I love your worldbuilding a lot. I know you're an art historian, which means you must have plenty of experience in researching—does it help with worldbuilding at all? I'm casually familiar with Elden Ring's lore (and I love it a lot), so I hope this doesn't come across rudely when I ask: how do you come up with your worldbuilding? Do you find things IRL that could plausibly work within the worldbuilding—do you find things in the game that invite curiosity and build from there, referencing things IRL as you need to? Your descriptions are so lush and vibrant, invoking a lovely balance between the game as I know it and the world you're building from it, and I wonder how much of your work as an art historian helps you with that, if at all? I enjoy worldbuilding, personally; I feel like it's not something most writers get into on the level that you have, so I was hoping you might shed some light on your process (if you have one!) like you have with your writing in the past. Thank you!
Hi anon, thanks very much for the kind words (and it’s not rude at all to ask).
I think Elden Ring is particularly fertile ground on which to worldbuild because the world is (statically) so rich and invites you to infer so much, yet huge chunks of the narrative are just empty space: space a good storyteller can really use to their advantage. Same goes for its characters - we have these brilliant outlines mapped by significant points, like constellations: be they a few lines of dialogue or item descriptions. It’s a pleasure to connect the characters to their setting and to each other across those existing anchors.
Obviously being trained as an art historian is useful because it means research, and writing, and putting forth theories based on collected material and historical sources (and having to defend them in front of your peers) and going down strange and sometimes useless rabbit holes to describe one damn thing or argue for why it exists. Just about every human civilisation has made art of some kind or another - to record, to describe (or ascribe) power, to worship, to ornament the self as a device to construct identity, and so on - so it’s an incredible window into any organised society. In the end what is really useful here, I think, regardless if you’re an (art) historian or not, is developing an instinct for what kind of questions to ask - the answers to which you, then, as the worldbuilder, can add as scaffolding or flourish to your creation.
A couple of key things I think about when worldbuilding, under the cut for lengthy tangents.
As a sort of parallel example to start generating some of these worldbuilding-adjacent questions, you could pick a work of art - any, from any period, with the hope we know a decent amount about the context or similar works, and ask:
Who made it?
What kind of artist? A man, a woman? Does it matter, or were only people of a certain sex, or social caste, permitted to be artists? Of what class were they? What sort of education did they receive, and was it privileged compared to everyone else, or were they not so valued? How did they train - apprenticeship? A type of guild system? How were they paid? Already we are thinking about who is making what, how their education places them in the social hierarchy, and how money circulates in this society - from merchants to artists? From patrons? From institutions?
Who commissioned the work? (Assuming it was not done for pleasure by the artist, but if so you can formulate questions for that, too).
What kind of status or money did one need to commission art? What subjects were considered appropriate, or not, and why? Devotional? Familial? Allegorical? Who paid for the artist’s material? Who got to see the painting after it was made, considering where it was displayed? What kind of power did that lend the commissioner? This is a good avenue through which to ask some religious questions: in this society/historical context, are images both secular and religious? Which has priority? Are there aesthetic rules and conventions, or a history of iconoclasm or heretical depictions? If depicting certain subjects is forbidden (for religious reasons or otherwise), who gets punished, and who does the punishing? What is the severity of that kind of crime, and how is it punished?
What is the subject?
What can it tell us about what was worth depicting in this society? Was there a difference between high art and domestic craft, and if so, were those differences reflected in materials or formal qualities? Between utilitarian and aesthetic objects? Does this work recount history from one particular perspective, or imagine a future, or depict mythical or religious imagery important to a national or personal sense of identity? What sort of material culture knowledge can we glean from it - let’s say, the portrait of a man holding a book, wearing a very expensive coat. What do those physical objects tell us about this society, about who could acquire what, and what status that lent them, and for what reason would they desire being depicted?
What sort of materials were used?
Where did they come from? How expensive, or easy to obtain? Were some considered exotic, or holy, or the result of trades? (Helps lead you into some more economic and geopolitical questions for your world - trade, scarcity, resources. Think of sumptuary laws. Think of lapis lazuli, or silk, or peppercorn, at different times in history. Think of why the Dutch loved their still-lives of lemons and currants and oysters; why rich prelates could commission tombs of ornate marble sculpture from the most talented foreigners).
Obviously some of these answers will vary widely if you are asking about a 2nd-century fayum portrait from Roman Egypt or a 15th century Dutch altarpiece (and yet…). Some will help you think through how a particular society is organised, and so whatever is “missing” from the in-game context is then easier to slot into your interpretation.
Regardless of the fact that it’s fantasy, when I am writing Elden Ring I tend to do a lot of research and general reading on medieval and early modern Europe (I am a late 19thc modernist so I, for example, know fuck-all about castle architecture); while for Bloodborne I will look at the 19th century more exclusively, as well as neo-gothic and medieval revivalism across Europe. The idea is to be very general but seize on specific examples, and to search for what real, historical features would fit neatly and bring colour to worldbuilding: what characters are wearing, how are they praying, eating, sleeping, where are they going when they’re not in a Game-Specific(™) place, what sort of hierarchy/labour/duties bring them together or keep them apart. To use some examples specific to O Mother of my Misfortune, when I am describing Messmer’s small council I am thinking about Henry VIII’s, who was notoriously paranoid and turned on his ministers and the gentlemen of his privy chamber; when I am mapping events which lead up to the hornless uprising I am thinking about various historical revolutions and rebellions, and how they play out; when I am figuring out how to construct Hornsent society as a theocratic apartheid I am thinking about the awfully numerous examples in human history. When I am deliberating doctrinal schisms I am thinking about the years leading up to the Reformation, and the first few centuries of Christianity; when I am proposing Hornsent monasteries are seized and turned into shrines for Marika, I am thinking about image-as-propaganda throughout history, and how it is used to compel and solidify complicity in populations. Sometimes it’s a book full of facts to get one line that brings credibility to your world, or to a situation, or simply enlivens a discussion between characters.
You don’t need to answer every single question down to the finest detail, but they are excellent jumping off points to build that cohesion, which you need, because inevitably your character will be moulded by it. If your character is a serf living on feudal land they cannot have the knowledge or experience of a merchant banker; if they are noble by blood, they will move through the world differently, behave a certain way towards some people and contrarily around others. The world is crucial, otherwise your character is just moving through a vacuum, without experiences and environments to shape them, or a context to guide them. In a sense, worldbuilding should act as a series of constraints for your character - for their personality, their impulses, the things they can or cannot know or believe, what they would or would not do because of this particular setting. A good setting can help hone a character, I think, though in the end I believe good character writing carries a story more than worldbuilding. Successful worldbuilding offers a stage on which a character is fully and believably realised - not just a vague, untouchable backdrop or info dump. It is the proscenium on which they move, the props they have access to, the circumstances that shape not necessarily how they will act, but at least what kind of agency they have.
(As an aside, good worldbuilding is always woven throughout the body of the work. There is never a scenario in which a big explanation or exposition at the beginning should precede action and storytelling, and then never come up again. Your world should reveal itself as the characters move through it, over time, so that it unfurls organically, because even if it is a surprise or delight to your reader, your characters know it already.)
All that to say, good worldbuilding is not possible without engaging with history. Read history. Watch documentaries. Go to museums if they are accessible to you. Find something you are interested in, and read about it generally before diving into details.
Personally, I also follow politics extremely closely, which offers a spectrum of ideas and examples of how humans choose to organise themselves, juggle power successfully or fuck it up, bring down a king or raise up a despot, deploy imperialist ambitions or sue for peace, etc. IRL circumstances are undeniably a very useful source of fantasy or sci-fi worldbuilding, but if you shy away from contemporary politics, then examine political history to understand how we got here. Political movements are almost always informed by economic and social conditions, so there’s no better way to investigate how a particular society is structured (and why it works, or doesn’t) than via its political context. The French Revolution fomented for five years, had allies turn on each other in ghoulish ways, and despite that, about 15 years later the French Republic still let a man crown himself emperor. History is full of bonkers examples of human ingenuity and idiocy, ripe for inventive folding into whatever world you’d like to shape.
Anyway sorry if it sounds like I’m assigning homework, but the real tldr of good worldbuilding is twofold:
Read and collect sources. Dig into history and pick out things that intrigue you or could make for an interesting backdrop for your characters. Cook with those ingredients. Use your critical thinking faculties to figure out how your characters exist within their constraints, and mirror the world they live in. None of this bullshit medieval fantasy characters having modern middle-class American sensibilities. Don’t fucking do it.
Perhaps more importantly, foster curiosity. Ask why. Ask why things are the way they are. How did they come to be. Who made the rules? Why? Why do things look like this, and not that? Art is just one vehicle for this, but it goes for all facets of our lived experience. The more you understand how things work, be it now or in a historical context, the more believable and compelling your own worldbuilding.
why do you all think "freedom of speech" means being an asshat on fics writers don't need to know you disagree with their fics if you liked it you liked it if you didn't you can Go
i wonder if radagon ever thought giving up his own personhood for the sake of the golden order and the greater will was acceptable and preferable to being marika's other half- because it'll mean he took that action on his own, that he took control of that half of his destiny on his own, being a "leal hound of the golden order"
personhood and radagon's willing abandonment of it are so interesting to think about especially when you take his last scene into context; of the elden beast using his fragmented, beaten corpse as its sword to strike the tarnished down with. that scene still haunts me- it's so ironic that in chasing his own personhood distinct from marika, radagon ended up being nothing more than the greater will's literal, fragmented sword
he's willing to be radagon of the golden order just so he does not have to "yet become marika"
i think it's very ironic that the same people who cite that sugilite must be appreciated for his lore don't understand that he didn't have beef with aventurine, he had beef with opal and diamond for rigging the trial such that aventurine was gonna end up having his cornerstone fixed anyway no matter what they voted
like sugilite knew aventurine was going to get his cornerstone fixed. that's. Kind of the point he's making when he says "as expected, the final vote comes down to this one." re: opal who is speaking with diamond's recommendation. the final recommendation was always diamond's to make.
sugilite doesn't really care all that much about what aventurine did because he expected it lol. we don't know how he expected it. but considering aventurine doesn't mention him in penacony when he remembered topaz, jade and opal- it's pretty likely he and sugilite aren't close enough for sugilite to know that information personally.
re: "death, wasn't this just a show for yourself?" like he already Knew. he already knew why aventurine did what he did. he voted simply because opal would have a tie to break. and because he knew it didn't matter.
sugilite dislikes aventurine sure, but he doesn't care as much as the hsr fandom seems to think he does.
it's in the trailer. he's featured specifically when it's time to introduce opal who by extension is representing diamond. sugilite is the farthest from diamond's throne. it's literally there- representing who sugilite really is displeased with. but it's shocking how so many miss the nuance in that trailer. and how many miss out on how interesting of a character sugilite is.
sometimes the takes HSR players come up with in the name of being socially conscious or being woke are so stupidly rooted in ignorance they end up being worse than racist or ignorant
I do fucking love Ranni so much, hilarious character. Steals death to kill her half brother. Discards her original body to look like a cute little blue doll instead. Lies to the Tarnished, who presumably just arrived in the country and who none of this means anything to, about her name for some reason. When confronted later, immediately brazenly admits she lied to you, and also that she's the one who had Godwyn assassinated, which somehow no one had figured out before. Sees through the Tarnished and Rogier's plan immediately, but still lets them work for her (because "there's nothing wrong with a well-laid scheme", but is it really that well-laid if you already know what our goal is?). Says shit like "I shall soon enter my slumber". Literally turns into a pocket-sized version of herself and gets so fucking pissed off when you see through that "disguise". You can marry her in game, and she'll give you a sword for it. Did I forget anything
Everything can be used as an arrow if you (are stupid enough) leveled str
Your typical target practice gone wrong, gone fiery✌️ Explanation's under cut
So i got this stupid silly idea while playing the dlc. So you know that Messmer's spear r2 is an explosion basically. Yeah, i randomly thought what if it can SHOT AS A HARPOON XD And greatbows can fire harpoons as an arrow, so... i feel stupid lmao
theartofmadeline
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
yousharknotpass
areudirty
prguitarman
discoholicmusic
stormborns
ellievsbear
