This post is basically a transcript of a speech I give to newbies to the D/s scene all the time IRL. I figured it might be useful not only to people curious about kink IRL but also to smut writers here on the smut writing website.
For the purposes of this post, I am sending specific physical acts out of the room. Right now they don't matter, because you can meet an emotional need through any number of physical acts. So when I say that there are many ways to dom and many ways to sub, I am not referring to many kinds of physical acts. I mean that there are many emotional needs that doms and subs bring to scenes, and those can change the scene more than the choice of physical acts that will occur in that scene.
I say this to newbies to the scene because they tend to have a narrow view of the motivations and needs that bring people to D/s, biased by both the newbie's own preferences and the depictions of D/s they've seen in media. The same is true of people who write kink fic. Kink fic is very biased to a narrow subset of the wide range of emotional needs that people might bring to this kind of play.
It's really important to understand this in D/s IRL because a mismatch or miscommunication about these needs can lead to a bad scene. For example, let's take the approaches of sub-as-beloved-pet and sub-as-object. If a dom treats a sub as a beloved pet when what they really want is to be treated like an object, then a sub who went into a scene needing to be ignored, or at the very least the illusion of being ignored and disregarded, is suddenly in the spotlight of a lot of intense attention and affection. Again, I will note that both of these scenes could potentially involve the same physical acts, just approached differently. Let's say it's a service submission scene where the sub is naked and cleaning the room for the dom. Sub-as-beloved-pet would get frequent praise and lots of patiently repeated instructions, while sub-as-object would get one detailed instruction at the beginning and no reinforcement except a punishment if they get part of the instruction wrong.
I'm going to go through a bunch of different styles of dom and sub, with the emotional needs that underlie them. This list is not exhaustive. I'm sure there's more I haven't thought of or encountered, so feel free to reblog with additions. It may also be a bit dom-biased because I'm a dom, but I think that might be for the best, because the emotional needs of doms are generally less understood than those of subs.
Various consensual kinks discussed below. Kinkshamers in the notes will be blocked with extreme prejudice.
Dom-as-control: This may seem obvious or even trivial, but it shouldn't be dismissed: many doms are motivated by an emotional need to have some part of their life where they have total control over what is going to happen. Something that I love about this style of domination is that I always know exactly what will happen next (except if there's some emergency, safeword, or other issue to address.) There are no wild cards in a controlled D/s scene except for those I explicitly allow (like if I ask a sub to choose which whip I'll beat them with.) This is also a reason why I personally have a very hard time switching; I have difficulty with the uncertainty of not knowing what will happen next. It should be noted that this style of domination is fairly incompatible with the bratty style of submission, as the brat is constantly throwing wild cards into the scene.
Sub-as-blankspace: The other side of this coin is the sub who needs to not have to think anymore. They've spent all day deciding what to wear and what to eat and which toothpaste to buy and they just want to stop. This is a very common motivator. This sub needs specific and clear commands from a dom, without too many steps, or else needs to have a well-established protocol of kneeling and service that they can do by pure muscle memory. This sub does not want the dom to offer them a choice of whips they can be beaten with, because that forces them out of the blissful blankspace of not needing to choose.
Dom- or sub-as-service: The same emotional need can sometimes motivate domination or submission! Many people dom or sub out of a desire to please their partner. It's about taking on a defined role that you know will meet your partner's needs. It feels good to be needed, after all. This motivation for D/s is generally the best understood by the public, especially as a motivation for doms. It's generally more socially acceptable to want to control and torment people if you're doing it selflessly in order to please them. A big part of my motivation for making this speech to people, and for writing this post, is to point out that this is far from the only style of domination, and pleasing their subs is far from the only emotional need that doms might have.
Dom-as-whumper: I'm using this terminology because of the website I'm on. I'm not into whumpfic, but I recognize in people who have a visceral need to see their blorbos whimpering and bleeding the same need I have to tear apart a cute kitten with my bare hands, or to crush a sub beneath my booted foot. It's the cuteness aggression approach to domination: sometimes your sub is so cute your hands itch with the urge to destroy them. This is where domination and sadism bleed into each other; this style of domination does not work well for the sub who wants to submit without being hurt or humiliated.
Sub-as-object: Subs who like to be treated as furniture, robots, or objects are often motivated by a need to enjoy a sexual or kink situation while being free of attention and scrutiny. Obviously, some baseline level of attention is needed for BDSM safety; the dom needs to be able to notice if the sub is injured or upset. But beyond that baseline, it can feel very freeing for a sub to be turned on, blissed out in subspace, crying, drooling, whatever, without anyone closely watching or listening to them, so long as they fulfill whatever their purpose as an object is.
Sub- or dom-as-flex: Both doms and subs can be motivated by a need to feel competent. I definitely feel awesomely powerful and competent when I do a style of domination that requires specialized skill, such as hypnosis. Submission can also provide a feeling of competence: look how long I was able to stay kneeling on the hard floor! Look how perfectly I cleaned the room, exactly as Mistress told me to do it!
Dom-as-troll (or mad scientist): The sibling to this kind of dom is the writer who thinks "wouldn't it be fucked up if....?" and then writes a freaky nasty little horror story about it. A great thing about D/s is that you can have a thought like "wouldn't it be fucked up if I tied up my sub and then ate their favorite snack right in front of them?" and then you can just do it (provided you know your sub likes to be tied up and tormented.) Then you can find out how your sub would react to your terrible ideas and laugh evilly at the results. The emotional need being served here is the goblin part of your brain that wants to break things just to see how they shatter. All you need to do is find someone who wants to be broken.
Sub-as-brat: Brats are often discussed as a single type of sub, but in my experience, there are two rather different emotional needs that drive brats. Some people are brats because they need the assurance that they can act out all they want, and it won't derail the action; the dom is strong or skilled enough to subdue them no matter what nasty tricks their goblin brain gets up to. Other people are brats out of a need to live in a predictable and fair moral universe. Those brats want a very clear system of rules and punishments for those rules. Then they test the rules, and they get meted out exactly the punishment they were promised. Within the world of this scene, the world is fair, and the same misbehavior will always face the same consequences, something that rarely happens in the real world. These types of brats are rather different, because the first kind of brat doesn't care as much if the consequences of their misbehavior are inconsistent, while the second kind cares a lot.
Sub-as-beloved-pet: Or beloved child, if they're an ageplayer. I find that subs that like to be a beloved puppy are driven by an emotional need to be loved, treasured, and supported unconditionally, even if they make mistakes, even if they behave messily or clumsily, even if they look silly, because that's how a good pet owner should treat a pet. There might be discipline involved, but the discipline is very supportive and patient.
Dom-as-nurturer: Some doms are motivated by a need to be in a nurturing role that their non-D/s life may not allow them to fulfill. For example, a man who wants to express affection and tenderness to his partner but has a hard time doing so because of the way he was raised may be able to unlock that ability if his partner plays a sweet puppy and he's playing the puppy's doting owner. Basically, the D/s scene creates a little world and a set of roles in which it's expected and normal for the dom to be nurturing, even if that's not true for the dom outside of that scene.
Dom-as-enfant-terrible: The other side of the coin is a dom who needs to be in a role where they can be unreasonable, demanding, and selfish, a role that their non-D/s life may not allow them to fulfill. For example, a mother who spends all day thinking about her family's needs may relish the opportunity to center her own desires without worrying if she's being "too much." She can be impatient and fussy and demand the sub do things over and over until she's satisfied, all of which she can't do when she's working as a teacher or other caring role.
Dom-as-artist: I think this is a hugely under-appreciated motivator for doms. Many have a need to be creative and imaginative that they fulfill through domination. I've been to workshops and demos at kink conventions where I've been awed by another dom's fiendish creativity. I once watched a hypno dom with a sub who got off on being afraid, and he hypnotized her and crafted an extremely elaborate horror scene in the room, filling it with menacing shadows and phantasms. This is where I'm contractually obligated to link A Dom DM because this is where domination overlaps a lot with game running and game design.
Sub-as-aesthetic-object: The flip side of this coin is that many subs enjoy being an aesthetic object or canvas for a dom's art. Very often these are subs chasing a need to feel beautiful, or at least enjoyable to look at. Subs who want to be aesthetic objects may enjoy wearing special outfits during scenes, or being posed in sexy or appealing positions. Subs in this kind of scene may enjoy letting go of worrying about whether they look good to the dom, because the dom is shaping them to their own preferred aesthetic, whether that's via poses, makeup, shibari, or something else.
Sub-as-sexual-creature: A lot of subs enjoy being called sluts, offered up for free use, or otherwise being hypersexualized. Why is that? Well, our society has a lot of shame and repression around sex, and it can feel much easier to relax and enjoy sex if it's couched in the fantasy that you have no choice because you've been reduced to a purely sexual creature. The sub has an emotional need to give up responsibility for choosing to have sex and be sexual, because that responsibility is a heavy weight to carry.
Dom- or sub-as-taboo-breaker: This is a huge motivator for both doms and subs. We all live in a society, and sometimes we feel a need to break the rules of that society. Both domination and submission provide opportunities to do so. It's taboo to piss yourself as an adult, but a watersports scene creates a space where it is acceptable or even desirable for a sub to break that taboo. As a dom, I personally get a huge taboo-breaking thrill from slapping a sub across the face. There's something about the sheer disrespect of it, and the memory of being scolded for doing it as a child, that fills me with impish glee.
Dom-as-hunter/sub-as-prey: For the hunter to catch the prey, there must first be a chase, or at the very least an ambush. This need not be a literal chase (we sent physical acts out of the room, remember?) but it is a dynamic to hunter/prey-flavored BDSM: the hunter has to earn it. This fulfills an emotional need for both dom and sub: a dom who struggles with feelings of unworthiness can feel like they've earned their partner's submission, and a sub can feel that the dom cares enough to put in the effort to catch them. Hunter/prey also allows dom and sub to explore some pretty dark emotions within the safety of consensual kink, such as fear, obsession, and consumption.
Dom-as-shadow: I mean shadow here in the sense of shadow work. Many doms take inspiration from people who bullied them in school (and many subs enjoy re-enacting scenes of childhood bullying in a safe and consensual context.) There is a real emotional need served by claiming the power of those bullies for yourself. Those childhood cruelties can be utterly transformed by the change of context. For example, the catty whispers and sneers of straight girls who bullied me for being queer comes out very different when I perform those same catty sneers as a genderfucky adult.
Sub-as-lesser-being: While some subs like to be beloved pets, and others like to be disregarded objects, some like to be pond scum. There can be a real freedom that comes from occupying a role of being disgusting and horrible. Nothing good or useful can be expected of you, and nothing you do will ever earn praise, and so you're free from worrying about or pursuing any of those things. Sub-as-lesser-being is also a space to explore difficult emotions like shame and humiliation in a safe context.
i wish i could remember who made the recommendation to "make a list of all the different ways someone could feel about a topic in your fictional setting and then make each of them a character" because it is a great technique and is also extremely fun
fun behaviors to give dragons that aren't feline/canine based
cause as much as i love dragons purring and roaring i wish there was just more variety in how they would act
clacking their teeth together to show contentedness/happiness (budgies)
using tails as a defensive weapon in a whip like fashion (iguana)
twitching to express that they're not a threat to members of their species (hognose snake)
feeling calm when eyes are hooded/covered (birds of prey)
head bobbing as a threat display (anoles/bearded dragons)
flattening neck or sides to appear bigger (snakes/lizards)
mantling over food to protect it from hatchmates (birds of prey)
wiggling neck as a courting maneuver (budgies)
audibly grinding teeth as a warning (macaques)
maintained eye contact as a challenge (gorillas)
pounding wings against sides as a threat (gorillas)
slapping other dragons with their claws when their personal bubble is invaded (seals)
hoards used as a site to impress mates (birds of paradise)
snorting when undergoing heightened stress (horses)
making repeated loud noises with surroundings to establish territory (woodpeckers)
loud constant arguments with other dragons when roosting (bats)
building lairs that cause a domino effect of change in the land around them (beavers)
slapping their tails against the ground/water as a warning (beavers)
wiggling tail tip to attract prey (various animals)
wiggling tail tip as a warning (snakes)
plucking or scraping off scales as a sign of stress (parrots)
raising spines/frills as a response to danger and carrying on with their usual business as they believe they're protected (lionfish)
and im not saying canine and feline behaviors are wrong or bad to give a dragon (people wouldn't write dragons with those behaviors if they weren't fun in the first place!) but i feel for creatures that are mythological giant winged lizards that you can do more and get experimental with it. often the more unfamiliar behavior the more dragony the dragon feels
I actually made this post not only because of the above "wanting to see less canine/feline behaviors in dragons" but also because there are books that delve into different dragon behaviors that have been really memorable to me! Sort've like when you taste real chocolate and then you only get Hershey's chocolate after
Joust by Mercedes Lackey is one I frequently reread that features dragons with bird of prey behavior and iguana tail whipping.
The Age of Fire series written by E.E Knight features perspectives from dragons themselves! Dragons have their own words for their body, sii for their forelegs, saa for their back legs, griff for the frills under their neck, and prumm for when they purr (yes its a purr but i really like the distinction)
Something to watch for, which I learned from stage magic but which is extremely relevant to detecting scams as well:
The magician or scammer will *tell you* how he is going to prove his honesty.
The magician rifles through the deck until you say "stop", then he says, "Are you sure? I'll keep going if you want." and asks "Now, you agree that you could have stopped anywhere you wanted, so there's absolutely no way I could know which card you got" and because it's a magic show and you aren't paying close attention you didn't notice he didn't deal a card from where you stopped, he dealt the bottom card of the deck.
The magician doesn't ask you, "What would it take for you to believe this" because you might say, "I'd need you to use a sealed deck" or "I'd have to personally shuffle the deck" or some other proof that would make the trick impossible.
Magicians say "You agree that if I did *this*, it would mean *that*, right?" and you say yes, and it feels like you are the one who got to verify things, but of course the magician is lying and the proof is nothing of the kind.
Scammers do the same thing. A really concrete example is phone scammers pretending to be working for the government will say, "Look, I see you're skeptical if I'm who I say I am, I'm going to hang up and call back, and you'll see on the caller ID it says, 'FBI' and that tells you that I'm really working for the government."
Now, caller ID can be spoofed pretty easily, so it doesn't prove anything at all.
But it *feels* to you like you demanded proof and the scammer was willing to give you the proof.
But you didn't tell the scammer what out would take to prove it to you, the scammer told you what the proof would be.
This is actually like a really basic thing to look for if you want to start decoding magic tricks and scams.
vampirism poses the question "what if there was a fundamental, horrible, unending well of want in your soul that, if truly satisfied, would lead to great pain for all those you hold closest and, in turn, their absolute and total revilement of you?" and naturally as a person with no problems I don't relate to this in any way at all.
Whereas lycanthropy poses the question āwhat if there was a wild destructive urge buried inside you to shed all cares and social bonds and pretensions of civilisation in one fell swoop, to tear your whole stultifying life apart around yourself in a glorious bout of transformation, and then you woke up and had to deal with the consequences of that, both to yourself and to everyone around you?ā and yeah, as a person with no issues whatsoever, naturally cannot relate there either. Heh.
People in the late 20th century thought the fundamental arc of human history was exploration, whereas now it looks like it's information processing.
In traditional science fiction, the historically progressive human urge is wanderlust, the pull of unknown geography, horror vacui or amor vacui depending on how you look at it. Those writers invoke the elapse of time that separated Kitty Hawk from the moon landing. They recite a procession of discoverers that includes Columbus or the Polynesians and whose next logical steps are space colonization and superluminal travel. Era-defining technologies are transportation technologies. You still get this now, sometimes. In a much-dunked-upon scene in Star Trek: Discovery (2017), a character's litany of great inventors includes the Wright brothers, the guy who invented FTL, and Elon Musk.
The corresponding fear, of course, is alien invasionāthat we are not Columbus but the Indians.
Now, the developments actually restructuring people's lives are either of the computer or on the computer. The PC, the internet, smartphones, social media, LLMs. Bits, not atoms. It has been this way for some time, though it hasn't fully made its way into culture. The progenitors of the new future are writing, the printing press, the abacus. We can see the arc clearly in retrospect, now that the future seems likely to be defined by machine learning.
Just as before, there is some anxiety that our trajectory will lead us into the grip of alien intelligences, horrendous and devouring.
If you go back to the period stretching (roughly) from the late 19th century through the Second World War, stories often hinge on wonder-substances and novel fundamental forces. This was, of course, an era in which a new force or element was turning up every other week. You couldn't swing a cat without hitting one. They discovered guncotton when some guy left his fouled lab coat next to an oven. Hence, Vril, the Ray, the "eighth and ninth solar rays" of Burroughs's Mars. In later stories, this sort of stuff is generally secondary, though superhero fiction preserves more of the old mentality.
Concept: a spacefaring fantasy setting where the traditional āshipās artificial intelligenceā role is filled by synthetic hearth-gods that interface with the shipās systems via miniaturised clockwork shrines. The tropes of ship-as-community and crew-as-found-family that pervade post-2000 spacefaring SF have direct and measurable presence in the setting, as cultivating a stronger sense of family and community results in a stronger shipās god.
(While this practice confers considerable benefits, it also imposes a practical upper limit on the size of a ship and crew; if the ship or crew is too large, rather than a synthetic hearth-god you get a synthetic city-father, which is generally considered undesirable for non-military applications on account of the fact that those critters are scary as hell.)
The tutelary spirit of a community as cultural infrastructure, as opposed to the individual personalised communities that comprise it. At the time of this posting, itās a matter of considerable speculation exactly why synthetic city-fathers tend to be so predatory and conquest-minded. Popular theories include:
1. Naturally occurring city-fathers have the same propensities as their synthetic counterparts, and are either better at hiding them, or simply lack the necessary context to express them on account of being immobile and capable of only gradual expansion.
2. There exists some flaw in our understanding of the principles of apotheogenesis that can cause artificial deiforms to become deranged; synthetic hearth-gods are apparently unaffected either because the problem is emergent only above a certain threshold of complexity, or because routine contact with close-knit communities exerts a stabilising influence.
3. The mindset of synthetic city-fathers is an inevitable reflection of the mindset of the sort of people who have the resources to build large spacegoing vessels.
useful/fun character development questions for couples
there are a lot of āotp questionsā lists out there but I just wanted to make a list that was specifically helpful for writers, especially for working out the technical stuff of conveying Romantic Love. so, here ya go, stuff to answer for each character
What, specifically, was the catalyst for their physical attraction (if applicable) to the other character? In other words, what in particular had them like āOh, theyāre...hot...ā
Does this change over time? What things do they find āhotā about their partner after theyāve been together for some time, and have had more time to, well, notice and appreciate?
By contrast, what was the moment that first made their ~heart~ Soft for the other person? Not necessarily a conscious realization of āI love this person,ā but a moment that had them like āOh...I adore them...ā
Does this change over time? What will always reliably make them melt with how much they adore the other character?
How do they consciously realize that they like the other character? Does it take them a while?
How do they react to the realization that they like the other character? Is it an āoh my god Iām never going to think about this againā thing, or are they pretty comfortable with it?
Do they (or would they) pursue the other characterās affection, and if so, how? Do they tell the other character how they feel? Try to earn their admiration? Woo them with romantic gestures? Flirt with them, skillfully or otherwise?
What do they think about romantic love? Do they have baggage surrounding it? Do they idealize it? Is it an object of longing and wanting, or were they really not thinking about it until they started falling for the other character? What are their expectations like?
What do they think about commitment? Is a long-term partnership the goal? Are they thinking about building a life with their partner, or are they focused on the present?
What scares them about entering a relationship?
What fears, past traumas, etc. would be hardest for them to talk about with their partner?
How much independence do they prefer in a relationshipādo they want to share their lives as much as possible with their partner, or do they prefer to mostly do their own thing and let their partner do their own thing?
What is their go-to for making a partner feel loved?
What makes them feel loved? Would they build up the courage to ask for it?
What, for them, constitutes a level of intimacy that they would only rarely share with someone? This can be physical, emotional, etc.
If they had the ability to just spend free time with their partner, what would they do? Would they go out or stay inside?
Under what circumstances would they want to be left alone by their partner?
Theyāre going through something incredibly difficultāperhaps theyāre very sick, have lost a loved one, or have gone through a traumatic event. Do they ask for or accept support and care from their partner, or try to isolate themselves?
Are they okay with public displays of affection? Do they like them?
When would they say āI love you?ā Do they say it first? Do they say it often, or is it reserved for special moments?
If sex is something that would be part of a relationship for them, do both or either of them have prior experiences? If not, how do they feel about it?
What does sex mean for them? Socially, religiously, what attitudes are they bringing with them? Is āvirginityā something they care about? Do they want sexual experiences to occur within a certain ālevelā of relationship, or does that not really matter so much to them?
How comfortable are they talking about, and openly communicating during, sex?
What would their partner do that would really turn them on, perhaps unintentionally?
They accidentally hurt or upset their partner. What happened? How do they respond? What do they do to make their partner feel better?
They have an argument with their partnerāwhat is it about? Do things stay respectful, or is there some shouting and accusing going on?
They have to apologize to their partner. Is this difficult for them? How do they approach it?
How do they feel about the prospect of parenthood? Do they plan on it? How would they react if they suddenly found out they were going to be a parent?
What compromises are they making in their relationship?
What completely petty topic (music taste, favorite food) do they find themselves completely at odds with their partner about?
What little thing do they find incredibly (though harmlessly) annoying about their partner?
How do their friends react to finding out theyāre a couple? Do they have lots of mutual friends? Did their friends know, perhaps before they themselves did?
Under what circumstances would they feel jealous?
Under what circumstances would they feel protective?
Would they get a pet? What kind? Who brings up the idea, and who takes a little longer to convince?
I'm a big fan of wizards-as-programmers, but I think it's so much better when you lean into programming tropes.
A spell the wizard uses to light the group's campfire has an error somewhere in its depths, and sometimes it doesn't work at all. The wizard spends a lot of his time trying to track down the exact conditions that cause the failure.
The wizard is attempting to create a new spell that marries two older spells together, but while they were both written within the context of Zephyrus the Starweaver's foundational work, they each used a slightly different version, and untangling the collisions make a short project take months of work.
The wizard has grown too comfortable reusing old spells, and in particular, his teleportation spell keeps finding its components rearranged and remixed, its parts copied into a dozen different places in the spellbook. This is overall not actually a problem per se, but the party's rogue grows a bit concerned when the wizard's "drying spell" seems to just be a special case of teleportation where you teleport five feet to the left and leave the wetness behind.
A wizard is constantly fiddling with his spells, making minor tweaks and changes, getting them easier to cast, with better effects, adding bells and whistles. The "shelter for the night" spell includes a tea kettle that brings itself to a boil at dawn, which the wizard is inordinately pleased with. He reports on efficiency improvements to the indifference of anyone listening.
A different wizard immediately forgets all details of his spells after he's written them. He could not begin to tell you how any of it works, at least not without sitting down for a few hours or days to figure out how he set things up. The point is that it works, and once it does, the wizard can safely stop thinking about it.
Wizards enjoy each other's company, but you must be circumspect about spellwork. Having another wizard look through your spellbook makes you aware of every minor flaw, and you might not be able to answer questions about why a spell was written in a certain way, if you remember at all.
Wizards all have their own preferences as far as which scripts they write in, the formatting of their spellbook, its dimensions and material quality, and of course which famous wizards they've taken the most foundational knowledge from. The enlightened view is that all approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, but this has never stopped anyone from getting into a protracted argument.
Sometimes a wizard will sit down with an ancient tome attempting to find answers to a complicated problem, and finally find someone from across time who was trying to do the same thing, only for the final note to be "nevermind, fixed it".
"This spell causes the hair to fall off cats." "It works with my tome"
"This spell causes the hair to fall off cats." "That's fixed in Xaranthius' latest publication, you just have to rewrite your entire spellbook for compatibility."
"This spell causes the hair to fall of cats." "Magister Olaus of Writhington uses it to help with his allergies. WORKING AS INTENDED."
I want to see wizards snarking at each other over different magical languages/scripts, the same way programmers do it over different languages.
Sure, "High Tower is a powerful language, but it's such a pain to write. I just use Unity* as it's simple to write and can do nearly everything I need" "cranky because you can't memorize all the conjugations and declensions, aren't you?" "LOOK MAN, I CAN MEMORIZE ANYTHING, INCLUDING THE FACE OF YOUR MOTHER IN ECSTASY. IN FACT, BEHOLD!" *a little time window appears between them, demonstrating exactly that. The first wizard (seen through the window) turns around and winks at the "camera".
"you kids today with your lizardman. How can you get anything done in a language without gendered pronouns? It's like fingerpainting. Sure you can learn on it but once you've got the basics you should switch over to a REAL language"
"the Kalic have been here already. We better get out before the rest of their army marches in." "how can you be sure?" "you see that teleport?" "no" "well, if you COULD see it, you'd see it's written in Adevic Yevi. That's the Kalic magic language." "couldn't it be someone else? We saw those Monon traders, maybe one of them..." "no. No one writes Adevic Yevi unless they're being paid to. It's a language written by committee."
Wizards going on a quest to get the spellbooks for a lost spell, only to find out that it was written in skydove cant. No one can read that shit! The creator must have been one of those weird "functional wizards". (They're obsessed with making sure their spells have no side effects)
There's a small library on the outskirts of Freeport which tries to collect versions of basic spells in every language. The Adevic Yevi version of "fireball" takes up 7 pages, mostly boilerplate setting up the interfaces with fire and explosions and ExplodingMagicalBallFactorySingletons. The Lizardman version is basically "AHAHAHA, YOU GO BOOM!"
There's a bunch of wizard apprentices working on porting an old "Summon Bread and Fishes" spell from the absolutely archaic language it was written in. Once it's in Unity, it'll be easy to modify and teach to more wizards, which'll obviously be good for disaster areas. It's just too expensive to keep paying the ancient guys who can still do magic in TRAN-FOR.
Eccentric wizards keep inventing new languages for spells. You look at them and they're neat, but it'll never catch on. And either you're right, or the next time you're applying to be a court wizard, the advisors want to know if you have at least 5 years experience in Tilted Runic and you're like "it only came out 2 years ago!" "aren't you a chronomancer?" "oh good point. Yeah I've been using it for 20-30 years."
There's wizards who will spend incredible amounts of time doing silly things with spells in strange ways. There's this guy (Vorth) who made his own language where there's only one basic spell: fireball. Everything else is basic magic glue tying multiple fireballs together. So like, he's got a breakfast spell. Stand back (good advice for all his spells), and you'll see a fish get knocked out of the local pond, flung through the air by successive explosions, and eventually it lands on his plate, nicely cooked and deboned, if slightly charred (the glass of milk is harder to explain). His magical door locks involve a quicksilver sphere and molten lead changing shape when heated... It's tricky but it seems to work. He's working on a teleport spell, but so far it's mainly just killed test subjects (primarily sheep from a nearby farm).
* so the funny thing here is that this isn't a reference to the unity game engine. The main country in my One Hundred and One Magical Pistols setting is called "the union" and their language is called "unity".
Wanders are like "they're available everywhere and once you learn how to do it it's so powerful!"
Staffguys always talk about how you can do ANYTHING with a staff. Wanders claim it's a pain to carry around an overpowered device that can do ANYTHING when you just need to cast fireball or a simple one man teleport.
Meanwhile the bare wizards are showing off how they don't need any magical tools and can just do hand motions.
Wanders and staffguys retort that when a spell goes wrong, THEY need to go to store for a new magical tool. YOU need new hands.
Unironically if you want to write a character who is a good decision maker (by which I mean a character whose character trait is Good Decision Maker, not just a character who happens to make good decisions) you should check out page 14 of the FEMA Decision-Making and Problem-Solving course.
It lays out the key elements of effective decision making, which are:
Clarity of Values
Quality of Information
Analytical Approach
People can't actually make effective decisions based just on intuition or vibes, and characters shouldn't be able to either.
Unironically if you want to write a character who is a good decision maker (by which I mean a character whose character trait is Good Decision Maker, not just a character who happens to make good decisions) you should check out page 14 of the FEMA Decision-Making and Problem-Solving course.
It lays out the key elements of effective decision making, which are:
Clarity of Values
Quality of Information
Analytical Approach
People can't actually make effective decisions based just on intuition or vibes, and characters shouldn't be able to either.
Partial transformation - mummy rot is slowly turning you to sand, a near miss from a medusa left you with partially stoned body parts, etc.
Hypnotic suggestions from being mind controlled persist after the controllerās death, causing the victim to occasionally take actions to support the cause of a mind flayer cult that no longer exists.
Repeated demonic possession has left the patient with permanent gaps in their soulās defenses, causing them to immediately get re-possessed if they go outside a consecrated area.
Post-resurrection trauma as the revived soul remembers an unpleasant afterlife.
Magical healing can get very weird if something is stuck in the wound. Itāll get you back on your feet, but you can get outcomes like āthereās a chunk of wood fused into your chest because the magic couldnāt figure out how to get the arrow out of your chest and just healed it in place,ā and this can cause mobility issues or infection vectors down the line.
SHealth tied to something else - the health of a tree, the amount of frost on the ground, the inverse of another personās, the political power of whoever cursed you
Curse of bad luck - makes any small illness or injury potentially fatal if not treated with anti-curse in addition to anti-infection procedures
Magical reliance on a magical or nonmagical substance - can have any number of side effects
Repeatedly being drunk by vampires can cause an increase in blood production and therefore high blood pressure and related ailments. Can be treated by blood letting.
Thereās a lot of hybridization happening in a lot of fantasy settings, and thatās just asking for a lot of people with weird half-dragon genetic disorders. Works out fine for some people, not so much for others.
Parasitized by (insert creature here). If you donāt take the correct precautions to keep it dormant it will continue to spread and eventually hatch out/transform you.
Repeated contact with the undead has left you open to their influence - leading to hearing or seeing things that other mortals canāt, which can distort or distract from more mundane concerns.
Alternately to being more vulnerable to intrusion, oneās soul can form a scar that makes helpful magic more difficult to take in.
Sleep disorders that make one fall into an impenetrable sleep at a specific trigger, or to do so for years at a time.
Out of phase with 4D space, oneās body not connected to itself or anchored in place/time in the usual way. There could be a consistent two hour gap between the things you hear and what has happened, you might clip into the floor as if it was in a different place for you, or you might slide through the material plane in cross section.
Intermittent intangibility.
Split into two people, each with only half your traits.
Sensitivity to ambient magic - like the thing where peoplesā joints ache before a storm but for being near ley lines or people with a lot of magic built up or other magic reservoirs. - The potential for magic, but where the magic has not yet begun.
Heal spell dependency: years of repeated serious injuries being healed by magic causes the body to stop healing naturally. seen often in professional fighters and those with a long career in hazardous occupations.
the forgotten dread: memory modification magic has caused the subjectās conscious mind to forget some past trauma, but their subconscious still remembers, causing them emotions that they cannot explain or justify ranging from mild discomfort to blind panic when presented with triggers related to the aforementioned trauma. often encountered in cases where the subject has paid an unscrupulous mage to make them forget their past as an ill-advised alternative to therapy.
Psychically Transmitted Memories: the subjectās mind has been linked to another personās and, although the bond has since been severed, they have retained memories or thought patterns from the other person that are difficult to distinguish from their own.
Negative Life Syndrome (previously āFalse Life Syndromeā): seen most often in cases when the subject is exposed to dark magic while in the womb, Negative Life Syndrome leaves the subjectās life energies tainted by undeath without making them truly undead. common symptoms include intolerance of radiant magic, aversion to sunlight, and the inability to set foot on hallowed ground; rare symptoms include healing from negative energies, sudden necrosis, and the desire to eat flesh or drink blood of living beings.
lycanthropy
Early Life Possessions: the subject was possessed by a spirit or demon during early childhood or infancy, and the possessing presence was in control of them when they learned important milestones, such as how to walk or speak. The subject is now dependant upon the possessing presence to help them perform these tasks or, in cases where the presence has since been exorcised, performs the relevant tasks at a level appropriate for an infant or small child.
Body requires nutrients not found in human food, and you must eat rocks, or gems, or some other alternative. You may or may not have the ability to actually digest these without magical assistance
Awareness of too many dimensions makes it difficult to interact with just this one - either to keep track of conversations, or walk to specific locations without ending up on another planet instead
Telekinetic psychosis - delusions tend to physically affect those around you (but HIGH chance for ableism in this one!)
you have flare-ups where your skin tends to slough off and be replaced by some other substance
After sharing life energy with a dying loved one, youāre now both trying to survive off one personās supply. Like chronic fatigue, but if your loved one gets too big of a bruise you wonāt have the energy to get up until it heals
living in reverse
stuck at a certain age
supersenses lead to constant overstimulation
youāre a changeling, and if you donāt have someone who loves you close by, youāll turn back into sticks and mud
I've been reading Iron Flame by Rebecca Yarros, and it's gotten me thinking about how worldbuilding is multilayered, and about how a failure of one layer of the worldbuilding can negatively impact the book, even if the other layers of the worldbuilding work.
I don't want to spoil the book for anyone, so I'm going to talk about it more broadly instead. In my day job, one of the things I do is planning/plan development, and we talk about plans broadly as strategic, operational, and tactical. I think, in many ways, worldbuilding functions the same way.
Strategic worldbuilding, as I think of it, is how the world as a whole works. It's that vampires exist and broadly how vampires exist and interact with the world, unrelated to the characters or (sometimes) to the organizations that the characters are part of. It's the ongoing war between Earth and Mars; it's the fact that every left-handed person woke up with magic 35 years ago; it's Victorian-era London except every twelfth day it rains frogs. It's the world, in the broadest sense.
Operational worldbuilding is the organizations--the stuff that people as a whole are doing/have made within the context of that strategic-level world. For The Hunger Games, I'd probably put the post-apocalyptic nature of the world and even the existence/structure of the districts as the strategic level and the construct of the Hunger Games as the operational level: the post-apocalyptic nature of the world and the districts are the overall world that they live in, and the Hunger Games are the construct that were created as a response.
Tactical worldbuilding is, in my mind, character building--and, specifically, how the characters (especially but not exclusively the main characters) exist within the context of the world. In The Hunger Games, Katniss has experience in hunting, foraging, wilderness survival, etc. because of the context of the world that she grew up in (post-apocalyptic, district structure, Hunger Games, etc.). This sort of worldbuilding, to me, isn't about the personality part of the characterization but about the context of the character.
Each one of these layers can fail independently, even if the other ones succeed. When I think of an operational worldbuilding failure, I think of Divergent, where they took a post-apocalyptic world and set up an orgnaizational structure that didn't make any sense, where people are prescribed to like 6 jobs that don't in any way cover what's required to run a modern civilization--or even to run the society that they're shown as running. The society that they present can't exist as written in the world that they're presented as existing in--or if they can, I never could figure out how when reading the book (or watching the film).
So operational worldbuilding failures can happen when the organizations or societies that are presented don't seem like they could function in the context that they are presented in or when they just don't make any sense for what they are trying to accomplish. If the story can't reasonably answer why is this organization built this way or why do they do what they do then I see it as an organizational worldbuilding failure.
For tactical worldbuilding failures, I think of stories where characters have skillsets that conveniently match up with what they need to solve the problems of the plot but don't actually match their background or experience. If Katniss had been from an urban area and never set foot in a forest, it wouldn't have worked to have her as she was.
In this way (as in planning), the tactical level should align with the operational level which should align with the strategic level--you should be able to trace from one to the next and understand how things exist in the context of each other.
For that reason, strategic worldbuilding failures are the vaguest to explain, but I think of them like this: if it either 1) is so internally inconsistent that it starts to fall apart or 2) leaves the reader going this doesn't make any sense at all then it's probably failed.
I've made a thing and thought others might be able to get some use out of it. If you just want the d100 tables, scroll down to the cut and skip my rambling as to what this list is. Short version, it's a d100 table of male names and a d100 table of female names, taken from 13th-century English records and trimmed to minimize names that were used within the last 140-odd years.
While working on my Dungeon23 project (updates collected here, by the way), I was looking for names for my NPCs, and stumbled upon the Henry III Fine Rolls as a source. This is a digitization and indexing of records from 13th-century England that include a lot of personal names. It contains references to a database they made that sorts these names by popularity and other factors, but the database apparently hasn't been maintained, because it's gone. For a while, I was just picking names from articles about that database, but I started to worry I was going to run out (due to my tendency to name any corpses of dead adventurers in the dungeon just in case someone likes to cast speak with dead). So I went to their index of names, which is great if you're looking for a specific person, but not useful if you just want a list of personal names, and decided to use their data to make a couple d100 tables for myself.
I went through the index and typed all the names into a spreadsheet. Then, to give the list a more medieval feel, I sorted them by how often they appeared in the Social Security Administration's data on baby names. (I know that's a bit US-centric, but to my knowledge there is no global database to use for this purpose.) Then I removed all the ones that appeared most often on the baby names list -- I figured if you were rolling on a table of medieval names, you'd be a bit disappointed if you got "John" or "Mary". (Incidentally, the following names appear both in the Fine Rolls and on the SSA's list of the top 10 (male and female, so 20 actually) baby names for 2021: Emma, Oliver, James, Ava, William, Isabella, and Henry.) I used the data going back to 1880 for thoroughness.
In the case of male names, this meant I was able to remove all the names that appeared in the SSA records. So the names in that table were (probably) not used at all in the U.S. between 1880 and 2021. (The SSA apparently doesn't keep records on names that appear less than five times in a given year, so it's possible there were a few of these guys around, but not many.) This is because, as you may expect from medieval records, there were more than twice as many male names in the records as female names, so there were more left over after cutting the ones that appeared in the SSA data. So twenty of the female names on the table were also used in the US since 1880, but not often.
I did not make any effort to sort names by etymology, so the list includes French, Welsh, Scandinavian, &c. names, not just names that have an English origin. Multicultural, for "pretty much just one quadrant of Europe" values of "multicultural". I don't think that should break anyone's immersion or anything; medieval people traveled around more than people tend to think.
Speaking of breaking immersion, I also cut the following names off of the list because I thought they might be distracting to your players if you randomly assigned them to an NPC -- or to your audience if you use this to name characters for a writing project. I'm not going to say there's something wrong with these names, just that they're the sort of thing you would want to only deploy on purpose:
From the male names:
Cok
Flourecoc
Hammecok
Marmaduke
Odo
Vivian
From the female names:
Cuntessa
Cuntus
Licorice
Also, to note, I've kept them separated into 100 male names and 100 female names because the source data was pretty firmly entrenched in the gender binary. Obviously you can do what you want with your characters' genders, though, and if you want to completely ignore the division, feel free to combine them into a single list and roll a d20+d10 for a d200 table.
Anyway, without further ado, the tables (or, well, lists numbered 1-100) are below the cut.
d100 Medieval Female Names
Acilia
Albrea
Alcis
Aleys
Alveva
Alvona
Amabilia
Amice
Amphelisa
Angaretta
Annora
Antigonia
Anura
Argia
Arniun
Ascelina
Aude
Avegaya
Avice
Barbata
Basilia
Belasez
Belina
Bertrada
Blitha
Bruncosta
Burgia
Celecestra
Claremunda
Clemencia
Comitessa
Constantina
Cundya
Custantia
Dervorguilla
Desiderata
Duva
Edelina
Egelina
Egidia
Emicina
Ermengard
Ermintrude
Escilia
Esterota
Eustachia
Fluoria
Frethesenta
Genta
Goda
Godelina
Godina
Goditha
Goldcorna
Goldina
Guinda
Gundreda
Gunilda
Gunnora
Hawise
Huwelina
Idonea
Imayne
Imenia
Isolda
Ivetta
Kamilia
Langusa
Laurencia
Lesianda
Letewaria
Liveva
Maciana
Mariota
Maszelina
Meisenta
Melcana
Nesta
Nichith
Olencia
Olenta
Oriolda
Osamunda
Pavia
Pelaga
Petronilla
Phillipa
Quenilda
Sanchia
Sapientia
Sarotha
Scolastica
Sigerida
Sinolda
Slima
Theophania
Wulveva
Wymarca
Ymanea
Yselia
d100 Medieval Male Names
Alard
Albric
Alfwyn
Algrym
Alnothus
Amauvin
Amfrid
Anessans
Arnewic
Arnulph
Ascelin
Asketillus
Astun
Avenel
Azus
Baldekin
Bonefey
Chernon
Costericus
Cradoc
Deodatus
Deulecresse
Deulobene
Eglinus
Ellemus
Elvered
Engelard
Engeram
Ernisius
Ernulf
Everwin
Ferrand
Fraricus
Fulk
Galerand
Gemmion
Gernegan
Godebrich
Godescallus
Gruffydd
Gundwin
Hagin
Halengrattus
Hasculph
Heinfrid
Heltonus
Herlewin
Hermer
Ilger
Imbert
Innorus
Isenbard
Joldwin
Jollan
Jukell
Jurninus
Ketelbert
Lefrich
Lefwin
Manasser
Mauger
Meredudd
Meuric
Mosse
Odard
Odinell
Orm
Ranulf
Ratiken
Reinfrid
Rochulf
Roscelin
Ruellus
Runcinus
Salekin
Samariellus
Savaric
Selvius
Serlo
Terricus
Thoreword
Tollanus
Turgot
Turkill
Ulf
Ulfketell
Urricus
Vivard
Waldethus
Walding
Waleran
Walkelin
Wandregisilius
Wicmannus
Wigan
Wischard
Wurmund
Wybert
Wymarc
Wynan
So yeah. There you go. For your TTRPG or writing project. Knock yourself out, let me know if you do anything cool with this.
