Lightningstep36 wrote:

mythbusteranimator wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Well, I made a sketch of the adolescent, and it came out okay. I told myself that I would color it, so I started, but then I got lazy and stopped. :P I'll probably finish it (someday)
Here's what it looks like so far, so you can get an idea of the coloration (although that pic's pretty bad, because the coloring is wacky and doesn't follow the sketch much)

That reminds me of Spyro : o

It kind of does. I like it, though.

Lately I've been making up another fictional planet, and it's inhabited by several sentient races.

How about Friflandia

Can a country be Friflandia

I can give you an anthem and map

Maybe, but I think I'd rather create the whole thing on my own.

(I know. I was kidding. )

mythbusteranimator wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

mythbusteranimator wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Well, I made a sketch of the adolescent, and it came out okay. I told myself that I would color it, so I started, but then I got lazy and stopped. :P I'll probably finish it (someday)
Here's what it looks like so far, so you can get an idea of the coloration (although that pic's pretty bad, because the coloring is wacky and doesn't follow the sketch much)

That reminds me of Spyro : o

It kind of does. I like it, though.

Lately I've been making up another fictional planet, and it's inhabited by several sentient races.

How about Friflandia

Can a country be Friflandia

I can give you an anthem and map

Maybe, but I think I'd rather create the whole thing on my own.

(I know. I was kidding. )

Haha, and I took it seriously!

I call mine
————–
Geeks3817a284728 for scientists
For the normal name
Tranfix
Its a geeks n nerds planet

Bump.

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

Zaneki wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

That'd be pretty neat, actually.

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

That'd be pretty neat, actually.

I don't think gravity works this way, so you'd have to handwave it ("oh it's a heavier type of oxygen discovered in the year 2033 that can be swam through, previously unknown to humans but the most abundant resource on planet “ for scifi, ”magic!“ for fantasy, whatever), and even then what exactly is something with no arms going to do effectively as a sentient race?

I'm formulating the ideas for a ”fictional world" (it's a world for a story/book to operate in so it's not just for the sake of making one) though all I have right now is the rough outline of the prevailing philosophy.

honesty wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

That'd be pretty neat, actually.

I don't think gravity works this way, so you'd have to handwave it ("oh it's a heavier type of oxygen discovered in the year 2033 that can be swam through, previously unknown to humans but the most abundant resource on planet “ for scifi, ”magic!" for fantasy, whatever), and even then what exactly is something with no arms going to do effectively as a sentient race?

Three words: suspension of disbelief
:P

Zaneki wrote:

honesty wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

That'd be pretty neat, actually.

I don't think gravity works this way, so you'd have to handwave it ("oh it's a heavier type of oxygen discovered in the year 2033 that can be swam through, previously unknown to humans but the most abundant resource on planet “ for scifi, ”magic!" for fantasy, whatever), and even then what exactly is something with no arms going to do effectively as a sentient race?

Three words: suspension of disbelief
:P

Hmm, I suppose, but I guess I'm unique in this thread for liking worldbuilding to be more “hard” (e.g, to have a proper lore, philosophy, map, etc.) or at least make up it's own explanations if an existing concept (like gravity in this case) would not give the actual effect.

Check out reddit's /r/worldbuilding sometime for some really impressive stuff.

honesty wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

honesty wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Zaneki wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Mewly wrote:

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Bump.

I'm out of ideas ——-________——-

Me too. I was hoping someone else would have some.

A world where the gravity is so low that people can “swim” through the air, thus eliminating the need for arms and legs. Instead, all animals have developed fins and fishlike tails.

Does that do any good?

That'd be pretty neat, actually.

I don't think gravity works this way, so you'd have to handwave it ("oh it's a heavier type of oxygen discovered in the year 2033 that can be swam through, previously unknown to humans but the most abundant resource on planet “ for scifi, ”magic!" for fantasy, whatever), and even then what exactly is something with no arms going to do effectively as a sentient race?

Three words: suspension of disbelief
:P

Hmm, I suppose, but I guess I'm unique in this thread for liking worldbuilding to be more “hard” (e.g, to have a proper lore, philosophy, map, etc.) or at least make up it's own explanations if an existing concept (like gravity in this case) would not give the actual effect.

Check out reddit's /r/worldbuilding sometime for some really impressive stuff.

You're not unique in that way. A lot of time I spend creating fictional worlds is making sure that the way the physics work makes sense. I also enjoy creating lore and philosophy, which includes writing a history on the world, and creating religions and deities that the inhabitants of the planet worship.

Standuism (rough draft and proof of concept, unofficially worded and stuff)

There is a “good” and a “bad” that are not exclusive to each other based on origin, but a mixing of intention, outcome, and other things. These are not necessarily called “good” and “bad” by believers, but seen as “acts of selfishness” and “acts of selflessness” (e.g. life should be to balance living for yourself with living for others), however, even some acts of meanness that aren't particularly beneficial to the person are seen as helping balance and in that way modern beliefs on it are argued to be flawed by some philosophers.

It is believed that there are two ruling beings, one representing each, who are worshiped and respected equally, and in order to please both and be admitted into the afterlife, you must balance the good and the bad actions in your life equally. To favor one over the other is to be sent to a barren wasteland full of people who favored the same being (some people prone to overbalancing “good”ness argue it will be a nicer place, though it is countered by how boring such a barren wasteland would be), however to be perfectly balanced is to be admitted into a sort of Heaven or Elysium.

Often people try to rebalance by being nicer, but it is seen a an ultimately selfish goal to want to help for the sake of balancing and can ultimately hinder you if the overall affect is not positive enough (donating a dollar to charity to rebalance would not help, but a person becoming a doctor simply for the act of rebalance could). It is often fuzzy the true outcome on someone's balance for an act and ultimately up to one person's interpretation until death.

The side of “overgoods” (people who believe in doing more acts of selflessness than the popular view of balancing permits) believe that to serve humanity as a whole is to also benefit yourself and that the returns create balance. While it is a blanket term (overgood can describe ANYONE who does more selflessness than selfishness), it is generally used on believers and the philosophical reasoning for doing so is known as Mildruism.

“Overbads” tend to be conceited and that to be serving them is to be giving a great sacrifice to humanity as well. Overbad encouraged by philosophy is Vandruism.

honesty wrote:

Standuism (rough draft and proof of concept, unofficially worded and stuff)

There is a “good” and a “bad” that are not exclusive to each other based on origin, but a mixing of intention, outcome, and other things. These are not necessarily called “good” and “bad” by believers, but seen as “acts of selfishness” and “acts of selflessness” (e.g. life should be to balance living for yourself with living for others), however, even some acts of meanness that aren't particularly beneficial to the person are seen as helping balance and in that way modern beliefs on it are argued to be flawed by some philosophers.

It is believed that there are two ruling beings, one representing each, who are worshiped and respected equally, and in order to please both and be admitted into the afterlife, you must balance the good and the bad actions in your life equally. To favor one over the other is to be sent to a barren wasteland full of people who favored the same being (some people prone to overbalancing “good”ness argue it will be a nicer place, though it is countered by how boring such a barren wasteland would be), however to be perfectly balanced is to be admitted into a sort of Heaven or Elysium.

Often people try to rebalance by being nicer, but it is seen a an ultimately selfish goal to want to help for the sake of balancing and can ultimately hinder you if the overall affect is not positive enough (donating a dollar to charity to rebalance would not help, but a person becoming a doctor simply for the act of rebalance could). It is often fuzzy the true outcome on someone's balance for an act and ultimately up to one person's interpretation until death.

The side of “overgoods” (people who believe in doing more acts of selflessness than the popular view of balancing permits) believe that to serve humanity as a whole is to also benefit yourself and that the returns create balance. While it is a blanket term (overgood can describe ANYONE who does more selflessness than selfishness), it is generally used on believers and the philosophical reasoning for doing so is known as Mildruism.

“Overbads” tend to be conceited and that to be serving them is to be giving a great sacrifice to humanity as well. Overbad encouraged by philosophy is Vandruism.

I like that idea. It's hard to imagine just how hard keeping that balance would be.

ursula k. le guin is very good at setting

Hey, guys, I'm working more on creating different races that live on the fictional planet that I created. I might share more on it later.

Bump.

Okay, I admit that this topic's pretty much dead now.

Lightningstep36 wrote:

Okay, I admit that this topic's pretty much dead now.

Nuuuuuuuuuuuuuu ;-;