Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
xking

GW and the bad names

Recommended Posts

Maybe because it's also for us to fill? MHW and AoS have different purposes - first gives us story set in particular world and second gives us a world to tell our own stories. There will definitely be more creatures in the future and the RPG is coming next year...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, michu said:

That idea  was written by David Guymer before AoS 2.0. Remember, each realm has many suns (don't think about them as celestial bodies, they are more like transceivers: they receive light from Hysh and transmit it further to their own realms).

Ghur is actually really easy to understand -you could say that it's full of predatory energy. Phenomena that in our world take thousands of years (like erosion) are more viciuos here. It can be described like wind literally eating the rocks. Nothing lasts long in the Ghur- your city can be claimed by a big crevasse in the ground or by mountains that every day get closer to it. Or even giant worm with another city on it's back. Everything tries to eat everything here.

You're describing Ghur, but it doesn't mean it makes more sense that way.

An example: a world having two or three suns is a FRAKING BIG DEAL in terms of worldbuilding. New calendars, new ideas of what a day is, of how time goes on, seasons and years work differently. Nah, it's just a passing comment. No biggie.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cèsar de Quart said:

An example: a world having two or three suns is a FRAKING BIG DEAL in terms of worldbuilding. New calendars, new ideas of what a day is, of how time goes on, seasons and years work differently. Nah, it's just a passing comment. No biggie.

Tell that to Tatooine. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, michu said:

Maybe because it's also for us to fill? MHW and AoS have different purposes - first gives us story set in particular world and second gives us a world to tell our own stories. There will definitely be more creatures in the future and the RPG is coming next year...

Don't want to change your idea, but to me a setting with so many lore hole for players to fill is too absurd to be called a good setting

I love aos, I want it to be better, we shall wait and see

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we really need whole bestiary of Mortal Realms to enjoy them? And the textbook of astrophysics? I don't think so.

We know some fauna - maw-krushas, gore-gruntas, squigs, bigger squigs, even bigger squigs, absolutely colossal squigs...

Edited by michu
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just remind ourselves how much lore and military-intelligence grade maps WHFB had exactly 4 years after it's first release...

Oh...

But hey maybe that's a little unfair, I guess after 30 or so years with just one world to focus on they had really given us an incredible and in-depth history and background for every corner of the planet, detailing in excruciating detail everything from the size of wheat sheafs to the day to day lives of people living in every continent, right? 

Oh... right.

Well at least the names were really well thought out & meaningful...

 

1225918709_WFRP1sted_WorldMap_NoUlthuan.png.8518525c98d851e8b2d867a18d3fd650.png

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 2
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Cèsar de Quart said:

You're describing Ghur, but it doesn't mean it makes more sense that way.

An example: a world having two or three suns is a FRAKING BIG DEAL in terms of worldbuilding. New calendars, new ideas of what a day is, of how time goes on, seasons and years work differently. Nah, it's just a passing comment. No biggie.

The rotation of the realm of light and Shadow determine what a day is, however each realm does have different seasons. Kind of how Japan has the monsoon season and the U.S. doesn't.  The realm of heavens Scholars have most likely invented a way to date things. 

You might have to wait until the AoS RPG comes out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, michu said:

Do we really need whole bestiary of Mortal Realms to enjoy them? And the textbook of astrophysics? I don't think so.

We know some fauna - maw-krushas, gore-gruntas, squigs, bigger squigs, even bigger squigs, absolutely colossal squigs...

I would like a bestiary for the AoS RPG, I would like to see the non-war fauna and Flora of the realms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JPjr said:

Let's just remind ourselves how much lore and military-intelligence grade maps WHFB had exactly 4 years after it's first release...

Oh...

But hey maybe that's a little unfair, I guess after 30 or so years with just one world to focus on they had really given us an incredible and in-depth history and background for every corner of the planet, detailing in excruciating detail everything from the size of wheat sheafs to the day to day lives of people living in every continent, right? 

Oh... right.

Thing is because the Old World was based on classic fantasy and medieval periods and the real world (to a limited extent of themes) we could get a basic idea. We could make an educated guess at the crops they'd harvest; the size of villages and fortifications; how big and small castles were relative to each other etc... It was a world built on the practicalities of reality. 
So in some way GW didn't have to outline the crops because we know what they'd be.

 

 

When you create a Realm where the wind blows rust flakes; where the land is basically made of metal; where there's a massive boiling sea of silver that pours down a neverending waterfall. Then you get all those questions. Clearly corn and wheat might not grow so well if at all; when the wildlife itself has pistons for muscles you start to go "Well ok then what DO They eat and drink?" Because you've no basis to ground the world in, GW has to do that work for us to provide some base line of unity in how we can imagine them. Do the mortals of those realms rely exclusively on trade of food from other realms to survive; is it only the central areas which are so heavily metallalised(is that even a word) and the regions without are more normal thus meaning that foods can be produced on food rich rim nations and then traded into the interior for metals.

Then you ask how do they trade with each other  - esp when you've just made base metals as common as dirt and sand. 

 

GW created a super high fantasy world so the onus is on them to populate it and establish how it works. Fans are more demanding not juts because of that but because GW is a mature company who employs teams of people who write lore. That's their whole job within GW! From the few who are overall in charge down to the BL authors who come and go but who are creating the world before us. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but see I want my imagination story to line up with your imagination story to line up with the next Gotrek and Malaneth story ;) 

And that gets even more important when you want to make an RPG game for the AoS setting. You have to establish the ground rules; the common ground; the core of the setting so that everything else fits on top. It's like a language - you can have infinite variety of conversations on every topic as wild as you can imagine and as indepth and detailed or casual and loose as you want. But if you don't establish the base rules of the language then it hampers interaction with others considerably. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's honestly all just presonal preference. Some prefer tight world building and some prefer loose world building where they can do whatever they can think of. I prefer tight world building too, however AoS is still very much a WIP that's only growing and getting more detailed so I don't mind the way it is right now.

Also think of the scale. Every single realm is bigger than the whole world that was (old world, new world, asia stuff etc. together) and that one wasn't completely fleshed out either. Wanting a completely fleshed out setting when there are multiple realms bigger than what used to be when the game is only a few years out and has mostly a focus on armies is a bit silly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, I like tight worldbuilding but I also know that Mortal Realms' lore will be expanded in the future and what GW offers now is enough for my imagination to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2019 at 2:33 AM, smartazjb0y said:

How is reaping bone confusing? Reap means harvest, which means collect...that doesn't seem confusing to me at all. 

I just think "lazy" is a silly complaint about the names when you could easily say your suggestions are, well, lazy in their own way. I certainly think "Ossiarch Legions" is a lazy name, it's literally reusing a term heavily associated with another Death Battletome. That's certainly lazy. And to say that "reaper" is overused while advocating the use of "legion" which is, well, overused especially in the context of Death factions, is also kinda silly. Maybe you dislike how the names have some redundancy, but that's certainly not lazy. If anything, that means they're doing too much instead of being simpler. 

What's unique about them is the Bone-tithe. "Legion" basically means "they're a big army" which doesn't get at why they're unique at all. 

Also, your example about the Idoneth completely misses my point. It's not like I said "the only way a name can have connotation is if it's a compound word made up of 2 real words." I simply said "Bonereapers" has more connotation than "Legions," but sure, let's go with Sharkmaw Foechomper, because that's clearly what I was suggesting. 

Regardless, I'm guessing this discussion probably stops here since it's just arguing over subjective opinions

 

I disagree. Legions of Nagash is a soup tome anyhow and its name shouldn't take priority over one which is highly specific and built from the ground up. "Legion" evokes the idea of the Roman empire, and OBR are clearly based on ancient military cultures and are unique in GA: Death for being a highly organised military machine.

Calling things 'subjective' is a pointless get-out card, we may as well not have any discussions at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think GW has intentionally created a setting which is more mythic, with a huge scale, so that it’s always possible for almost anything to take place in it. No more « there couldn’t be lizardmen in sylvania in 2257 », no more « dwarfs didn’t have cannons during this battle »...

They designed this universe as a backdrop for people to write their own stories in. I think that’s the smart play, even though it will understanbly frustrate lore enthusiasts and people who want their settings to make complete sense. If you look at irl mythologies, a lot of things don’t make sense. After Icarus, why didn’t this awesome flight technology spread everywhere for instance? 

I’m curious to see what the AoS rpg will bring, but I’m betting that there will never be a complete objective knowledge of how everything works in the mortal realms. They’re a sandbox for people to write their own stories in, unlike a litterary universe conceived by a single author.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moldek said:

I think GW has intentionally created a setting which is more mythic, with a huge scale, so that it’s always possible for almost anything to take place in it. No more « there couldn’t be lizardmen in sylvania in 2257 », no more « dwarfs didn’t have cannons during this battle »...

They designed this universe as a backdrop for people to write their own stories in. I think that’s the smart play, even though it will understanbly frustrate lore enthusiasts and people who want their settings to make complete sense. If you look at irl mythologies, a lot of things don’t make sense. After Icarus, why didn’t this awesome flight technology spread everywhere for instance? 

I’m curious to see what the AoS rpg will bring, but I’m betting that there will never be a complete objective knowledge of how everything works in the mortal realms. They’re a sandbox for people to write their own stories in, unlike a litterary universe conceived by a single author.

I agree. It was always kind of a stretch to explain in narrative campaigns how my Tomb Kings ended up fighting some of the other factions since they mostly kept to their lands.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Panzer said:

I agree. It was always kind of a stretch to explain in narrative campaigns how my Tomb Kings ended up fighting some of the other factions since they mostly kept to their lands.

To acheive this they just need to make a narrative, say there are many 'realm gates' appeared in the old world as a result of end times warp fuckery

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cèsar de Quart said:

If you look only at the Army Book material, you don't get this idea. I've said several times that if I need to submerge my head in novellas and RPG stuff, then the world is not well presented, period.

And you're plain wrong. To the question "how do people live in the Mortal Realms?" you answer "just like in our world, but there's many fantasy and sci-fi elements"? Can't you see the contradiction? If there's a network of airship shipping lanes but the sky is dangerous and full of air krakens, if there are gates to other dimensions which can be mundanely traversed, if magic is such a worldly affair that mostly everyone can get a sniff of it, if wheat grows 3 meters tall, if the sun roams randomly in the sky in Ghur, if there are several moons messing with the tide, if the dead live alongside the living in Shyish, if the fracking GODS walk among us...

Things in the Mortal Realms are way too crazy for our rules and references to apply. Societies, systems of belief, models of government and economy... All needs to be rethought. 

This would be fine if I could just go ahead and rethink it, it's a fun exercise and I like it. But the lore keeps changing the rules or shifting around the meaning of what's been said before. When Phil Kelly explained day and night in the Mortal Realms, he said that Hyish and Ulgu orbiting each other meant day and night, very clearly identifying Hyish with the Sun. Now it seems each Realm has a sun of its own, or several, and Hyish is just the "metaphorical" daylight. Man, Phil, your first idea was fine! Why change it into such nonsense as "the sun in Ghur roams randomly in the sky", making life in Ghur totally uncomprehensible. If day length changes in a random way, I simply don't know how any living being survives. But of course, Ghur has mountains that move, so...

Of all the Realms we've visited so far, I think Ghur is the most absurd, the one that's more a one-note joke. Aqshy and Ghyran are easy to imagine or understand, Shyish and Chamon are a bit harder but not impossible with some effort, we know nothing about Hyish or Ulgu yet, Azyr is still a mystery but it has potential for nice space pirate adventure themes... but Ghur is pure nonsense.

Maybe the random movement of the sun just means that the orbital path of Ghur around the Ulgu-Hysh binary is really odd, involving planar epicycles through multiple spatial and non spatial dimensions. It could even be that Astromancers have ways of keeping trakc of it, but it seems random to tribes of hunter gatherers.

 

I'd love a bestiary of the Mortal Realms, particularly if they took inspiration from the classic Old World Bestiary. I think its safe to say that that was one of the best "monster books" ever conceived!

Edited by EccentricCircle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2019 at 1:05 PM, ANevskyUSA said:

You think so? It makes perfect sense in Greek. It means "place of death."

Thx for the info! ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Overread said:

Thing is because the Old World was based on classic fantasy and medieval periods and the real world (to a limited extent of themes) we could get a basic idea. We could make an educated guess at the crops they'd harvest; the size of villages and fortifications; how big and small castles were relative to each other etc... It was a world built on the practicalities of reality. 
So in some way GW didn't have to outline the crops because we know what they'd be.

 

 

When you create a Realm where the wind blows rust flakes; where the land is basically made of metal; where there's a massive boiling sea of silver that pours down a neverending waterfall. Then you get all those questions. Clearly corn and wheat might not grow so well if at all; when the wildlife itself has pistons for muscles you start to go "Well ok then what DO They eat and drink?" Because you've no basis to ground the world in, GW has to do that work for us to provide some base line of unity in how we can imagine them. Do the mortals of those realms rely exclusively on trade of food from other realms to survive; is it only the central areas which are so heavily metallalised(is that even a word) and the regions without are more normal thus meaning that foods can be produced on food rich rim nations and then traded into the interior for metals.

Then you ask how do they trade with each other  - esp when you've just made base metals as common as dirt and sand. 

 

GW created a super high fantasy world so the onus is on them to populate it and establish how it works. Fans are more demanding not juts because of that but because GW is a mature company who employs teams of people who write lore. That's their whole job within GW! From the few who are overall in charge down to the BL authors who come and go but who are creating the world before us. 

Exactly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2019 at 2:13 PM, xking said:

You think "shade + spire" is more unique then " Vandium" ?    I'm complaining that the names sound lazy and not unique.  "Minas tirith" sounds unique, Hallowheart does not.

Pretty bad example actually. It's just a different language because minas tirith actually is just a composed name too (Tower of Guard/vigilance/ watch). For non English people it all doesn't sound that mundane... And the average sindarin elf probably rolled their eye because apes (humans) used their language to give a city such a basic name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Overread said:

Yeah but see I want my imagination story to line up with your imagination story to line up with the next Gotrek and Malaneth story ;) 

And that gets even more important when you want to make an RPG game for the AoS setting. You have to establish the ground rules; the common ground; the core of the setting so that everything else fits on top. It's like a language - you can have infinite variety of conversations on every topic as wild as you can imagine and as indepth and detailed or casual and loose as you want. But if you don't establish the base rules of the language then it hampers interaction with others considerably. 

I disagree. In my opinion, thats 40Ks big strenght. Everyone has a different interpretation of the 40K universe, and both are correct. "Everything is canon, nothing is true" is a good tag line. Sure, there are some very rough guidelines (like Sigmar/the Emperor sits on his throne on Terra/azyrheim) but there is also enough space to get creative. 

"The Imperium of Man is a totalitarian hellhole and every world looks like a gothic cathedral" is equally valid as "My world is a peacefull agri-world that is ruled by a democraticly elected governor".  Both versions are very different from another but both can exists simultaneously. 

I have always come up with my own lore for my tabletop factions. My own Tau sept, my own High Elves kingdom, my own Kharadron Skyport. I love that AoS allows players to go wild and I would be very unhappy with a too restrictive setting. 

To me, the video 1 or 2 years ago where Phil Kelly explained the basic logic of the mortal realms is enough. Everything they add now are just examples of how things could be or cool stories they want to tell. 

Edited by Gecktron
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is 40K actually has a lot of details filled in, you just don't realise it. We know what the Imperium eats; what the various social structures of it are like; what their hopes and dreams are (if they are allowed any. Sure there are still big mysteries; but we've got a good grasp on its foundations. We even have multiple maps showing key planetary bodies and key locations. We know that Cadia falling is a freaking huge event in the setting.

Meanwhile in AoS we don't have as much information. WE don't really know where the strongholds all are in relation to each other; heck we aren't even sure quite how the realms and celestial bodies interact with each other. We don't even have a basic concept of food and transportation on the ground nor what kinds of infrastructure there is (it seems to shift between heavily mechanised steam-punk all the way to your standard Medieval affair).

 

Again its not that we can't use our imaginations; its about having some common grounds to use the same basic building blocks to build up from. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gecktron said:

Id disagree. In my opinion, thats 40Ks big strenght. Everyone has a different interpretation of the 40K universe, and both are correct. "Everything is canon, nothing is true" is a good tag line. Sure, there are some very rough guidelines (like Sigmar/the Emperor sits on his throne on Terra/azyrheim) but there is also enough space to get creative. 

"The Imperium of Man is a totalitarian hellhole and every world looks like a gothic cathedral" is equally valid as "My world is a peacefull agri-world that is ruled by a democraticly elected governor".  Both versions are very different from another but both can exists simultaneously. 

I have always come up with my own lore for my tabletop factions. My own Tau sept, my own High Elves kingdom, my own Kharadron Skyport. I love that AoS allows players to go wild and I would be very unhappy with a too restrictive setting. 

To me, the video 1 or 2 years ago where Phil Kelly explained the basic logic of the mortal realms is enough for me. Everything they add now are just examples of how things could be or cool stories they want to tell. 

I completely agree with you. Even in the old world I’ve never been really invested in specific character’s stories, or the nuances of politics. It’s always been the background illustrations, the far off regions, the text snippets about a moment in the life of some unknown captain...

To me the universe is a backdrop. Sure it has to make some kind of sense, and have compelling settings and peoples, but I’ll always make up my own corner anyways. I’m not too interested in the books, they always felt sub-par compared to a lot of « regular » novels.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Overread said:

Thing is 40K actually has a lot of details filled in, you just don't realise it. We know what the Imperium eats; what the various social structures of it are like; what their hopes and dreams are (if they are allowed any. Sure there are still big mysteries; but we've got a good grasp on its foundations. We even have multiple maps showing key planetary bodies and key locations. We know that Cadia falling is a freaking huge event in the setting.

No, we know what some places are like. That was my point. That universe is so big that its impossible to make definitiv statements. We know that some agri planets are hellholes that press every last grain out of the ravaged earth while others are peaceful backwater planets with herds of grox. And another world does it in another way. Every world is unique and GW just gives examples how it can be. 

Again, we have maps of some place. And in most cases "maps" mean we know where they are in the galaxy. We have no idea how Cadia looks, or Fenris, or Mordia. The only real maps I can think about are Armageddon and Vigilus. The 40K galaxy map is on the same level as the AoS realm maps. The only difference is that some names on the galaxy map have been mentionend a few more times. 

Edited by Gecktron
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...