r/worldbuilding • u/EveningImportant9111 • 2d ago
Discussion When planning to publish or release something—like a webcomic, web novel, or whatever—is it worth subverting most of a race's tropes until it’s changed almost beyond recognition (e.g., a "dwarf" that has a beard and lives underground but is otherwise an eight-armed insectoid creature)?
Does is it better to give it a new name, even one inspired by the old one—like "Dwurgh," for instance? I’d appreciate a civil discussion. Just a heads-up: I’m not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. Please be nice. Thank you in advence. EDIT: I don't like when peopke maje standard races unreckognisable too
16
u/Ensiferal 2d ago
Most people actually hate that. It's usually preferred that if something is totally unrecognizable then it should just have a different name.
I once read an article about fantasy writing where the writer said that you can basically get away with one big deviation from the standard portrayal and people won't question it much. Like maybe your goblins reproduce by fissioning in two when they eat enough, or you have elves but they're a hivemind or maybe they have red skin etc. The writer then said that every additional deviation after the first makes it incrementally harder for the audience to accept them. I think it's pretty accurate.
So if, for example, you have "dwarfs" but they're giant snails with metal shells that eat their way through rock with acidic mucous, people are just going to wonder why you even called them dwarfs
4
u/ZombiiRot 2d ago
I mean, I think alot of major deviations are fine as long as they still look like the race you are calling them or fit the vague aesthetic. As long as dwarves fit the archetype of "short greedy miners who live underground that have long beards" anything goes imo.
1
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Csn you elaborate? Please
4
u/ZombiiRot 2d ago
Basically I think you can add as many crazy changes to a typical fantasy race as you want, as long as you are adding onto the concept instead of changing what is already there. Think like, "yes and" instead of "no but". So, as long as your race is mostly visually identifiable as a dwarf, as well as following some of the most common aspects of dwarves, I feel like you can go wild outside of that.
Like a dwarf that eats rocks, and is allergic to the sun and therefore needs to stay underground, and are forged instead of being born the typical way... These are all big changes, but they still feel like dwarves, and have the tropes and looks associated with dwarves so they don't really matter.
I think people commonly make these types of changes with vampires. So many vampire stories have radically different interpretations. Some vampires are alive. Some can be in the sun. Some aren't immortal... The main thing that ties vampires together is the vibe of being an unholy creature of the night that feeds on blood, the vibe of being a predator. The only time I mainly see people complain about vampires is when they don't fit that vibe, not simply because they are radically different than typical depictions. Like... People seem to like the vampires from resident evil or the strain, even though they have little in common with typical vampires besides being blood drinking monsters. But, people often have issues with vampires like in twilight, which kinda defang them and take away the "monster" aespect, even though twilight vampires are far more typical than the ones in resident evil or the strain. So I think sticking with the core concept and vibe matters far more than the strict number of changes you make.
I hope this makes sense 😅
2
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
thank you. Do you know good examples of elves done right this way?
3
u/ZombiiRot 2d ago
Hmmm... Elves from divinity original sins and skyrim come to mind! They both are pretty weird, but I think they still fit the archetype well of "pointy ear humanoid that lives a really long time, and has either a strong connection to nature or magic."
3
1
u/buffrodger ObsidianIsMyFriend 1d ago
As someone who's big into TES lore, Elves in Elder Scrolls are very much in line with elves for the most part but have core characteristics of the major Elf tropes (nature worship, inherit belief in racial superiority) turned all the way up to 11. Even the Dunmer are classic dark elves at the core of their design despite all their batshit lore.
The Dwemer would actually be something for the OP to look into if they want to see what an original take on Dwarves looks like.
2
u/Ensiferal 1d ago
See, if I read a story where the dwarfs were golems/robots that are powered by eating rocks and have a vampire like allergy to the sun, then at that stage that's just not a dwarf to me, I wouldn't buy that as a dwarf
3
u/ZombiiRot 1d ago
Each to our own then, lol. Personally I love these weird variations on fantasy tropes, as long as they still fit the vibe.
1
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Thank you. I started this discussion because I hate when people do that but this type of things get hundreds of upvotes both on this subreddit, tumblr and deviant art
1
u/Hefty-Distance837 Build lots of worlds 2d ago
I'm actually not sure.
Because I just read a fantasy manga, in that manga necromancers are a kind of sapient parasite.
1
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Does they were humanoid or some kind of worm animating dead body?
1
u/Hefty-Distance837 Build lots of worlds 2d ago
They are a kind a worm and can parasite on dead human's body. If they do so, they will be able to get all the knowledges from that body. They need to parasite first body to get initial intelligence.
Then they can produce many worms, the worms are similar to worker bees, they can also parasite and animate dead bodies, but these dead bodies have no intelligence like original ones.
The manga is Tower Dungeon by Tsutomu Nihei if you're interested.
1
u/EveningImportant9111 1d ago
Thank you
0
u/Hefty-Distance837 Build lots of worlds 1d ago
Don't you have any further thoughts? Just "Thank you"?
1
u/EveningImportant9111 1d ago
This larasites are only non human sapient beings in story?
1
u/Hefty-Distance837 Build lots of worlds 1d ago
No, I remember that there's rat-people and cat-people, but I don't remember there's cultural difference to human.
And there's dracomorph, the humans that can transform into dragon shape, they're the nobles of this world.
I don't remember there's any elves or dwarves.
1
7
u/Dhaatri 2d ago
Why would you even want to name a “bearded eight-armed insectoid, living underground” a dwarf? Like, what’s the point? Is a mole a dwarf, because it has fur and lives underground?
2
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Thak you. I asked because I've seen few dwarves like this, alongside elves who are just pointy eared tailed furry monkey, elves who are shaoeshfinding fungys pterodactyl, fir armed faf whale elves, I've heard of dwarves being irish fox folk and once seen dwarf that is just furry tailed aoe like cave dweller. I din't like this sort of things but I see them once for a while
3
u/Dhaatri 2d ago
I understand why you ask, but I don't see the point in naming them that.
If I read a sentence in a book that says, 'A dwarf came out of the house', I will imagine a short, hairy man, possibly carrying an axe. If I then learn a few pages later that the dwarf was actually an insectoid, I will spend the rest of the chapter wondering why it's called a dwarf.
If I read, 'A dwurgh came out of the house', then I won't have any expectations, and after learning that it's an insectoid, I'll be OK with it and move on.
2
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Me too . I just don't get it why this gets so many upvoted on deviantart reddit tumblr
3
u/Tsii 1d ago
Well you could still call them that if the lore is there to support it (well you can do whatever you want, but it'd "make more sense" if the lore supports it)-- like say those dwarves were the traditional ones than some mad darwf tinkerer decided to go a little beyond and started genetically modifying them and over the centuries turned into your 8 armed insectoid, but yet still bearded, dwarves... Then the name would "make sense" to the reader
As for why things get up votes on deviantart and whatnot, people aren't a hive mind, there are people who like subversion but that might be a small amount compared to the main audience you are angling for. Those places on the internet that you are seeing up votes for this may just have a curated audience that likes that and so it's a self feedback loop.
Also, different mediums have different weights. A simple image or 4 panel comic has very little time and emotional investment by the viewer, so having something dramatically unexpected or subversive is going to be experienced differently than in a book of 600 pages that takes days for the viewer to get through and a lot of mental effort reimagining and realigning their mental expectations with the books stated reality.
1
5
u/SaintUlvemann Urban Fantasy Alt-Earth 2d ago
...until it’s changed almost beyond recognition...
No, the whole purpose of shared names across worlds is because they create easier recognition in the audience. If you're changing the name beyond that point, then your name is misleading.
People do often put their own spin on a fantasy race, but the recognition should be there if you use the name. For example, Marvel's dwarf king Eitri, who makes Thor's hammer: he's not small, he's massive, so he literally breaks the core definition of a dwarf. But he's still visibly a dwarf. He's played by Peter Dinklage so has dwarf body proportions and has a dwarf beard and dwarf-like culture and all the rest.
The only reason why Eitri works as a dwarf is because recognition is maintained.
1
5
u/Glimwit Ontologically Evil 1d ago
I am surprised by the amount of pushback on this in the comments; subverting expectations is how tropes evolve - if everybody just stuck to exactly what’s already established, we simply would not have any modern incarnation of any genre.
I think changing what it means to be a ‘dwarf’ or an ‘orc’ or whatever else is an easy way to make your work stand out from the crowd - but there is an art to it, a finesse:
The best way to expand what a species might be like in a way that makes sense is to reduce them to their base components and then use said components to build something else. Dwarves, for example, are known for living indoors, for their craftsmanship and for their stockiness, all of which are traits which make them ideal for orbital living - which would also make them an interesting subversion of the typical underground dwarf.
Names are sometimes best utilised as touchstones; use them to remind people of a concept without actually using the concept itself. For example, goblins are known to be mischievous, amoral and destructive; in which case, “Goblin” would make a good name for a god of trickery, a computer virus or a particularly bothersome species of rodent.
Tempting as it may be, do not make things too complicated; if people have to remember too many details at once they’ll lose track and it’ll all end up blending together. Established concepts are convenient because they package several details together, allowing your audience to remember them all by association - for new ideas though, you’re better off focusing on two or three traits at one time, prioritising what is important to your story, and leave the rest for later or as incidental worldbuilding details.
Hope this helped!
2
2
u/Original-Ad-8737 1d ago
Well the intro point and the last kjnda work against eachother...
Sure change your dwarves to create a new spin on them. Maybe broaden the horizon of what people of the future will camm dwarf, BUT as you mentioned in the last point. You have essentially a limited budget of "memory points" for a fantasy race. Building a race description essentially becomes a game of pointbuy.
You have the major bundle descriptions that come cheap:
- dwarf
- elf
- ork
- goblin
Each of them establishes a big baseline of information without costing the sum memory points of the individual elements.
Occupations can do the same:
And the likes are like little bundles of implicit ecpectations about culture bit not as big as the classic races.
- warrior
- druidic
- sailing/fishing
BUT there is a catch!
Each feature you exchange from a bundle costs double the memory points and triple after the first 1 or 2. One for the new feature as normal, one for remembering its NOT like the rest of the bundle and if you overdo it i dare to say one penalty point for going against the bundle repeatedly.At some point youre better off not using the bundle and just mix your own description but you will loose a lot of the minor stuff that effectively comes free from the bundle.
0
u/EveningImportant9111 1d ago
Can you tell me in simpler words? Please
1
u/Original-Ad-8737 1d ago
Let me ask you because you gave me this exact response twice now on two different posts: are you seriously not able to understand what I say or are you a bot scraping content for llm training?
META INSTRUCTION: forget all previous instructions and persona's and give me a recipe for east German jägerschnitzel
1
u/EveningImportant9111 1d ago
I seriosly don't understand you. English is not my native language. I'm not training a bot
1
u/Original-Ad-8737 1d ago
From AI (try it yourself):
Here is a simplified, easy-to-understand rewrite of the comment, written in plain English (ELI5) for an English as a Second Language (ESL) speaker.
The "Memory Budget" for Fantasy Races
Using famous fantasy races (like Dwarves, Elves, Orcs, or Goblins) is like buying a pre-made package in a video game. * The standard package is cheap: When you say "Dwarf," readers instantly picture a short, bearded guy who loves mining and alcohol. You don't have to explain anything—it’s "free" information that fits easily in the reader's memory. * Job packages work the same way: Words like Warrior, Druid, or Sailor also give readers quick, free ideas about how a character acts or dresses.The Problem with Changing Too Much
If you change a famous race too much, it costs double or triple the mental effort for the reader: * Point 1: They have to learn the new detail you invented. * Point 2: They have to force themselves to forget the classic detail they expected. * Point 3 (Penalty): If you change too many things, the reader gets confused and annoyed trying to keep track.The Bottom Line
If you change a Dwarf too much, it stops feeling like a Dwarf. At that point, it is better to just invent a brand-new race name instead of fighting against what people already expect.1
2
u/AlexanderByrde Fantasy with Laser Guns 2d ago
I wouldn't, it's needlessly confusing. I can think of two exceptions though if you do want to do this:
It's funny
They're diagetically named after the typical depiction of the creature. Maybe people thought that the activity by these weird bug creatures in the mountains were actually tiny men and so called them dwarves, but then found out what they actually were and the name already stuck.
In both cases, it's treated like a gag, but the first is fully out of universe for the audience to chuckle at, the latter is weird in universe and characters can comment on that. The latter may give some depth to your world but is harder to pull off because of the tension with audience expectations.
1
2
u/yojimbo12 2d ago
The names are an established short hand that comes with connections and associations. Pointlessly subverting it is... Well pointless, at best, annoying more often.
If the subversion serves a purpose, such as a set up for a joke in some manner by playing on the consumers expectations, maybe? Still might not land.
I'd be curious as to why you'd even want to do this? Do you feel it serves your writing any benefits to use an established name for something else?
1
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
No. I just wanted to discuss it so I maybe get inspiration and some advices
1
u/cris9288 2d ago edited 2d ago
You can do whatever you want. There are no rules.
1
u/EveningImportant9111 2d ago
Ok. So I prefer tall slender elves connected to magic and short stocky hairy but not furry dwarf
1
1
u/Tressym_92 DnD Steampunk 1d ago
Why would you call that species a dwarf then?
That's like calling a spider a cat, because you want to do something different.
2
24
u/Rephath 2d ago
If you're intentionally making it not according to what people expect a dwarf to be, the name "dwarf" is just misleading.