So, something most every setting builder sooner or later has to get around to doing is the history of the setting. How the past leads to the present and what happened in between. Now this is difficult due to a series of reasons:
1. History is VAST. Even with a relatively new world you have thousands of events that together have to give shape to complex things like societies, nations and people. What is important?
2. History is broken. The winners write history, and sometimes the winners can't write. At some point history just fades into the distance and without written records everything becomes guesswork. So what do we know? Where do we begin?
3. History is complex. Even if you have a lot of cool ideas they have to fit into the grander scheme. They have to lead somewhere; perhaps even somewhere specific.
So how do you go about writing history? Do you just slap on a creation myth and call it a day? Do you ponder historical alliances of long-gone royal houses for months? Do you begin with the advent of gods, life or society? Is it put into system with years, calendars, lists and timelines or is it a list of vaguely ordered dramatic events?
One thing I have considered is working backwards; starting with the present and then heap on the causal events. Another idea was to focus on a series of primary cultures and try to imagine their progress and relationships evolve and devolve. Or one could come up with various large events and attempt to link them together.
Although I haven't posted much in the way of history for Vibrant yet, I find that writing history for the setting is easier where the setting is sci-fi than it would be were it fantasy - it's much easier to gloss over early bits, making small references and general statements about the early history. With Vibrant I think it's important to tell what kind of world a species originates on, what implications this has had for their development, and information on what parts of similar human history were absent from theirs (and at the same time, what unique elements they may have possessed that humans have never been exposed to). Recent history is far more important and is also pretty easy to write - you can mention wars and why they began, and the dates of major technological advancements, and that's about it, just like one might write any history; however in this case it seems more brief, as if the setting is geared more towards the present than others.
I have at times used the method of writing backwards. I think it can make it easier to leave important bits out, but it's not that bad. I think the best idea for writing any history (if you have time to do it) is to start at the beginning and list the advent of particular technologies and changes in climate/beginning of wars/etc. one-by-one, creating a "family tree" of sorts for each one that helps consider short- and long-term effects of each on the setting.
Hmm, but of course history also has to be interesting to the reader. For example, no one wants to read a paragraph about how early hominids discovered fire. That still leaves plenty of interesting discoveries, but you understand what I mean.
But it is a good idea to consider both short- and long-term effects for every event.
Also, I think your observation that fantasy and sci-fi history differs in many ways is correct, especially because sci-fi often has the groundwork done if you will.
Quote from: Conundrum CrowHmm, but of course history also has to be interesting to the reader. For example, no one wants to read a paragraph about how early hominids discovered fire. That still leaves plenty of interesting discoveries, but you understand what I mean.
But it is a good idea to consider both short- and long-term effects for every event.
Also, I think your observation that fantasy and sci-fi history differs in many ways is correct, especially because sci-fi often has the groundwork done if you will.
Indeed. It's important to make the history interesting as well - some people will find a bulleted timeline enough, but not always. You're right about the sci-fi work being done - just take a look at Rocketpunk Manifesto and Atomic Rockets!
Only to answer your post in part, once, while brainstorming work for a fantasy novel I wrote (which will likely never be published, but which was of an epic length)- I drew maps of what a portion of the world looked like (re: political boundaries) during several stages.
For example, I had a map from the year 0, the year 150, the year 750, the year 1200, the year 1500, and present-day 1750. This helped me figure out the back story of how each of the countries were related and where minority ethnic and cultural groups might end up with respect to each country. (The story was designed to play with political and cultural philosophies in a very low magic world).
The map avoids the difficulties of reader-reluctance to wade through a disjointed history.
Zompist.org also demonstrates the power of the map- I only became interested in his histories after pouring over his clever maps.
>>For example, no one wants to read a paragraph about how early hominids discovered fire.
What about the myth of the fellow who stole fire from the gods and ended up with his liver being plucked out daily as punishment. (Prometheus? Coyote, etc.) People love to read about that.
Quote from: Conundrum CrowFor example, no one wants to read a paragraph about how early hominids discovered fire.
My archaeology professor would disagree.
I have severe psychological issue with this. I mean, Bad, demented, add details that matter to no one, idiotic issues.
That's one reason I'm working with an improbably short span of history (with improbably quickly-progressing cultures)-- centuries are much easier to fill.
Ah yes LD, myths makes (almost) everything vastly more exciting :D
And I'm not saying discovering fire is unimportant, just that it's hardly your clever way of introducing fire to the humans that will make people read more of your setting, or will introduce them to it properly.
And I can understand that Vreeg... If you get a good idea, you almost inevitably want to convey it in some way. Even if it is utterly irrelevant.
Lemme get a running start at this thread's central questions more directly:
Quote1. History is VAST. Even with a relatively new world you have thousands of events that together have to give shape to complex things like societies, nations and people. What is important?
2. History is broken. The winners write history, and sometimes the winners can't write. At some point history just fades into the distance and without written records everything becomes guesswork. So what do we know? Where do we begin?
3. History is complex. Even if you have a lot of cool ideas they have to fit into the grander scheme. They have to lead somewhere; perhaps even somewhere specific.
no one[/i] is a reliable narrator.
Quote from: Conundrum CrowAh yes LD, myths makes (almost) everything vastly more exciting :D
And I'm not saying discovering fire is unimportant, just that it's hardly your clever way of introducing fire to the humans that will make people read more of your setting, or will introduce them to it properly.
And I can understand that Vreeg... If you get a good idea, you almost inevitably want to convey it in some way. Even if it is utterly irrelevant.
OK, this is one of the things that make todays tech so much fun. I just add, and add, and add to my Access database on history, and every few months, I replace the data.
And it is cool, becasue you can continue to grow this database and make it more and more interelated.
Tale of Years (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/Tale+of+Years)
I start with really broad strokes, key moments that changed world history. I then work backwards for the previous couple of centuries from the campaign/story/whatever "starting date", filling in relevant details. After that, I pick periods of time that I either feel could be interesting or are relevant to a story (or could be) and shape those.
Part of the fun for me is having vast amounts of time and/or space that are blank, since I can fill in the gaps and go, "okay, how the heck did we get from here to there?"
My current rules:
-Keep the language simple and use short sentences.
-Pack details into two-line paragraphs.
-Don't say anything that won't accomplish one of the following
A) reflect the setting's tone/themes
B) shine light on the present circumstance
C) intrigue the reader
D) intrigue the character
Remember: if the events can't touch the PCs, they didn't happen! (Notice I said can't, not don't)
They're unspoken rules, but I punch myself when I don't follow them.
Quote from: your guts are DELICIOUSMy current rules:
-Keep the language simple and use short sentences.
-Pack details into two-line paragraphs.
-Don't say anything that won't accomplish one of the following
A) reflect the setting's tone/themes
B) shine light on the present circumstance
C) intrigue the reader
D) intrigue the character
Remember: if the events can't touch the PCs, they didn't happen! (Notice I said can't, not don't)
They're unspoken rules, but I punch myself when I don't follow them.
The past gnaws on thr pcs, it bites and nibbles them, if dome correctly, it chews on their privates and masticates their feet.
Now I'm hungry.
Quote from: your guts are DELICIOUSMy current rules:
-Keep the language simple and use short sentences.
-Pack details into two-line paragraphs.
-Don't say anything that won't accomplish one of the following
A) reflect the setting's tone/themes
B) shine light on the present circumstance
C) intrigue the reader
D) intrigue the character
Angel. You do succeed at that. Your settings always read very different from other settings. And that fact seems appropriate, somehow, for your worlds.
Let's say you have written a few paragraphs giving a broad introduction to the history of your world or a region: Do you include years or not?
For: it adds structure and verisimilitude and makes it easier to correlate it with other events.
Against: it detracts from the dramatic momentum of the text and can be repetitive or boring or irrelevant.
I tend not to include years simply because usually when I'm writing the broad narrative flow of what is going on I actually have no clue when (specifically, on the calendar) any of it is happening. I go back and fill that in later, or never, sometimes.
Quote from: sparkletwistI tend not to include years simply because usually when I'm writing the broad narrative flow of what is going on I actually have no clue when (specifically, on the calendar) any of it is happening. I go back and fill that in later, or never, sometimes.
Yeah, this exactly.
Sometimes I go back and fill in years, but it's a terrifically low priority. Sometimes I deliberately leave out the years, letting the
mists of antiquity enshroud stuff, y'know.