very much like the game (or any of the Bethesda RPGs), but the Morrowind setting is just incredibly original. It was the direct inspiration for my own worldbuilding. Hard to find anything that is similarly original, and with such a degree of consistency and plausibility.


----------



## psychotick (May 26, 2018)

Hi,

In my view the tropes aren't tired at all. It's the writers who are lazy. (Not all writers obviously - and naturally none of those here!!!) There's nothing wrong with a damsel in distress or a medieval Europe type setting. It's how you design them / write them. Do you simply copy what a thousand other writers have done or do you add / alter to your settings and characters so that what seemed tired elsewhere, is suddenly sparkling and fresh? I mean just imagine if the hero having fought his way through an army of monsters and brigands and one ultimate dragony / wizardy thing finally got to the damsels prison, unlocked the door and was greeted by those heart warming an gratifying words - "And I suppose you think I'm going to marry you now?! You do know I'm gay?!"

There's nothing wrong with the tropes. They are tropes for a reason. Have fun with them!

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Miles Lacey (May 27, 2018)

WooHooMan said:


> I wasn't accusing you of suggesting that.  I was adding a related gripe of my own.



I didn't assume you were accusing me of anything.    If I had I would've specifically replied to your comment rather than make a separate post.  I just felt I needed to clarify what I was stating to make it clear that I didn't favour going to the other extreme.



WooHooMan said:


> Tamriel isn't a bad example of world-building.  It may use familiar conventions but I'd say it uses them well.  It has good execution.  I suspect that Skyrim tried to file away a lot of the uniqueness of the Elder Scrolls setting for the sake of mass appeal.  It's all still there, it's the same Tamriel but it's easy for people to spend hours playing Skyrim and only get a glace of the depth and unqiueness of Tamriel.  I'm thinking you need to play some more Morrowind.



I did mention Skyrim rather than Tamriel - and for good reason.  While I thoroughly enjoy the greater diversity in terms of the animals, creatures and landscapes that exists in Skyrim the urban areas and the interior of a lot of the buildings and ruins tend to be virtually identical outside of the big cities like Solitude, Markarth and Riften.  That's why I am somewhat critical of its world-building.  However Cyrodiil was a lot more diverse geographically, especially with the Shivering Isles, and so are the urban areas and the building interiors.  Morrowind and Solstheim in the _Dragonborn DLC _are in a class of their own.  Both are very disorientating but in a good way.


----------



## Ban (May 27, 2018)

Miles Lacey said:


> I did mention Skyrim rather than Tamriel - and for good reason.  While I thoroughly enjoy the greater diversity in terms of the animals, creatures and landscapes that exists in Skyrim the urban areas and the interior of a lot of the buildings and ruins tend to be virtually identical outside of the big cities like Solitude, Markarth and Riften.  That's why I am somewhat critical of its world-building.  However Cyrodiil was a lot more diverse geographically, especially with the Shivering Isles, and so are the urban areas and the building interiors.  Morrowind and Solstheim in the _Dragonborn DLC _are in a class of their own.  Both are very disorientating but in a good way.



Skyrim has great diversity in its environments as well though. You have temperate forests in Falkreath and Riften, mammoth-filled plains in Whiterun, tundras up north, craggy mountain forests in Markarth and fields of geysers south of Windhelm. Not to mention Blackreach, an enormous underground dwemer complex filled with mushroom life, the ashes of SOlstheim in Dragonborn and the spectacular Boneyard and forgotten vale in Dawnguard.
Apologies for derailing things, but that is custom policy for this site anyways.


----------



## WooHooMan (May 28, 2018)

Miles Lacey said:


> I did mention Skyrim rather than Tamriel - and for good reason.  While I thoroughly enjoy the greater diversity in terms of the animals, creatures and landscapes that exists in Skyrim the urban areas and the interior of a lot of the buildings and ruins tend to be virtually identical outside of the big cities like Solitude, Markarth and Riften.  That's why I am somewhat critical of its world-building.  However Cyrodiil was a lot more diverse geographically, especially with the Shivering Isles, and so are the urban areas and the building interiors.  Morrowind and Solstheim in the _Dragonborn DLC _are in a class of their own.  Both are very disorientating but in a good way.



But you were talking about the Dwemer's role in Skyrim.  Their role in Skyrim is no different than their role in Morrowind and Redguard.  They aren't just a disappeared race meant to excuse the existence of dungeons.  They are part of Tamriel's lore and the narrative of the Elder Scrolls.
Also, I'd say the buildings and ruins being similar is somewhat justified.  The Dwemer ruins are distinct from the Nordic ruins as they were different cultures with their own architectural styles.  Most of the Nordic ruins were constructed by the same people - the pre-Septim, post-Atmora Nords.
The towns being similar is justified by the fact that most of them are probably pretty young and were constructed by the same cultural group: Septim Empire Nords. Cyrodiil architecture is more diverse because the racial demographics of Cyrodiil is more diverse (and dynamic due to cultural exchange with neighboring countries).  Not only are Imperial a less overwhelming majority than Skyrim Nords but they are a more diverse culture due to historic split between Colovian/Western Imperial and Nibenese/Eastern Imperial.  But then we get into the topic of how much of Tamriel's lore is represented in the actual games which is a big and controversial topic among fans.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 1, 2018)

Oh boy do i have a lot of these 

Probably my biggest gripe: Introducing predatory creatures (like dragons) that are huge beyond what is prudent or possible and yet not inventing any other creatures for them to prey upon. I'm looking at you, Temeraire. We have like hundreds of varieties of 30+ ton carnivores spread across the world, yet nothing else is different. The ecosystems work exactly the same. What are they eating? Who knows? Certainly not Naomi Novik! 

The largest predatory animal on earth, the polar bear, isn't even one ton in weight. You can't just drop creatures 50 times the size of the largest extant predator on earth all over the globe and keep every ecosystem exactly the same. 

This is actually really common, though. Creating massive carnivorous creatures with no concievable way to support their size. Every level of an ecosystem has many, many times the biomass of the one above it. Yet people will shamelessly create predators that are plot devices for eating the MC's but that have no other apparent food source than the MC's because their realm is barren, devoid of any other living things, etc...Um, do plucky young heroes traverse this land often enough to be a steady source of prey, or what? 

Everything taking place in temperate regions.  Specifically ones that mimic Europe. Likewise, all cultures being based on european ones. You guys know there is an entire globe? right? 

But really, I would like to see something that takes place in a tropical region, or maybe in the arctic circle...

Fantasy Kitchen Sink or worlds where all animals and plants are the same as earth except all mythical creatures are apparently real. Why? We don't know! Arent a lot of these mythical animals from totally different mythologies? Probably! Have humans never really made up any animals or beings? Does this world have any actual connection to Earth at all or any way that the creatures of this world could be the inspiration of myths on Earth, or do all Earth mythical animals coexist here for literally no reason? 

everything is a patriarchal absolute monarchy. Apparently no one has ever tried any other form of government. T can't even be a constitutional monarchy.  

Technology and culture being totally stagnant for thousands of years. 

Abrahamic religions don't exist but the ideas, beliefs about morality, and general worldview that we get from those religions is still there. 

Certain Earth animals being considered staples of fantasy worlds, but....I don't know how to explain it other than, horses are in almost every fantasy novel, but imagine a zebra in a fantasy novel. Or a kangaroo. Or a panda. Even if the fantasy world has an equivalent environment where these animals could live, it would just seem wrong. Somehow it's acceptable to make an analog of europe with all the animals of Europe and say "This is a fantasy world totally separate from Earth," but people wouldn't take it in stride the same way if you made a fantasy world with only Australian animals and claimed it was a whole different world. They have us convinced wolves can be a fantasy creature, but imagine doing the same with a koala. 

Generally just people writing about things they haven't researched. Making ecology with no knowledge of ecology, culture with no idea about culture. 

I'm sure i'll think of more later. Actually I can think of more now, but i'm getting tired of typing.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 1, 2018)

<Everything taking place in temperate regions. Specifically ones that mimic Europe. Likewise, all cultures being based on european ones. You guys know there is an entire globe? right?>

My latest books take place in a warm, misty area. They import food from other worlds, but often have curry and stuff like that. A little variety can change everything.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 1, 2018)

<Abrahamic religions don't exist but the ideas, beliefs about morality, and general worldview that we get from those religions is still there.>

Oh, good goddesses, yes. This is one of those things that annoys me to no end.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 1, 2018)

TheCrystallineEntity said:


> <Abrahamic religions don't exist but the ideas, beliefs about morality, and general worldview that we get from those religions is still there.>
> 
> Oh, good goddesses, yes. This is one of those things that annoys me to no end.



Me too.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 2, 2018)

I don't think there is such a thing as a worst or overplayed trope. All things in their place. Any of these will fit into any story when it is the right story for it to be in, and all of them have the potential to be great additions. I am not sure why I should be sick of any of them.

I think, these things, like the stories that use them are trying to say things, and connect to things in the human understanding and experience that makes them relatable. Sometimes they are even reaching for what is true or asking is something that is thought to be true really true, or even help to reveal things that are true. They are just tools in a tool box, used effectively, they help an author say whatever it is they want to say. I know it is fun to poke at them, and I am sure there is a long litany of people who have used them poorly, but its better to make them useful tools and master them.


----------



## Gurkhal (Aug 2, 2018)

TheCrystallineEntity said:


> <Everything taking place in temperate regions. Specifically ones that mimic Europe. Likewise, all cultures being based on european ones. You guys know there is an entire globe? right?>
> 
> My latest books take place in a warm, misty area. They import food from other worlds, but often have curry and stuff like that. A little variety can change everything.



I'd love to run a story in an warmer setting but I don't live there so I don't know much about how life there is, and feel more comfortable basing myself on something that I already know as opposed to racking up face palms like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 2, 2018)

My books are all spacey-wacy and spiritual and astral and cosmic and all that fun stuff.


----------



## Orc Knight (Aug 2, 2018)

Gurkhal said:


> I'd love to run a story in an warmer setting but I don't live there so I don't know much about how life there is, and feel more comfortable basing myself on something that I already know as opposed to racking up face palms like there's no tomorrow.



I have a habit of running into jungles and beach settings and mangrove swamps with my writing. It may start in temperate but it quickly becomes hot and muggy and decidedly green. And full of lizards and snakes.


----------



## Gurkhal (Aug 2, 2018)

Orc Knight said:


> I have a habit of running into jungles and beach settings and mangrove swamps with my writing. It may start in temperate but it quickly becomes hot and muggy and decidedly green. And full of lizards and snakes.



I'm happy for you. But for myself I don't dare...


----------



## FifthView (Aug 2, 2018)

pmmg said:


> I don't think there is such a thing as a worst or overplayed trope. All things in their place. Any of these will fit into any story when it is the right story for it to be in, and all of them have the potential to be great additions. I am not sure why I should be sick of any of them.
> 
> I think, these things, like the stories that use them are trying to say things, and connect to things in the human understanding and experience that makes them relatable. Sometimes they are even reaching for what is true or asking is something that is thought to be true really true, or even help to reveal things that are true. They are just tools in a tool box, used effectively, they help an author say whatever it is they want to say. I know it is fun to poke at them, and I am sure there is a long litany of people who have used them poorly, but its better to make them useful tools and master them.



Yeah, even beliefs about morals and worldviews inspired by Abrahamic religions can help to make a fictional fantasy society relatable. But sometimes one runs into thinly veiled Christianity, for instance, with little changed, or a character speaks of atonement and resurrection in a future time, etc., and it grates. Sometimes, various sins are universally accepted as sins in that world, or the proscriptions of the Ten Commandments, at least by the "good" inhabitants, and this can grate also.


----------



## Devor (Aug 2, 2018)

I hate how all these stories are still using "day" and "night" like that's a concept set in stone.  Why can't the sky be bright purple for seven hours, dark red for seven hours, and then shifting shades of green for twenty hours?  We could sleep at purple time, have family time during the red hours, and then work the green shift....

Heck, why should there even be a sky?  Ten miles up there could be another world, and we should be able to climb up to it, like in that Mario game. We could have a war with the flip-siders, trying to build and take control of crossover points to get to the other landmass.

We don't even need to keep to having ground, sea and sky.  The "land" could be made out of a tan ooze that hardens or liquefies depending on the conditions, even sculpted as it hardens. A person could be lost in the oozey ocean and sculpt their own shelter wherever they were.

Instead of having distinctions between flora and fauna, we could use insect-like creatures that walked around, planted themselves somewhere, and began to sprout a bush of flowers and thorns from the back to keep off predators.  Inside the bush, the longer the insect remains planted, the more it grows into a full-sized animal, until it sheds the bush and runs free into the world.

...

I love creativity as much or more than the next person.  But in my opinion, this isn't where it comes from.  I don't think a lousy story isn't going to suddenly be better because the setting is switched out with a swamp or desert.  In fact, it may become worse if you don't do the work to support that change.

And if somebody's going to put the work into it, I'm going to appreciate that whatever the choices they make.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 2, 2018)

Lists like this seem to inspire certain kinds of responses.

On the one hand, if the list is taken as an absolute proscription—_What is hereby listed is verboten!—_then there is the corresponding reaction that says, Um, no.

On the other hand, it's fun to make lists like this about things we personally don't like, usually with the bad examples in mind, heh.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 2, 2018)

FifthView said:


> Yeah, even beliefs about morals and worldviews inspired by Abrahamic religions can help to make a fictional fantasy society relatable. But sometimes one runs into thinly veiled Christianity, for instance, with little changed, or a character speaks of atonement and resurrection in a future time, etc., and it grates. Sometimes, various sins are universally accepted as sins in that world, or the proscriptions of the Ten Commandments, at least by the "good" inhabitants, and this can grate also.



Well, I could make arguments as to why an Abrahamic religion might show up in far away places with no connection to religions here on Earth, since those also represent a humanistic effort to capture what might be true about a people, a creator and its creation. I might even expect some of the stories could be similar and carry the same themes. Actual stories being the same would seem unlikely, but the big concepts could easily repeat in many places at once. I don't think its a stretch to say in a distant place, creatures which deal with death and what may come after might not come up with resurrection as a possible answer. Really, when a child asks what happens when I die, there are not too many answers one can really choose from.

Similarly, it would not be a stretch for a distant people to come to understand the power of forgiveness, and if there were a people who could come to think there must a Creator (or creators) but they are somehow separated from them, they might go down the road of how do we atone. its not just Christians who have drawn the concept.

Certainly it is true that there are many ways far places might develop. Most likely, they would have many religions with many different concepts floating around. But so long as they are a people who keep asking questions about the universe, it could very well be they come to some similar answers. Maybe there might be a different shakedown as to which became prominent, but I suspect those that could not stand up to any test of reason would fall away, leaving those best able to do so...and thus we might end up with similar concepts at the top of the pile again. (Which is not to say that all prominent religions stand up to the test of reason, or that a test of reason is how they are best measured, but that they have not been sufficiently knocked down).

A far away people saying, Hey, I think there is a God, I think it loves (or at least wants) us, I think it might be mad cause we all kind of do rotten things, and maybe we should seek some type of atonement, would seem a likely possibility to me. In the same way that the Christian God (which I would tend to expand to include the one all the monotheists are really talking about) often likens itself to a father, and these types of themes flow from the experience of a father with his children, I suspect the idea of a displeased father would be a little universal, and thereby bleed into lore and the understanding of the relationships between peoples and their creators.

Course, it could also go a million different ways well. And those different ways could all be glorious and fun and have great stories spun about them. Maybe they will even shed light on different truths. But I would bet, floating out there in fantasy worlds where Gods walk among the people, there are still some who think someone must have created them too.

Just as an aside, when I see Christian-like religions in works of fiction, they tend to be used as a backdrop to show something that is a flaw in them (I suppose otherwise they would just be Christian fiction). But I will admittedly say, I am not as well read as others.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 2, 2018)

That would be an Um, no. 

Not disagreeing at all, I am.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 2, 2018)

^^You have to be careful, or else you end up with Crystal Dragon Jesuses.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 2, 2018)

Hard to argue with that I suppose. Guess I will spin around too...


----------



## FifthView (Aug 2, 2018)

Well it's all true. I think I suggested once, a couple years ago, that a sticky be added to every Fantasy Writing forum on MS:

_If you are planning to post a new thread to the effect of "Can I...," then the answer's always yes. No need to ask. Just make it good. Then post a different new thread.
_​Edit: I don't mean to make light of your well-considered comment, so sorry if I seemed to.

But I mean by the above...

"Can I ... base my world's morality on Christianity?"
"Can I ... make my fantasy world's culture, climate, etc., like Medieval England's?"
"Can I ... write about elves, dwarves, halflings...?"
"Can I ... "

Answer's always Yes.


----------



## psychotick (Aug 3, 2018)

Hi,

There were absolute loads of pre-Christian religions in the world and to suggest that they didn't have concepts of life after death and atonement is unfair. Think of the Norse Valhalla, the Roman Elysian Fields and the Greek Hades. An afterlife of some sort along with the requirements to reach it, was a very common religious concept. So I don't see any real issue in creating religions that look and sound a little like the Abrahamic ones. Just make them yours.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 3, 2018)

FifthView said:


> Well it's all true. I think I suggested once, a couple years ago, that a sticky be added to every Fantasy Writing forum on MS:
> 
> _If you are planning to post a new thread to the effect of "Can I...," then the answer's always yes. No need to ask. Just make it good. Then post a different new thread.
> _​Edit: I don't mean to make light of your well-considered comment, so sorry if I seemed to.
> ...



Yes! But I will probably complain about it! lol

And that doesnt mean its bad. People will always complain. I will find different books. And write my own.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 3, 2018)

FifthView said:


> Well it's all true. I think I suggested once, a couple years ago, that a sticky be added to every Fantasy Writing forum on MS:
> 
> _If you are planning to post a new thread to the effect of "Can I...," then the answer's always yes. No need to ask. Just make it good. Then post a different new thread._
> Edit: I don't mean to make light of your well-considered comment, so sorry if I seemed to.
> ...




Sorry, I cant tell if this is supposed to be an answer to my post or not. I was not answering a question of 'can I', I think that is a given. I was saying it might be quite likely that these Abrahamic religions might pop up in far away places, and so to treat that as in impossibility, and something that should be avoided, is to discount the likeliness that it would happen. I think it is more likely than one might think. Particularly in worlds that have human and humanish races, with similar mortality and family-type relationships.

In the same way that people who engage in science might come to the same conclusions about the way things work, the same types of things would work out in philosophy. And there would be the same types of questions. Who am I? Who are we? What is there? How did it come to be? What does it all mean? What is true?

Of course I can see things being very different. If I had a race of Ant people, for example, removed from their lore might be a concept of a disapproving father. So, the stories they create might not have those types of themes. But themes of Creation, Gods liking and disliking their creation, being good to each other, not murdering and stealing and lying, Gods being active, and perhaps the mortal people thinking there is something better coming....I think these would almost universally pop up.

Fantasy worlds, were Gods are more present might lend to strong examples that one need look no further, but philosophy, like science, will not be stopped. And sooner or later people will ask...Is this God the prime god, or was he created too?

Anyway, that it is your preference not to see these in the fiction you would like to read, is fine. But it is not necessarily ridiculous that it would appear.

As I said, I suspect there would be many concepts in any world all at once. They have Zeus, and they have Vishnu, and we have Odin, and those other dudes over by the pyramids...well, they are just crazy to believe in things with bird heads. But all these things would either have to be true, or they would dissipate in time.

If there are not gods walking about, then how long can I believe in stories where Zeus is fathering so many heroes, and no one has ever seen Zeus, and there are not any of his sons walking about? Sooner or later, I ask is there really a Zeus? At that point I would suspect many religions would pass into myth, and the more sensible ones would linger on.

All of the above does not take as a given that an Abrahamic type deity is true. But if I do presuppose a single creator God, then I would think the above becomes more likely than less.

But this is a thread about preference and taste. So, there is no wrong answer. Don't prefer it if you don't. I was addressing what I thought to be notion that because we have a world without Abraham, therefore it is just silly to have a world that has a religion like Judaism (or any other monotheistic one). I think that requires more inspection. I don't think it is silly, it think it might be quite likely.

Actually... I did not intend to address that at all, but threads drift.

I think my larger point was about hating on stuff. I know it lets off steam, but I hope (and suggest) a better tactic might be to look at it differently, and ask how might this be used? and use it to make better what you already have.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 3, 2018)

pmmg said:


> I was saying it might be quite likely that these Abrahamic religions might pop up in far away places, and so to treat that as in impossibility, and something that should be avoided, is to discount the likeliness that it would happen.



I was a little confused, because my comment just before yours included this:



FifthView said:


> On the one hand, if the list is taken as an absolute proscription—_What is hereby listed is verboten!—_then there is the corresponding reaction that says, Um, no.
> 
> On the other hand, it's fun to make lists like this about things we personally don't like, usually with the bad examples in mind, heh.



—which, in its way, is in agreement with what you posted afterward. The list may be taken as an absolute proscription or as a fun list used as an occasion to name things one personally dislikes.

BTW, I think there's a wide gap between the theoretically possible and what will or won't be aesthetically pleasing.  As concepts, I mean. As I wrote afterward, "Yes, you can" do anything you like; especially for a fantasy world, where the imagination is the limit, the list of possibilities, or likelihoods if  you wish, is vast in scope. But the likelihood is a separate consideration from the question of aesthetic enjoyment. If it weren't, I'd be forced to consider the possibility that everything _ought _to be aesthetically pleasing to me, if done well, simply because the likelihood of something happening in the real world is high. I don't think this is how art works.

I am in full agreement about the likelihood of near-similarity of religions, morality systems, and so forth, occurring if the possible permutations are vast. For years, I've contemplated something similar. Some viewers of Star Trek or other sci-fi television shows and movies have complained about the fact that many of the aliens are basically humans with only minimal physical differences. But given the vastness of the universe—brilliant video here:






—I do wonder whether similar physical conditions in sun type, planet size and composition and orbit, etc., etc., might lead to intelligent non-Earthlings that look an awful lot like us. Perhaps our very form bears some important correlation to the likelihood of human-level intelligence occurring. Perhaps the same sort of initial conditions that life on Earth enjoyed, and the same sort of geological events, were required for the development of intelligence in the first place. I don't know; no one knows. But given the vast number of possible permutations of solar system configurations, surely some similarity of conditions might form, and maybe very human-like non-Earthlings might develop.

Yet there are critics who insist on a different approach, who will say that the likelihood is far greater that such a race _will not_ look _anything_ like humans. I would ask, On what basis?

Here we run into the problem of the limit of human imagination. How many artistic creators have avoided basing their non-Earthlings on humans but instead based them on insects, or the octopus, or lizards? Heh. Well, those are Earthlings too.

My initial answer in the thread that I, too, disliked the appearance of Abrahamic religions in these secondary world stories was not due to the fact that I thought such a possibility was unlikely. That seems to be the assumption in your well-considered comments: The argument against those tropes is founded on the assumption that such things would be unlikely.

I can't speak for everyone else, but for me the dislike is due to a) the many poor examples I personally have experienced in my reading, and b) what I feel in those poor examples to be a lack of imagination, a facile approach.

As for "a", I believe I've explained that already. I dislike the poor examples, but this doesn't mean I think the appearance of Abrahamic religion and morality is unlikely, and it also doesn't mean I'm arguing for an absolute prohibition.

But, what is this word, "poor"? For "b" I'd use an analogy. If someone were to write a new superhero story and create two superheroes who would at first fight each other and then team up, and one is basically Batman with a new name—Night-Creature Man!—and the other is basically Superman—Sun-Powered Invincible Man!—etc., etc., I'd probably not like this. It's a thin copy. (As parody, farce, comedy, I might like it however; depends.) In other words, those poor examples have felt to me to be thin copies, an expediency, a lack of imagination. I feel the same sort of thing when I read secondary world Medievalish stories in which all the idioms, concepts, etc. in the language are very modern. If a barbarian warrior says, "OMG, don't have a conniption fit!" I'm going to feel it's a mere expediency, a lack of imagination, no matter how forcefully someone argues it's a "translation" into English and that world has naturally developed "similar" speaking patterns and concepts because, duh, the Universe is infinite.

None of these concerns are meant to be an argument against every possible permutation of Abrahamic-like religion, philosophy, and morality in every possible future story.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 3, 2018)

"Space is big. Really big."


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Aug 5, 2018)

Devor said:


> ^ This, 100%.  It's not really _fantasy_, but it's the most unrealistic and condescending thing I see in books, movies, and people on facebook.  There's kindness, foolishness, meanness, and some level of smarts in groups of almost all kinds, but especially ones as broad as social class.  That goes for good or bad across the board.


I blame Marx.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Aug 5, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> Thanks for mentioning this, Ireth. It annoys me SO bad! Like, it just puts this image out there that women choose poorly because lust. So stupid. And dumb. And enraging. ---rant over


If anything it's the man that makes the dumb choice because the power of boners compels him to.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Aug 5, 2018)

So, one of the things that bugs me, is found in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. The legal system in their wizarding world is complete garbage. Due process isn't even a thing. The procedures are arbitrary and capricious and make no sense. It bugged me at 15. It bugs me at 29. 

The other problem is that the governments often created are completely unsustainable. Read The Prince dang it. 

Also, rebellions in these worlds are often unprincipled. Not that they are bad but they aren't fighting for a certain ideal. Also, also, these rebellions are almost never subject to the excesses that rebellions find themselves subject to. 

Next, parenting in fantasy worlds. WTF is up with them? Parenting is piss poor. Although, I loved the eventual catharsis in the Wheel of Time between father and son. But most of the time it's nothing but neglect abuse and stupid, stupid Homer Simpson level of decision making.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Aug 6, 2018)

Garren Jacobsen said:


> So, one of the things that bugs me, is found in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. The legal system in their wizarding world is complete garbage. Due process isn't even a thing. The procedures are arbitrary and capricious and make no sense. It bugged me at 15. It bugs me at 29.
> 
> The other problem is that the governments often created are completely unsustainable. Read The Prince dang it.


Speaking of unsustainable governments and Harry Potter, Rowling has said that the population of Magical Britain is 3000. In Goblet of Fire, we find out that there was a Ministry task force assigned with maintaining the World Cup grounds. It consisted of 500 people. That's one-sixth of the entire population working for the government on one specific task. An entertainment task. Bad at maths indeed.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 6, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> Speaking of unsustainable governments and Harry Potter, Rowling has said that the population of Magical Britain is 3000. In Goblet of Fire, we find out that there was a Ministry task force assigned with maintaining the World Cup grounds. It consisted of 500 people. That's one-sixth of the entire population working for the government on one specific task. An entertainment task. Bad at maths indeed.



JKR abuses Word of God imo


----------



## pmmg (Aug 6, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> Speaking of unsustainable governments and Harry Potter, Rowling has said that the population of Magical Britain is 3000. In Goblet of Fire, we find out that there was a Ministry task force assigned with maintaining the World Cup grounds. It consisted of 500 people. That's one-sixth of the entire population working for the government on one specific task. An entertainment task. Bad at maths indeed.



I had a similar event in a RPG I was hosting once. I said there was a band of 50 orcs (meant to be a big enough number to give the party pause about attacking them), and I said they sent out scouting parties in groups of 5 in the major compass directions. That being 8 directions, equating to 40 of their 50 wandering off in small groups. I said that because I knew if they just sent out one, the players would kill them and that would be that, and I wanted to give them something to play around. However...I did not do the math right.

In the future, I've always been cognizant of how many of something I am claiming for something.

I think this same thing happened in the LOTR and hobbit movies. In the hobbit, Azog wants to chase the hobbits but is called back by Sauron and he splits his forces, leaving Bolg in charge. Bolg chases the hobbits to the Elvin village and gets into a big fight when the dwarves escape. If you follow that battle, and I did because I became curios, in that one sequence 98 Orcs are killed---and Bolg still has a lot of them left over.

That's a lot of Orcs. If Bolg has a band of say 200 Orcs when he splits with Azog, Azog must have about 400--or more. 200 Orcs is a pretty big band and would draw quite a bit of attention, and not so easily sneak into Dale to have another big battle. All to say, its no small band chasing the hobbits, and Bolg does not look like a very good war leader having had so many killed for so little results (maybe orcs are used to it).

I think this is also kind of a case where, for movie magic, they need a lot of reasons for the action scene to remain tense, but they dropped a heck of a lot of orcs, and I don't think the orcs get a single kill. That does not make them look as tough as they should be. Anyway, I am not supposed to notice that stuff, but I do.


----------



## psychotick (Aug 7, 2018)

Hi,

If we're going to play the numbers game, I think the Shanarra tv series (It's so long since I read the books that I can't be sure if they have the same problem) has them all beat. So in the show we have the four or five races, all of them amassing vast armies for the wars and having their own cities. Only problem is the geography. It's two days walk to anywhere. How can you support vast armies for wars when your entire world is only say a hundred miles in diameter?

The second problem of course is the age of the world - which is post human. But at the least it would take thousands of years, even including radiation to increase the rate of mutation, to create new races. But we still have steel structures like the San Fran bridge and helicopters? No.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Aug 7, 2018)

psychotick said:


> It's two days walk to anywhere.



Isn't this place a geographical oddity, couple of days from everything!


----------



## CupofJoe (Aug 7, 2018)

TheCrystallineEntity said:


> "Space is big. Really big."


----------



## psychotick (Aug 7, 2018)

Hi Garren,

Sorry, badly worded. I'm not pointing out a strange geography, just that it's a tiny scale world with massive population events happening in it.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Aug 7, 2018)

psychotick said:


> Hi Garren,
> 
> Sorry, badly worded. I'm not pointing out a strange geography, just that it's a tiny scale world with massive population events happening in it.
> 
> Cheers, Greg.


Don't take away my O Brother Where Art Thou moments. That's blasphemy.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 8, 2018)

FifthView said:


> None of these concerns are meant to be an argument against every possible permutation of Abrahamic-like religion, philosophy, and morality in every possible future story.



Well, Mr. Fifth. I do like your well thought-out posts and appreciate your that you spend your efforts here with us. You are a gentleman and a scholar.



FifthView said:


> But the likelihood is a separate consideration from the question of aesthetic enjoyment. If it weren't, I'd be forced to consider the possibility that everything _ought _to be aesthetically pleasing to me, if done well, simply because the likelihood of something happening in the real world is high. I don't think this is how art works.



I don't feel I have anything to add that would be considered a rebuttal. Seems we would agree on many aspects of this.

The above lends itself to me towards the suspension of disbelief, which albeit, is really hard for me. Perhaps harder than it is in others. But if the story is putting out stuff I think unlikely, ill start asking questions. If it gets to the point where I just dont buy it, the story is going to get a lot of unwanted scrutiny. That's just the way my brain turns it. So...I like when authors have something to say, and I think it is probably true that even those who are not meaning too, or are not aware of if, are still adding the body of human thought and experience. I am fine not agreeing with them when I don't, but I do find it is still important what they create. And I very much like when I am still thinking of the concepts in a story after the story is completed. And if I get to incorporate them into something that I must think about as a something possibly true about something, even better.

Religions are just one thing among many.

Truth is, I have wondered on the biblical lines, 'we are made in God's image', and 'we are wonderfully and fearfully made' along the lines of what shape is a more fearful shape for a creature to be. Humans are in fact quite powerful. The male body, with its center of balance in its chest, and its arms clutching in from the side, is kind of made to pound the crap out of things (like the den-den diako drum). It is albeit small compared to things that may be out in space, but is there another shape more fearful?  Big teeth and big claws seem to be the best we can come up with for more frightening, but actually, I might argue other humans are more frightening than monsters. And bigger human like shapes are just exaggerating what is already powerful about the man like shape. (Sometimes, I look at the creatures with big sharp teeth and wonder can it really open its mouth wide enough to make those teeth useful?)

I do feel that SciFi has pretty much run the gamut on what can be imagined, not to say they have exhausted all possibilities, but I am unlikely to go 'Wow, that is a type alien that has never been considered before...' And, along with the suspension of disbelief...you know, some shapes would also seem to be universal. Worms, for example, would likely be a shape that repeats often.

Given strange enough worlds, with higher or lower gravity, or different atmospheres, well, it might be a task to imagine what sorts of creatures may exist in those, but reason would still seem up to the task of doing so.

An issue I had with Star Trek was that all the worlds seemed to be of one culture. All Vulcans were the same, and all Klingon's likewise. I found that unlikely, but not enough to care. It would be too big of a story to really show all the diversity. I like-wise asked about the giant worm in star wars that the Millennium Falcon hid in, in terms of its eco system. How can I get a big worm? I would need a large food supply, which it seemingly does not have. But....I also did not fall out of suspension of disbelief over it.

Ill be honest, I don't read a lot of books trying to sneak in Abraham. Maybe I just don't read the right types of books. Most often, when a religion is in it, I find they are presented as something that is wrong and needs to righted. As a Christian, I don't really enjoy it, but I understand, Christianity (Abraham) does kind of underpin western culture, and what better to be asking questions about? Most of us come, or see the world greatly affected,  from western culture and Abrahamic influence, and so our experience, and reaction to it, kind of stems from it. So that is just how it goes.

The universe is vast and endless, and so, it should seem, are all the possible concepts. But I am not sure that is true. I don't think the answer to the question, 'what happens when I die?', has an infinite amount of answers. Perhaps a few big concepts and then a lot of not-really important variations (though maybe cool).

I suppose I would also say, that writers come in all stripes and flavors and any concept is sure to have a gigantic share of people doing it lazily or poor. That just kind of follows sturgeons law (90% of everything is crud). No escaping that either.

But in general, towards the topic, I would just say 'hating on' is not useful, better to understand and make use of (as a tool in ones tool box).

I am beating a dead horse....moving on.


Here, I always found this one to be impressive.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Aug 9, 2018)

Fake roman empires.

Or, really just any placeholder for a real world empire but ignoring the conditions that caused that culture in the first place.


----------



## Corwynn (Aug 9, 2018)

Tropes aren't necessarily good or bad, but some can rub people the wrong way. These are my personal pet-peeves:

Bad geography. Swamps right next to desert, rivers that flow uphill, and most especially, obviously rectangular continents. That last one really gets me. If the main continent follows the Law of Cartographical Elegance to a tee, it breaks my suspension of disbelief.

I don't mind temperate climates and Europeanesque cultures so much, but what really gets me are the endless fantasy kingdoms that are essentially copies of medieval England. The worst part is that these places aren't particularly English either. There is no sense of national identity whatsoever to distinguish it from any number of generic fantasy kingdoms.

Related to both of the above, really generic place names, like Highwatch, Black Bay, the Mountains of Doom, ugghhh.

Choosing the most boring and bog-standard racial, cultural, and social class combination for the protagonist to make the main character more "relatable". If I wanted familiar and relatable, I wouldn't be reading a fantasy novel, would I? It doesn't help the reader relate, it just makes the main character boring. I swear, if I see one more American 30-something white male with brown hair and stubble, I'll...

Wizards who spend years in their ivory towers studying and experimenting, and yet for all that, they never make any meaningful contribution to the magical arts and sciences. Even worse is when magic and/or technology was more advanced long, long ago, and yet after 3000 years, nobody has been able to figure out how they did it, or replicate it.

Always Chaotic Evil races and cultures. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and carries certain Implications. Always Lawful Good races are bad too, but they crop up less often.

Fantasy religions that are basically just ripoffs of the Greco-Roman pantheon, especially when the temples and clergy also have the aesthetics of the Catholic Church.

Fantasy races that are all basically just humans, both mentally and physically, with only a few minor differences. Also, humans are the majority and dominant race, despite the fact that they have no (or very few and minor) physical or mental advantages over the others.

And of course, misuse of language, and pathetically illogical action; but this is common to all literature, not just fantasy.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 9, 2018)

^Hear, hear.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 9, 2018)

We needn't add the "of course tropes aren't bad" disclaimer in some cases. A river flowing backward isn't a trope, it's a mistake. 

one of my least favorite book series put a "jungle" right in the middle of an otherwise cold/temperate continent


----------



## TheKillerBs (Aug 9, 2018)

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> We needn't add the "of course tropes aren't bad" disclaimer in some cases. A river flowing backward isn't a trope, it's a mistake.


Only if it isn't part of a world with alien geometry or is otherwise magical or supernatural.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 9, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> Only if it isn't part of a world with alien geometry or is otherwise magical or supernatural.



If there's no explanation like that at all, though, we can't be left to assume it


----------



## TheKillerBs (Aug 10, 2018)

If such an explanation is plausible in the context of the world, you can't assume it isn't part of the unseen worldbuilding backbone.


----------



## elemtilas (Aug 10, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> If such an explanation is plausible in the context of the world, you can't assume it isn't part of the unseen worldbuilding backbone.



If I have to explain every instance of odd geography in a story, would that not at least touch on infodumping, which is apparently a pet peeve of many? 

The way I see it, in a work of fantasy, if you as Author show me a river that runs uphill, my response is "well okay! they have rivers that run uphill". It's just part of the world that I as Reader am discovering as I go along.

These things are not necessarily mistakes. Inner consistency and the separation of realities allow us readers to shrug our shoulders and move on with the story already. Now, if you set this uphill running river in Virginia of the good ol USA right here on standard issue Earth, then I'll have a problem with your worldbuilding. When you introduce illogically placed inconsistencies into a place where they _can not be_ (not just "should not be"), then I have to assume the worldbuilding backbone is either broken or else (more likely) has some kind of congenital malformation.

This is not just misuse of a trope, this is just bad conception, bad writing and poor editing.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Aug 10, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> If such an explanation is plausible in the context of the world, you can't assume it isn't part of the unseen worldbuilding backbone.



That wouldn't fly with me, i'm afraid.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Aug 10, 2018)

--Mysterious ruins from long ago connected to an 'elder race', of whom the current inhabitants of the world know nothing.


----------



## FifthView (Aug 10, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> the unseen worldbuilding backbone.



My comment isn't so much a continuation of the current debate but just a reaction to this phrase. Yes. Whenever I'm able to suspend disbelief about something in the fantasy world, there's usually the presumption that it's supported and fortified by some unseen worldbuilding backbone. In other words, I don't need every tiny detail explained in order to justify something in that world.

However we also run into preconceived "backbones" that we bring to the reading, so if something seems out of whack—well, it seems out of whack.


----------



## Devor (Aug 10, 2018)

There's a difference between a trope and poor world building.  Also, it's unfortunate, but sometimes a mistake is just the best way to make something work, especially if you didn't catch it until the late stages.  Typically, though, you'd do your best to hide the mistake, or else lampshade it, in which case your writing skills might hopefully be able to make up for your worldbuilding flaws.

I love worldbuilding backbones.  But there's a line between creating intrigue and confusion, and it can one of the hardest things for a writer to manage.  Some readers are also more resistant to the realm of suspended disbelief (I think we've all heard people complain about plot holes that actually made total sense... just like the grammar police sometimes "correct" statements that were totally right to begin with).  But what I really wanted to say is, if your worldbuilding "backbone" doesn't make sense by the end of the story, then it's not a backbone, it's a plot tumor.


----------



## pmmg (Aug 10, 2018)

elemtilas said:


> The way I see it, in a work of fantasy, if you as Author show me a river that runs uphill, my response is "well okay! they have rivers that run uphill". It's just part of the world that I as Reader am discovering as I go along.



That would not likely be my reaction...but it might be, if the author had already won my trust that they got it covered. Still, if something is going to be that incongruous with what we bring into the story as a given, I would expect some explanation, or at least a reaction from the characters that it was weird.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Aug 10, 2018)

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> That wouldn't fly with me, i'm afraid.


Fair enough.


----------



## Laurence (Aug 10, 2018)

It’d be interesting to hear the opinion of people who haven’t written / read 1mil+ fantasy novels. 

I feel like most normies are a lot better at suspending disbelief than us.


----------



## elemtilas (Aug 10, 2018)

TheCrystallineEntity said:


> --Mysterious ruins from long ago connected to an 'elder race', of whom the current inhabitants of the world know nothing.



Gobleke Tepe

Maybe not an "elder race" per se, but otherwise, spot on!


----------



## elemtilas (Aug 10, 2018)

FifthView said:


> My comment isn't so much a continuation of the current debate but just a reaction to this phrase. Yes. Whenever I'm able to suspend disbelief about something in the fantasy world, there's usually the presumption that it's supported and fortified by some unseen worldbuilding backbone. In other words, I don't need every tiny detail explained in order to justify something in that world.
> 
> However we also run into preconceived "backbones" that we bring to the reading, so if something seems out of whack—well, it seems out of whack.


This is true, but as I see it, that's more _our _problem as Reader, not a problem with the Author or her work or abuse of tropes. If I as Reader refuse to lay aside my ultra-realistic preconceived notions when reading, for example, Harry Potter, then I'm rather missing the whole point. I might just as well read Tom Brown's School Days (randomly picked English boarding school novel).


----------



## elemtilas (Aug 10, 2018)

pmmg said:


> That would not likely be my reaction...but it might be, if the author had already won my trust that they got it covered. Still, if something is going to be that incongruous with what we bring into the story as a given, I would expect some explanation, or at least a reaction from the characters that it was weird.



But if it's not weird, then no one is likely to react...

Author would win my trust on the matter if such a river were demonstrated to be a "normal" part of this world. It's a world completely at odds with our understanding, but I had the same reaction with Flatland. The Author satisfied me of the normality of 2D space, and that was that. Me, I think I would be more suspicious if ordinary people in a world where rivers run in all kinds of directions and the sky changes colours every 20 minutes and in some places, things fall up and if you walk crabwise through a door you turn 2 dimensional until you walk anticrabwise out the door make incongruously descriptive commentary about their everyday experience.

It's up to the Author to explain without _explaining_ and to assure of the normality of the experience. "Samoy looked out at the pale red sky and then at his watch. Drat. The hand was rapidly sweeping towards purple. He should have been out the door by half past green-sky. 'How am I going to make up thirty minutes at work!?' he cried out to nobody. Nobody answered. You know they'll take those minutes from you, if you don't hurry along. Shrug. 'Gives me the heeby-jeebies to do it this way...ugh.' Samoy went down the hall towards his home office, turned sideways and held on to his stomach as he sidled crabwise through the door. He always felt like retching whenever he went two dimensional, but the purpling sky outside his window reminded him this was an emergency. He crossed the room to the mail tube, slapped in the destination order and folded himself up as he crawled into the carrier..."


----------



## S.T. Ockenner (Aug 2, 2020)

Miles Lacey said:


> claiming it was an advanced race that suddenly disappeared (yes, _Skyrim_, I'm looking at you)


Skyrim is in a series, it's not a standalone. It would be better to say Elder Scrolls.


----------

