How deep are your worlds?

[Elder the Dwarf]

I'm attempting my first real work in my free time. I've worked on designing my world and I was just wondering how in-depth your worlds go. I saw the topic about time and if you really think about it, a new world would require a new time system (days, months) and even the one o'clock, two o'clock is questionable. Many words would have to be taken out, curses, and other things I can't think of. And for all the British people on the forum, even bloody couldn't really be used. It can get really frustrating at times when you think of the scope of it all. To what extent do you guys manufacture your new worlds?

 

[ascanius]

Hmm, currently I have 38 pages of various notes for almost everything from the mundane like smithing a rare metal to population demographics for certain cities and regions along with trade and currency exchange. I have a 1.22Mb map file where I can zoom from a view of the entire continent down to details at 500% zoom, I might be quarter of the way finished right now. I think it depends how how obsessive, and detailed oriented you are. I like the details and knowing what each and every aspect of the world is. Organizing it all into the story, and creating an outline is where im having trouble. In the end it is down to how much detail you want.

 

[Ghost]

It depends on which world. My main project AG is very detailed. Not so much yet as far as mapping or individual people, but the countries, languages, and myths are the things I'm tackling first. It's meant to be a world where I can set many novels. The novels aren't related except that they take place on the same planet. Some of my characters are nomadic tribesmen in ancient times, kings in their equivalent to the middle ages, and mechanical geeks after a series of technological revolutions. So I have to build the world across its history and across different continents. I get sidetracked by the research if I worldbuild as I go, so I might as well immerse myself in it.

I have other worlds that aren't so involved. In those ones, I tend to be vague about things like time unless it's important to the plot or set in an alternate history. It doesn't seem necessary to introduce something like that in a standalone novel. Some of them only span a couple of towns or one city. I detail what's relevant to the plot and a little extra to enrich the world, but I don't go overboard.

 

[Devor]

I remember a YouTube video about Clown Philosophy and the idea that if every possible universe existed, then there would by definition have to be a world which was different in every possible way from ours except for one single constant. In the video the constant was that everyone in our world and theirs still hates the clown; in my world, it can be that bloody is still a curse word. I'm not going to worry about it.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

I personally don't like deviating too much from standard conventions - in other words my world has 4 seasons and time similar to our world (three meals a day with one at "mid day"). Where I concentrate on is political systems, relgion, and history. The important thing for a new writer is to let your world building be a 'backdrop' to your story. It should be revealed organically through your plot and characters - don't try to impress your reader with all the work you did - Most of my world building never reaches the page but it does develop a clear idea in my mind of where things are taking place.

 

[Hëradïn]

I have unique time systems, language, history and even different skin colors for each of the four races of humanoids, and they four can inter breed (though what comes out depends entirely on which race the father belongs to) also their skin color is depended on what color the mother was. as for swearing, I use ****, cunt etc, but nothing beyond that really.

 

[monty]

My worlds aren't that deep because I'm hoping to introduce 12-16 year olds to Sci-Fi in something that's easy to read. I remember when I was younger The Hobbit and Lord of the Ring series just seemed too involved to try.

 

[Chilari]

Looking at some of the above responses, it seems I fit into the shallower end of the scale of worldbuilding. I create worlds to fit the stories, not the other way around; if I can set other unrelated stories in the same world at some point in the future, then fine. It'll save me work in the future. But the story or the character comes first, and the world is created to enable me to tell the story I want to tell. If I need a city that has a particular problem with immortals, I create the city and I create a religion that'll give them that prejudice, or a history with one immortal in particular (or both, with the religious bit developing from the history bit). If I need something sinister and inhuman in the woods for my protagonist to face, I create some form of fae folk and some mythology surrounding them to justify their poor reputation.

In general, though, I do not have several languages made up, and half a dozen cultures of places my characters never visit, and histories for every major city within five hundred miles. As far as languages go, I create names for them and decide where they are spoken, and maybe give them vague sound groups for naming characters who speak that language, but I don't create languages or decide that certain prefixes or suffixes mean particular things or anything like that complex. In terms of other cities or places which might be referred to by characters, they get a name and a vague location (150 miles NW of where ever my characters are, for example), and maybe I'll decide which language group they fit into and which religion they follow if the city is mentioned more than once. As for maps, I have a vague idea in my head of where places are in relation to each other and what kind of landscape they occupy - mountainous, river valley, plains, coastal, etc - and that's about it. If I draw a map, chances are I'll lose it, forget about it, or redraw it to suit the needs of the story at a later date.

As far as making the world different from Earth goes, my policy is to keep things simple. Readers will have trouble remembering that there are two moons and nine days to a week unless it's a week with two full moons and then it's a ten day week and months are either 25, 26 or 27 days long depending on the moon cycles and this religion worships this moon and that religion worships that moon and the other religion worships the sun and there are these cities and these houses and prominent families and all these factions and these political issues and ... urgh. I either don't use the term "week" at all, or assume it's 7 days. Same with months. There is one moon, the year lasts 365 days, trees grow, people farm wheat and beans and peas and carrots and keep cattle and sheep and chickens and bees and city industries include smithing, carpentry, potting, basket weaving and whatever else you might find in a culture which has yet to experience an industrial revolution. Any differences there are, as regards magic, unusual critters, society, history, religion and politics, I try to introduce fluidly, as it pertains to the characters and the plot.

 

[Johnny Cosmo]

I'm really into intense world-building because I want to develop as rich a setting as I can for my story. That said, I've decided it might be best for me to relax, at least until I've finished my first draft. I can always world-build as I go, and then if something doesn't match up properly, I'll edit either the story or the world to fit after I've got that first draft down.

 

[Elder the Dwarf]

I remember a YouTube video about Clown Philosophy and the idea that if every possible universe existed, then there would by definition have to be a world which was different in every possible way from ours except for one single constant. In the video the constant was that everyone in our world and theirs still hates the clown; in my world, it can be that bloody is still a curse word. I'm not going to worry about it.

Don't take what I said the wrong way, I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying that since the word has roots in one of our world's specific religions, it doesn't fit historically. You can certainly use it anyway, and there might even be a cool way to explain the word's significance to your cultures.

 

[Lia-Art]

I've only just started creating my world, but I'm planning on making it extermally detailed for two reasons:
1. I love the creation proccess involved in making a detailed world and
2. I want to set many completely unrelated stories in the same world that way I only have to make one world and I can put alot of effort into one instead of a pathetic amount of detail into several

 

[Laughing_Seraphim]

I like to build a pretty robust world, usually fitting in an already robust universe. I don't always give 100% of that to a potential audience, but it is already there.
For instance.
GoogledieBop: Gray skies, always gray. The dirt has oddly colored patches because of a bacteria unique to the world. This in turn alters the color of bones and teeth. Animal droppings are oddly colored.
My entire story takes place inside a mental institution there, so the coloration of the ground, through a window will be described in fair detail. The animal droppings, probably not so much. The world you build beforehand, and the world you write don't have to match up exactly. The gray sky would contrast well with hues of pink and orange dirt patches swirling up a hill of bright green grass. That in turn would contrast further from the dismal white and gray of the looney bin walls.
Obviously in building the world the gray walls, gray sky and colorful outside world are relevant for the imagery. Maybe hospital workers in deep red uniforms, or blue teeth as well. Contrast. The animal droppings, the bacteria, probably aren't anything the READER needs to know for THIS story. If the sequel is about a scientist trying to discover why everyone is going insane, you as the writer already know that it is a mutation in the bacteria caused from the way it grows in animal droppings.

So, yes, I personally try to make my world very deep ahead of time.

 

[Laughing_Seraphim]

I've only just started creating my world, but I'm planning on making it extermally detailed for two reasons:
1. I love the creation proccess involved in making a detailed world and
2. I want to set many completely unrelated stories in the same world that way I only have to make one world and I can put alot of effort into one instead of a pathetic amount of detail into several

+1 Little brother or sister.

 

[Zak]

Readers like when they see you put a lot of work into creating your world. I think you should read at least one book from The Watergivers Series by Glenda Larke. She did an amazing job at creating a fantasy world.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

Readers like when they see you put a lot of work into creating your world. I think you should read at least one book from The Watergivers Series by Glenda Larke. She did an amazing job at creating a fantasy world.

I think it is a matter of personal preference. Personally...I prefer not to "see" the work you put into it. The world building should be seemless and invisible and brought up in context (again my preference) but others, as you noted, do want to "see" it.

 

[Devor]

A lot of old writing spent time trying to educate readers on the technical minutia of what they're talking about, Moby Dick comes to mind. Today I think most readers find the endless education a chore and a hindrance to the real beauty of what's happening in the story. Books didn't used to compete with television, internet or even a diverse nightlife.

Using Tolkein as one of everyone's favorite two examples, he mixes some excessive detail into the works and shoves a most of it into the Appendices. I would rather include incredible detail in very subtle, quick ways. A five-word description here, an intuitive-sounding name there, maybe somebody explains it in a paragraph later on, and a little narrative history fills in the blanks as needed. I mean, in a well developed world there's going to be more of these details than fit into a prologue.

 

[TWErvin2]

I think it is a matter of personal preference. Personally...I prefer not to "see" the work you put into it. The world building should be seemless and invisible and brought up in context (again my preference) but others, as you noted, do want to "see" it.

I'm with Michael Sullivan on this one.

There isn't a problem with having a detailed world created, but 'showcasing' it through the novel can be a major pitfall. The vast majority of the detailed histories and cultures and family lines and revolutions and counter revolutions, etc. will never make it to the pages of the novel. Most readers are there for the story.

Having a well-developed and consistent world in which the characters inhabit and move about, where the plot and action occurs is great. The world should be a vehicle to 'showcase' the story.

 

[Dreamhand]

Lot's of exceptional and diverse observations in this thread!

As a world-building addict (admitting to the problem is the first step) I completely empathize with the delight and wonder of building a rich, complex world. The nuance and relevance of each minute detail seems give the world weight and substance and we take great delight in (for example) knowing exactly why the days are only 20.34 hours long or the life cycle of the trilium worm in the context of salt-bog ecosystem.

One caution I would offer (and one that I've remind myself of time and again)... world-building is NOT story-building. As many commenters have pointed out, character and conflict are the foundation of most successful storytelling. I'm an advocate of the world being as much a character of the story as the walking talking beings, but even that is a subjective choice.

I agree with what many have observed... the amount of detail is only relevant in the context of the story you're telling. If I catch myself leading off a thought with "Wouldn't it be cool if...", then I know I need to tread carefully. "Wouldn't it be cool if dragons could talk?" The answer as a world-builder is almost always "yes!", but as a writer, I think the answer almost always has to be "no." Those minutiae of fact or fancy are utterly irrelevant unless they serve to drive your story forward.

As writers, we have precious little time to capture the hearts and minds of our readers, and we won't do it with facts and figures or exhaustive histories or a complete re-rendering of the periodic table. We CAN however, create character's with talents and flaws and fervent desires and then place them in a world that feeds and amplifies the drama of those desires.

I mean... we ARE fantasy writers, right? Magic and gods and relics and spirits and such are the threads of the tapestries we weave. But those fantastical elements are not what's "cool" about our worlds. It's the stories that evolve FROM and IN those places that capture our imaginations. As fantasy writers, we've allowed ourselves the freedom to build worlds where the metaphors of heroism and villainy are bold and tangible... so use them to tell tales of equal scope and grandeur.

I recommend (as others have) to first decide what your story is. What themes and conflicts, what ambitions and desires are going to fuel the fires of your characters? Once you know those details, then build a world that raises the stakes, cranks up the danger and the drama, and makes the attainment of those ambitions that much more perilous... and essential.

Weave the world INTO the story, make it a character as well as a setting, and hold yourself to the same rules you would any character in terms of page time and word count. And, for god sake, SHOW us, don't TELL us. Reveal through the story those wonders you've devised. If you want to share the wonder of the life cycle of the trilium worm then make it relevant... to save her daughter, the hero must have an herb that only grows in the salt-bogs of Madrashur, but the herb has withered because trilium worms (providing essential nutrients to the rare herb) are an essential component in the magic of the Urthraug priests and has been harvested exclusively for their use. NOW we have conflict! Now the trilium worm is interesting and relevant.

I love building worlds... but I always have to be careful not to confuse an awesome world with an awesome story. While the two are not mutually exclusive, one does not necessarily imply the other.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

Weave the world INTO the story, make it a character as well as a setting, and hold yourself to the same rules you would any character in terms of page time and word count.

I more or less agree with your entire post, and I think the whole topic can be summed up as follows:

Most readers will be turned off by excessive details about your world. Some readers love that sort of thing, but not very many. Very few readers will be turned off by only having a moderate amount of detail. If your goal is to maximize readership, go for a moderate amount of detail, and weave it in; infodumps should be short and minimal, and always work better in the context of informing characterization and story.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

Lot's of exceptional and diverse observations in this thread!

As a world-building addict (admitting to the problem is the first step) I completely empathize with the delight and wonder of building a rich, complex world. The nuance and relevance of each minute detail seems give the world weight and substance and we take great delight in (for example) knowing exactly why the days are only 20.34 hours long or the life cycle of the trilium worm in the context of salt-bog ecosystem.

One caution I would offer (and one that I've remind myself of time and again)... world-building is NOT story-building. As many commenters have pointed out, character and conflict are the foundation of most successful storytelling. I'm an advocate of the world being as much a character of the story as the walking talking beings, but even that is a subjective choice.

I agree with what many have observed... the amount of detail is only relevant in the context of the story you're telling. If I catch myself leading off a thought with "Wouldn't it be cool if...", then I know I need to tread carefully. "Wouldn't it be cool if dragons could talk?" The answer as a world-builder is almost always "yes!", but as a writer, I think the answer almost always has to be "no." Those minutiae of fact or fancy are utterly irrelevant unless they serve to drive your story forward.

As writers, we have precious little time to capture the hearts and minds of our readers, and we won't do it with facts and figures or exhaustive histories or a complete re-rendering of the periodic table. We CAN however, create character's with talents and flaws and fervent desires and then place them in a world that feeds and amplifies the drama of those desires.

I mean... we ARE fantasy writers, right? Magic and gods and relics and spirits and such are the threads of the tapestries we weave. But those fantastical elements are not what's "cool" about our worlds. It's the stories that evolve FROM and IN those places that capture our imaginations. As fantasy writers, we've allowed ourselves the freedom to build worlds where the metaphors of heroism and villainy are bold and tangible... so use them to tell tales of equal scope and grandeur.

I recommend (as others have) to first decide what your story is. What themes and conflicts, what ambitions and desires are going to fuel the fires of your characters? Once you know those details, then build a world that raises the stakes, cranks up the danger and the drama, and makes the attainment of those ambitions that much more perilous... and essential.

Weave the world INTO the story, make it a character as well as a setting, and hold yourself to the same rules you would any character in terms of page time and word count. And, for god sake, SHOW us, don't TELL us. Reveal through the story those wonders you've devised. If you want to share the wonder of the life cycle of the trilium worm then make it relevant... to save her daughter, the hero must have an herb that only grows in the salt-bogs of Madrashur, but the herb has withered because trilium worms (providing essential nutrients to the rare herb) are an essential component in the magic of the Urthraug priests and has been harvested exclusively for their use. NOW we have conflict! Now the trilium worm is interesting and relevant.

I love building worlds... but I always have to be careful not to confuse an awesome world with an awesome story. While the two are not mutually exclusive, one does not necessarily imply the other.

Very nicely put. I wholeheartedly agree. Well said.