Welcome to Gaia! ::

Wait, what?
I don't get what you're trying to do. Is this like the AntiGuide?

How you determine how to create your world depends on how skilled you think you are. If you find yourself comfortable with your writing, then go really in depth. If you're still a little hesitant, then just skim the surface of it, writing down just enough to get you started, then work from there.

One of my favorite faux pas is when the religion is exactly like Christianity without Jesus. That makes no sense.

Additionally, consider the factors put in the world. A famous example being, dragons and castles. If you have dragons, anyone who lives in a castle is a moron. Dragons can knock down the walls, and a court yard may as well be a dinner plate. A lot of worlds have things just thrown in there "because" without 1) realizing they conflict with one another or 2) taking advantage of said conflicts. If your world does not have a sun, it will not have time as we measure it on Earth. And, then, to further elaborate the effects of removing something, if there's no time, you can't say "days" "weeks" etc.

The best world builders are aware of the consequences of creating a world different from Earth. The worst world-builders are those who take Earth and stick on a few fancy things they think are "cool."

Thank you everyone. Can anyone tell me anything about weaponry found in a primitive world? i.e slingshots, crossbows, and spears?

Then answer me this:

Chinese Reloading Crossbow
English Longbow
Egyptian New Kingdom Sword (looks like a sceptre)
English Longsword

Siege Engines

Advantages and disadvantages, uses, names, how they're made, etc. Please and Thank you!

I'm not going to pretend to be a genius about this kinda of thing, 'cause I'm not, and I frankly don't know anything at all about the things that are on your list and not European, but...

Longbows - pretty much, that's what they are. Excellent for piercing the armour of knights, etc., but long (6 ft.), and really hard to draw. Used for defense of keeps and fiefs, where the archers can just sit on the curtain wall at shoot at the idiots who get close enough. They also have a really wicked range. Can't be strung for too long, or else the string starts to stretch and weaken.

Longswords - Big, heavy, and used (like most swords) by knights. Hard in a war-type fight, unless there's a lot of one one one going on - which was common in the middle ages, since it was dishonourable to attack someone who was busy. This is where the term "back-stabbing" comes from, by the way.

You mind want to look at halberds if you need pole-arms (they're a lot like a speak with a really mean blade), naginata (I think I spelt that right) are similar and used by Japanese women (you don't seem to be too picky about culture, so I thought I would point it out). They're about five feet long and are lead cored, then tipped with a scythe blade about eighteen inches long - not something you would want to be at the receiving end of.

Cross-bows are just as good as longbows for punching through armour, and don't have to be unstrung.

Then we have hand-and-a-half swords, broad swords, cutlasses, katanas, recurve bows, throwing knives, daggers, throwing axes, war axes, lances...

Sorry, it's late - that's all I can think of off the top of my head. wink

Edit: Ooh... And slings and pole were often used by children to fend off predators while they were watching herds - if that does you anygood.

Yes, I agree with this. I want to add that just because you aren't putting it explicitly in the book doesn't mean you shouldn't know about it. If a question comes up about why your world is a certain way, you should be able to explain it fully even if the fact is not necessary to your book and you don't put the explanation in it.

I agree with most of the things said here.

Hm. It's a difficult topic, because good worldbuilding creates a world that can no longer be distinguished from the characters.

I think there are two ways to worldbuild. If you're writing a short story, your world should be character-based. You should be thinking about what you need to tell the audience and tell it. If you're writing something like epic fantasy, then your characters should come from the world, not the other way around.

Think about it. Let's say I have a world similar to Earth. Let's say I add...elves to it. (Oh, the cliches... just bear with me here.) Okay, so how are the elves going to interact with the humans? Chances are there will be some differences between the two races OTHER THAN THE POINTY EARS. Let's take another few cliches here, and say that elves are taller, more slender, and better archers. *headdesk* These cliches are killing me here, people.

Anyway, back to the point at hand. Most amateur writers will leave it at that. Well, no. That won't WORK. You can't change one thing about the world and not change everything else. Ripple effect, people. You can't isolate a ripple in a lake. You just CAN'T.

So, what would you do with these overly-cliched characters, then? Well, think about it. If the elves are better archers, they're going to have a huge advantage over the humans when it comes to hunting. They'll shoot down most of the animals before the humans can even string their puny bows. Assuming that both races live close by (to enable interaction, which had BETTER be crucial to the story), this is going to hurt human development badly. They might all have to turn vegetarian. They might become adept with hunting knives instead. They might start slaughtering the elves.

If you decide to take the vegetarian route, then have other things progress from this. Some sort of religion could arise from this that involves treating animals as equal to humans, so hunting is as bad as murder. That could lead to devising some nasty punishments for those who break the law. And before you ask where this idea came from, think about it. Humans will do ANYTHING to convince themselves they have no weaknesses. So if they can't hunt as well as the elves, they'll say it's because animals shouldn't be killed, rather than admitting their own flaws. Also, some prejudice will eventually build up against the elves, and this will probably lead to some pretty nasty things. (Don't try telling ME that vegetarianism doesn't lead to genocide!) If you want some ideas on how nasty, look at Christian/Pagan arguments. Because I'm fairly sure that the humans would see the elves as some sort of dark, evil species for killing their animals. Of course, you could go one further and have the humans worship the animals as sacred, which would prevent the elves from hunting as well - if they laid a finger on an animal, war would break out.

So let's say that you choose to have your humans develop skill with hunting knives instead. I can see a lot of rivalry building up here between the two races. And don't try telling me that the two will co-exist peacefully, with the archer elves shooting birds to eat and the humans hunting only on the ground. It won't happen. Sooner or later, some elves will shoot a groundling, or a human will invent throwing knives. It's wanting more than they need. It's called greed. Humans have it, and if your elves are believable, they'll have it too, even if they try to hide it. And war will erupt.

Finally, let's say you decide to skip both of those stages and have the humans start to slaughter the elves as soon as they realise that they are better hunters. Hm. My first thought on this is that it's rather stupid. Admittedly, they'd get in a good first surprise attack, but after that, they're doomed. If the elves are better with bows, they'll start massacring the humans as well as the animals. They might even start eating the humans (It's not technically cannibalism as the elves are a different race, so stop making spewy motions). If you have any other sentient creatures (if, say, the pigs were able to talk), you might want to think about an alliance, either with the elves, to avoid slaughter, or with the humans, to fight back and hopefully put an end to their race getting eaten. If you have your cliched elves have a cliched attitude, they might refuse the help of these creatures and continue to slaughter them as food. They might use them to help destroy the humans and then destroy the creatures afterwards. If the creatures side with the humans, it won't mean much. Sure, you might have a moral victory, but at the end of the day the bloodshed will continue. If the elves are able to hunt the creatures, then the creatures won't be that great an ally for the humans. They'll just be a liability on the battlefield. And even if the humans are great with swords, if your elves are the typical masterminds that they're portrayed as, they'll shoot the humans down before they and their swords can even get CLOSE.

OVERALL SCORE: Elves 3, Humans 0.

XD Joking. Seriously though, that's why you have to think about these things. If anyone can justify having the original situation of a cliched human/elven world where the humans survive (regardless of the elves' survival), tell it to me. If you can find a loophole to human inferiority, I will give you a prize. The moral of the story being, DON'T MAKE THOSE ELVES SO GODDAMN SUPERIOR.

Coming up next: After the war. Because I like this scenario rant.