• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Does World Building Scare You?

I love world-building; it's great fun.

The trick is to not spend more time on world-building than you do on character- and story-building. Those are the important parts.
 

Saigonnus

Auror
Nah, I ain't scared of world-building, but then I have a very laid back approach to it: I just figure I can add the details as required and imply the rest. No need to waste creative energy on things that aren't actually going to show up in the story, after all.

Besides, first drafts and all that.

I tend to think if you make a whole world (or continent etc.) that opens up the options on what you can do with your story. Get stuck with a story, look at the map and perhaps think of a side quest in a spot you've already made; you've got the names, details of the place so you don't need to build up the world some more.

Your character finds himself in a kingdom after being exiled from his own; what kind of kingdom is it? Who rules? What do they trade in when he finds he has no weapons, gear or anything but the clothes on his back? these things can always help carry the plotline along if you don't have to stop and think of all these at the time you are writing. I think MOST writers do at least a little planning on the background of an area so they don't have problems.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I find that it is good to have balance. Too much world-building becomes a de facto means of avoidance and procrastination for many fantasy writers I know. They spend months or years working out the most minute details, far more than a reader will ever need to know, or even than they need to know as author (and they need to know more than the reader). The end result is that their stories never get written because they are always tinkering with world history, world maps, and the like. If that's what one finds interesting and a source of fun, then that's great, but if you're really serious about writing stories and your world-building keeps you from doing so, it is a problem.

The second problem I see with too much world-building is that it is too rigid, and as a result the author has to some degree confined her story before writing it. I've had a couple of times where I've talked to people who were at a real roadblock in their story, and the author's answer to some of the more obvious suggestions to getting around them were "Yeah, but that won't work because in my world...." That is great (and even necessary) as far as internal world logic and consistency goes, but in this one case in particular I think the author spent so long working on the history, politics, religion, ecology and so on of the world that he simply wasn't open to changing any of it. He literally spent years on it, and the story became slave to the world that was created, instead of the world serving the story (the latter being how it should be, in my view).

Personally, I like to have more general ideas of the world, as well as the people, places, and creatures in them. A general sense of the history, mythology, and so on. By keeping it general, I feel I have greater freedom when writing, and the world is more malleable to my needs as an author.

Of course, everyone should approach this in the way that works best for them. But the two pitfalls I mentioned above are the ones that I most frequently see as negatives for authors who exhaustively create their worlds.
 

Caliburn

New Member
"Does worldbuilding scare you?"

Yes.
I have no idea what I'm doing.
In fact, I'm pretty sure no one does, but some people seem more confident at fumbling around in the dark.
Me, I can't decide on anything. Nothing!!

*throws hands up in the air*

Some people on this site are more interested in making fantasy roleplaying game settings than writing novels. I'm one of those people. Building RPG settings is a lot like playing with LEGO, which was something that came naturally to me as a child (though even then I wanted to follow the instruction manuals for constructing the set, then place the characters myself to make an interesting scene).
That said, I'm still not very confident in building RPG settings either.
Additionally, working up the interest to write stories is hard and presents even fewer ways to find your bearings. It can feel a lot like being lost at sea. One of my friends thinks that's the best place to be as far as writing is concerned--it means you're probably breaking rules and covering new ground--and I can see where she's coming from. I guess I'm still a landlubber who hasn't found his sea legs :eek:
 

J. S. Elliot

Inkling
Actually, I love world building. I can spend months upon months building the background to not one, but impendingly countless stories. One of the things I really like about it is, in the act of creating such a lush background, I usually end up with anywhere from a small to very large amount of additional ideas. Some are on a large scale, whilst others are on a much more personal level.

But since I'm one of those people who feels they should know their world before they start, it takes me a while to get going on a story set in a new world. However, once the background is fully painted ... It'd be rather easy to get started. It may take longer, but it's worth it in the long run. ^^
 

Saigonnus

Auror
"Does worldbuilding scare you?"

Yes.
I have no idea what I'm doing.
In fact, I'm pretty sure no one does, but some people seem more confident at fumbling around in the dark.
Me, I can't decide on anything. Nothing!!

*throws hands up in the air*

Fumbling in the dark is pretty accurate in many cases, but in others completely inaccurate. I would like to think that many writers (like myself) have a good grasp on what their world looks like (in the halls of their own mind). They know what they want to accomplish and what kind of "ambience" their world has. There are many tools out there for world building and many posts here about things to consider when building a world that is at least mostly realistic.

I used to play with legos myself (one of the few toys I actually did have) and loves building things. I created vast worlds on paper (my primary world was twelve 2x2 sheets of graph paper drawn by hand and a binder full of information just about the basics of the world (city names, populations etc.) Later I used those same maps in my head for gaming campaigns in my teens and twenties so I have some knowledge about the subject.

You can use alot of different things to world build, and one I use is sims 3 (insert laugh here) for building particular things I need to SEE so that I get a better grasp of what works and what doesn't since it's laid out in front of me. That is probably more detailed than most people go for world buiding, but I usually only build those places I am specifically using for the story.

There are TONS of ideas out there for making worlds and I think you should think about the different aspects of what works well together and what seems merely cobbled together. Start simple, one kingdom and outline it with the basics as you could always add more to it later. Then think about that kingdom's neighbors, or is wilderness? what kinds of creatures live there and in what capacity? One thing at a time and pretty soon you'll have a fairly fleshed out world with just a bit of time and practice.
 
Last edited:

Caliburn

New Member
That Sims 3 thing is quite a novel solution to planning Saigonnus! (especially since Lego is so expensive these days).

I'm fairly into my pet project at the moment. I feel like I have slightly more of an idea of what I am doing, with certain rules of thumb popping into my head when I need them. I also feel less inclined to be eccentric for its own sake, which is a big reason why I feel like I know what I'm doing and why I'm doing one thing and not another.

For instance, to get a rough idea of how many cities or territories are in my setting, I start by taking each race and assigning them a territory and assume they have at least one city (though one of them doesn't have any city or territory). But how many races should I have? Well in terms of playable races, I have all seven or so of the traditional ones (which I love, especially half-orcs), then an equal number of non-traditional or new ones. That ensures that I have a good number of interesting 'new' things, while at the same time keeping things from becoming too weird or wacky. The traditional races also help to show off the newer races, because I have specifically made those races to fill in holes left by the traditional ones. Example: there are three small races (gnomes, dwarves, halflings), but only one big race (half-orcs). Why not have two more big races?
Having more than just the stock races also makes it seem like I'm not just grasping at the low-hanging fruit (eww...)

Other considerations for races: I wanted at least one race for each of the six stats I use (the usual ones cos I love 'em), I want a good race and an evil race, I want at least one race that is overtly strange, and I want my own version of dragon-dudes because I have a dragon fixation (like all good people).

Ultimately its all about similarities and contrasts for me, both in terms of the people and the lands they inhabit. No need to be super-sophisticated right out of the gate. I find the little details and curiousities suggest themselves to me while I am busy working on the core essentials. For example one of my races are golems created by an inventor, because I like golems and I like robots so why not? I then realised that DnD's Eberron setting already has the Warforged but I really like robots and I find the Warforged to be too beefcake for me so I wanted to have slender, ceramic robots with chiselled facial features meant to look very human but squarish at the same time--a more elegant robot, almost designed as a foil to the Warforged. Then the idea suggested itself that their creator should be obsessed with machinery and spent his entire life trying to turn his entire homeland into a mechanised replica of nature (trees and all), then another idea popped up that his most prized robot should be a replica of his fiancée who left him, which he keeps in a special container like a sleeping beauty. The inventor has long since passed away and his creations are without a master, but his beloved replica is presumably still locked away.

So that's an example of how I get the ideas flowing. I start with what I like and what already works and try to build from there.

Edit: Typing this post gave me the idea that the golems could be like 'living' statues--works of art, more delicate than practical (low constitution). His fiancée replica could be posed like a statue in some secluded vault. Once activated, she could become a party member.
 
Last edited:

Jabrosky

Banned
The second problem I see with too much world-building is that it is too rigid, and as a result the author has to some degree confined her story before writing it. I've had a couple of times where I've talked to people who were at a real roadblock in their story, and the author's answer to some of the more obvious suggestions to getting around them were "Yeah, but that won't work because in my world...." That is great (and even necessary) as far as internal world logic and consistency goes, but in this one case in particular I think the author spent so long working on the history, politics, religion, ecology and so on of the world that he simply wasn't open to changing any of it. He literally spent years on it, and the story became slave to the world that was created, instead of the world serving the story (the latter being how it should be, in my view).
I've definitely bumped into this problem. I love world-building, but overdoing it can indeed limit your storytelling wiggle room.

Another challenge is knowing exactly what I want in my world. This is especially a problem if I'm doing a whole world and not simply one province or region.
 

Saigonnus

Auror
I vaguely remember playing with "tinker" gnomes... cousins to regular gnomes, but their craft revolves around "tinkering" with the various disciplines (alchemy, engineering, smithing etc.) and often to funny or dangerous ends (scorched eyebrows, smoking beards etc.) I remember them making clockwork creatures that ran off of magic for a "battery"... or having them make a character a chemical grenade (like greek fire only worse) that were easily thrown for fire damage, heck they "forged" something like a cannonball with the concoction inside for a siege we planned and executed.

I agree that world building can be overdone if you like to flesh out every tiny iota of the world, though I believe I don't have that issue, I learned early what works and what doesn't... because a gaming campaign (I ran quite a few) is much like telling a story in many ways and having rigid "scriptures" of every little thing can restrict the characters and ultimately lessen the enjoyment of the game. It bad enough when the players are "rules lawyers" (i've never cared much for playing with them) much worse if your rules cover every aspect of the game.
 

Caliburn

New Member
I guess its important to define what people mean by "every little detail". How much is too much exactly?

Detail is great. Wonderful in fact. But detailing EVERYTHING? Well, for one, that's impossible. It also adds a whole bunch trivial information that readers/players generally don't need to know. A little bit of trivial information can be spicy, but too much will distract from your narrative or from the more salient aspects of your world.

It depends on what is more important to you: if you are a worldbuilder with a heavily simulationist bent (you want the world to seem as realistic as possible) then play to your strengths, choose a world-size that is practical to your needs or partition a larger realm into smaller chunks and work on each one in turn so you'll be able to have finished parts ready sooner rather than later. People of this persuasion typically have a huge arsenal of facts and details at their cranial disposal as well as a preoccupation with research as a hobby and not just something they do for their novel or project.

If you are more into story or, in the case of RPGs, the design of the game itself, then focus on those and only give details importance if they add to the story or game design (or to give those elements a realistic twist).
For me personally, having a synthesis of story and gameplay where both aspects play into each other is one of my holy ideals. I find design is very much like architecture in that aspect--needing to be functional yet beautiful at the same time.
Details aren't my strong suit so I don't bother with them too much except where they play into my strengths.
 

Fluffypoodel

Inkling
I would say hop right in. so what if your world isn't any good. I have mapped out a lot of worlds, some of them have been ripped off from other worlds but it is the act of world building that makes them better. nothing you make is ever set in stone (unless you're published! and even then you can still fool around) I have found that the more you world build the better the world will become. you can cut and paste things around all you like to see where your world is coming too. I find that my later Ideas require me to redo a lot of my original ideas, thus giving me a better world. so don't be afraid and go for it!
 
Top