Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3544130" data-attributes="member: 18280">Again, if worldbuilding requires that you are CREATING A WORLD, and &quot;world here doesn't necessarily mean planet, it could be larger or smaller depending&quot;, then it is logically inconsistent to claim that creating the village/dungeon/wilderness combo is NOT worldbuilding because it isn't CREATING A WORLD.&nbsp; The term &quot;world&quot; loses its scale reference.Or, another way to look at it:&nbsp; You brought up a demiplane as being smaller than a planet, and that is certainly possible.&nbsp; From this point of view, one could claim that the Top-Down method of worldbuilding was the Only True Worldbuilding, and everything else was creating setting or adventure.&nbsp; That would be consistent with claiming that worldbuilding is CREATING A WORLD.However, creating the political structure of a city or the history of a hill IS NOT Top-Down worldbuilding.&nbsp; When Hussar makes the claim that these things are worldbuilding, he is violating the meaning he ascribes &quot;world&quot; in the context of &quot;worldbuilding&quot;.This is not saying that a &quot;city = the entire world&quot;, but it IS saying that the meaning of the word &quot;world&quot; as used in the term &quot;worldbuilding&quot; doesn't necessarily refer to the entire world.No twisting of anyone's words is required to draw the conclusion.&nbsp; You simply cannot have it both ways, and be rationally consistent.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 3544130, member: 18280"] Again, if worldbuilding requires that you are CREATING A WORLD, and "world here doesn't necessarily mean planet, it could be larger or smaller depending", then it is logically inconsistent to claim that creating the village/dungeon/wilderness combo is NOT worldbuilding because it isn't CREATING A WORLD. The term "world" loses its scale reference. Or, another way to look at it: You brought up a demiplane as being smaller than a planet, and that is certainly possible. From this point of view, one could claim that the Top-Down method of worldbuilding was the Only True Worldbuilding, and everything else was creating setting or adventure. That would be consistent with claiming that worldbuilding is CREATING A WORLD. However, creating the political structure of a city or the history of a hill IS NOT Top-Down worldbuilding. When Hussar makes the claim that these things are worldbuilding, he is violating the meaning he ascribes "world" in the context of "worldbuilding". This is not saying that a "city = the entire world", but it IS saying that the meaning of the word "world" as used in the term "worldbuilding" doesn't necessarily refer to the entire world. No twisting of anyone's words is required to draw the conclusion. You simply cannot have it both ways, and be rationally consistent. [/QUOTE]

Verification