Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Nyte]

Besides having them for various resources (water, oil, gems, etc...), I use my more hostile planets as proving grounds for testing military units. If they can function in continent sized sandstorms, extreme temperatures, and other hostile environments, then they'll function pretty much anywhere.

[Kassaran]

Alright guys, so I'm here to ask, multi-dimensional travel as an alternative for FTL, is it doable? I have a theory on how it might occur due to a form of traversing through multiple realities, but the main reason I ask is because of an IC explanation I came up with a long time ago to explain the reason why my current MT/PMT nation has moved through various regions and had an effect in other worlds canonically while still keeping a degree of realism to it all.

[SquareDisc City]

So what kind of economies can ice planets, desert planets, volcanic planets, and hive planets have? Sans manufacturing and fake elements.

Depends how things are going. If you're looking at settlement of the planet, then there's going to be most of the economic activity you'd associate with any settlement - no matter where a town is it's gonna need food, construction, transport, banking, public services, shops, etc. Depending on the planet it might be closed-environment-dome stuff, or it might be a case of settling in the warm equator of an ice world or the calmest parts of a volcanic hell, that kind of thing.

If there's no permanent settlement, for whatever reason, then I think any economic activity will be limited. You're probably looking at military exercises, scientific study, wilderness tourism, that's about it. Maybe geological exploration with a view to possible mining, but I think once the mining actually starts up it would attract a permanent population. Though it's plausible the settlement could be in orbital stations instead, if flying between orbit and surface is cheap enough.

[Excidium Planetis]

So what kind of economies can ice planets, desert planets, volcanic planets, and hive planets have? Sans manufacturing and fake elements.

Ice planets are an excellent source of... Ice. Water is actually quite valuable in space, as hydrogen and oxygen are not only both necessary for Earth-like lifeforms, but also make pretty good rocket fuel. Hydrogen is also useful in nuclear fusion, a technology I assume most FT nations possess.

On the whole, Ice mining is a very important part of my own nation's economy, and could prove quite valuable on an entire planet covered in it.

[Kiruri]

So what kind of economies can ice planets, desert planets, volcanic planets, and hive planets have? Sans manufacturing and fake elements.

A desert and volcanic can be natural energy planets(sure, you might have power sources superior to solar and geothermal but surely with FT technology, these methods will be efficient enough to serve as decent sources of passive energy collection). Deserts also make good junk yards(rise ye garabage men of the future). Ice planets could make good research bases, providing a naturally cold environment to conduct various researches that might require it(as well as serving as natural coolant for any heat generated).

Not sure I understand hive planet(Im assuming a primarily residential planet with massive populations and urban sprawl?)

So basically it'll be mostly service-based if it isn't for energy production...

Couldn't you mine those planets for some sort of resource as well?

[Tierra Prime]

So what kind of economies can ice planets, desert planets, volcanic planets, and hive planets have? Sans manufacturing and fake elements.

You could always terraform them. I came to the conclusion that terraformers (Which in sci-fi are never really explained, being more akin to magic than technology) are a combination of a weather machine, an atmospheric generator, and a molecular forge. The surface of the planet is removed using tractor beams, broken down, and then rebuilt rebuilt according to a VR map the terraformer's computer had randomly generated (So that it will look unique, otherwise each planet would look more or less the same). Once the new surface is placed onto the planet, the atmosphere is stripped away and a new atmosphere is generated using the molecular forge. Finally, weather patterns conducive to human settlement and the growth of plant life (Rain and wind) are established. After all of this, the world should now be ready for you to seed it with plant and animal life. The terraformer could do that too I suppose, though it might be better if you brought in your colony ships at that stage.

[Allanea]

Anything, really?

A plant will have any manner of natural resources (the entire Mendeleev table, really), and the only thing you couldn't do is agriculture (which is a tiny percentage of even an MT economy, agriculture contributes only 3% of global GDP IRL).

[Kyrusia]

Alright guys, so I'm here to ask, multi-dimensional travel as an alternative for FTL, is it doable? I have a theory on how it might occur due to a form of traversing through multiple realities, but the main reason I ask is because of an IC explanation I came up with a long time ago to explain the reason why my current MT/PMT nation has moved through various regions and had an effect in other worlds canonically while still keeping a degree of realism to it all.

"Dimension" is merely the minimum number of coordinates required to define any given point in a given system. We live in, classically, a 3(+1)-dimensional volume (excluding the alternative dimensions certain candidates for the Unified Field Theory postulate): three spacial dimensions (and one temporal dimension). In science-fiction, unfortunately, this term has been co-opted to mean an alternate plane of existence (or reality, see below) which can lead to confusion when talking about actual dimensions (tensors et al), alternative manifold volumes, alternate planes of existence, etc.

The term you are looking for is an "alternative volume" (or worldvolume), and these are fairly standard fair in FT. See: Subspace, hyperspace, n-space, s-space, etc. This is not necessarily the same as entering alternate or parallel realities, which is decidedly rare in FT (generally speaking), though I've seen it done. I'd like to point you toward a previous segment of this thread (and its surrounding commentary) insofar as designing your method of FTL is concerned:

To a degree (much to my own chagrin at times), issues involving superluminal mechanics - namely Faster-than-Light transit, communication, detection, navigation, etc. - is one of the points in FT where handwaving is necessary. FTL has become, more or less, rather essential if for no other reason than plot often necessitates it; plot also, however, often determines its actual speed. In short: your FTL, in any given thread, will work (or not work) exactly how plot dictates. Aka: it will function and/or malfunction in whatever fashion benefits the story most.

This aside, there are, arguably, four "primary" things to keep in mind when deciding for yourself how your FTL transportation and communication mechanics work:

• Aesthetic
• Range
• Rate
• Travel time

Working from what I feel is the least important aspect up, travel time can be pretty much... whatever you feel works, given your relative "degree of FT-ness" and to what degree of complexity you desire. The passage of time can, for example, vary based upon the perspective in which a given object is viewed; without going too "SCIENCE", the amount of time passed between one ship departing one point and arriving at another point can vary based upon viewing it from the perspective of the individuals aboard that vessel, and individuals watching that vessel transit. An instant to an external observer can be a minute to the traveler, for example. You aren't required to have this be true for your given FTL; an instant for a traveler can be an instant for an observer, or three days can be the same for both. You can have it be whatever fits for your given rules and mechanics, but, again, this relates mostly to aesthetic (which I will cover last) and, as mentioned: plot. More often than not, the needs of the thread and your ship needing to be somewhere (or not somewhere) at a given time (or before or after that time) for a given story will often fit conveniently within whatever "travel time" you decide is pertinent.

Next, we come to one of what I call the "Two Points of Weakness". But first, rate is, simply, "How fast can my FTL engage and do its job in a given period of time? And what sort of mechanics go into this function?" In short: does your FTL drive need time to "charge" or "spool-up"? How long after one jump does the drive need to "cool" or "re-charge"? Does my drive actually need to recharge, or is the limit of my rate of jumps determined by some other factor - such as navigation calculation time or some inherent weakness to my handwaved mechanic that lets me perform FTL? I mention "weakness" because, to me, rate (and range) are some of the easiest points to employ some degree of natural "weakness" into FTL to give it a feasible functionality without allowing a player to powergame and jump from Point A to B to Z without issues and, effectively, out-position other players. An FTL drive without some bugs is a very short jump (Hehe. Puns.) to "godmoding", "power-gaming", and the employ of an "I Win Button". Keep this in mind.

As with rate, range is another "point of weakness". Chiefly, if your rate isn't much of an issue and you can do jumps in quick succession, I feel you should seriously consider how "far" those jumps actually go. If you haven't guessed, range is simply the distance a ship can transit in a given jump. Three light-years? Thirty? Three hundred? Pinning down a range is a major part of designing your transit and your communication insofar as FTL concerns. It is a fairly standard trope in FT that if a vessel can make a rapid sequence of FTL jumps, those jumps are fairly short; but if a vessel can only make one jump in a relative period of time, the range can be increased.

Play with these things - rate and range especially - and get feedback from other players you play-with or intend to roleplay with. More often than not, in this case, the wisdom of the mass can go a long way in helping you determine what is or is not "acceptable". For example, it is generally considered poor form to traverse the entire breadth of the Galaxy instantaneously, and that intergalactic travel is fairly limited - if it exists at all - to a very select group of individuals whom the community trusts and respects to not abuse such, given their experience and time spent being collaborators and creators (as well as helpers) in the community.

Lastly, but most importantly: aesthetic. Above rate, range, and travel time - at least to me - aesthetic matters more. This covers not just how the FTL jump looks to an observer and to a traveler, respectively, but how you describe it working. Does it make people sick or uneasy? Is the technology behind superluminal transit and communication cumbersome and not really understood and, relatively speaking, "backward" compared to others? Is it inherently dangerous and, if so, how dangerous? Does a simple miscalculation in navigation end-up with you being lost in space, or obliterated like a bug across the cosmic windshield? Can your FTL jump be performed anywhere and to anywhere, or do you need to jump between gravity wells (such as near stars) or near some pre-built infrastructure (such as beacons)? Does your FTL require gates? Etc.

As you can see, the questions and avenues one can follow in regards to the aesthetics of your given FTL transit and communication are, effectively, endless, and that's why it's the most important aspect to consider: one can pin down the time it takes for a drive to recharge or the range one ship can go, but one is constantly building upon the aesthetics of their given nation or entity, and thus the aesthetics for their technology constantly grows more and more complex.

Something to keep in mind when facing these questions is to consider that whether you are being consistent with your FTL tech; you should avoid changing the fundamental rules of "How this works" from one thread to another. Keep things fairly similar and try and roleplay logically and reasonably how advancements in your technology might be undertaken - this includes in designing it originally. Consider the history of your star-state and how that may have shaped your FTL technology. Also, as initially mentioned: FTL - be it in transportation, communication, sensors, etc. - is often dictated by plot. But not just by plot: by collaboration and compromise with other players. If you want your ships to be undetectable while they are in-transit, it only makes sense that said ship shouldn't be able to detect anything itself while it is transiting. The proverbial, "Nothing in? Nothing out".

Really, though, its a matter of reaching a balance between how you want your technology to be described and seen, how it works given the internal rules you have given it, and avoiding problems such as using your given technology - be it related to FTL or any other tidbit of tech, characters, culture, etc. - as an "I Win Button" or power-playing.

Remember: be creative, collaborate with others, be willing to compromise, and be consistent.

[Northwest Slobovia]

So what kind of economies can ice planets, desert planets, volcanic planets, and hive planets have? Sans manufacturing and fake elements.

I tend to agree with:

Anything, really?

For example, I have a "desert planet" -- single biome planets strike as lazy worldbuilding, but whatever -- that during its long history has been variously known as a:

• Struggling first outpost of a nation new to FT
• Rapidly growing mining colony
• Major, self-sufficient industrial world
• Vast cosmopolitan urban conglomerate, like Trantor or Coruscant, that was the cultural center of a major FT civilization
• Fading rust-belt economy propped up by a large military base in-system
• Post-war ruin
• "Feral" world, with a small transient population

Sadly, my notes for it aren't yet in its factbook, but I might have a chance to get to it this vacation. And I've got a couple of different "ice worlds", and other such silly things. A little creativity pays large dividends.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

The Russian Empire employs an alternate dimension for its FTL needs. The Etherway is a vast network of mostly unexplored tunnels similar to the good ol' Webway we're all familiar with, complete with various betentacled horrors lurking in it which will happily attempt to eat your ship, which is why it's a good idea to keep all your limbs inside the craft after transit. As a bonus, the Etherway's equivalent of light travels at about 600km/h and exists as something like a liquid, so it's generally advisable to pull the blinds to avoid accidentally becoming your own father or causing the ship to undergo a sudden quantum state transition into a fine mist of atomic particles.

It has, however, been found to make a quite fantastic weapon and fuel source as it tends to react to regular photons in a fashion akin to a matter-antimatter reaction.

[Taledonia]

Mine is sort of like the Warp. You go into thought-space and reappear at your destination. All crew need to be put into dreamless sleep, however, else it will become reality within this outer realm. This is not always a good thing.

[Arkotania]

I use what I call "Telejumps". Wormhole created at destination and origin. At origin, ship begins to rapidly dematerialize into an energy beam that goes through wormhole. The crew only experiences a tingling sensation and are only aware that their location changed. At the origin observers will just see the ship suddenly fade into darkness, and at the destination an observer will not notice the ship fade in. It will just appear.(though upon entering the wormhole, the destination one release a quick burst of radiation which will alert most FT nations who have scanning activated)

Time it takes depends on the number and density of atoms being transported, the complexity of said atoms(a human will take a little longer than a block of pure lead), distance, and QPU speed(responsible for plotting and encoding).

There are also experimental plans to create a gatestation at fixed locations that can Telejump multiple ships more effectively. Works on a small scale but it requires massive amounts of QPU and its been more effective to have the gatestation remotely cooperate with shipboard computers(though its still faster, it isnt the degree of efficiency that has been planned)

[Tierra Prime]

Speaking of FTL travel, I've been thinking of introducing warp gates into my canon. They'd allow for instantaneous travel to and from specific star systems using an artificial wormhole. The problem is that I don't want this technology to work on my star ships. I like introducing "hyper wakes" to increase the time my ships spend in hyperspace, because I don't like the idea of ships being able to just zip into star systems. I was thinking that these "wormhole drives" wouldn't function either because my ships can't generate enough power to sustain an artificial wormhole, or that an artificial wormhole can only be generated between two predefined points (X can only connect to Y).

What do you gentlefolk think?

[SquareDisc City]

The UPT's warp drives I assume to be an Alcubierre-ish type, though I've never really specified. These permit "continuous" navigation at FTL speeds, with the ability to choose and change your destination while travelling, along with the possibility of being intercepted at FTL; I note that Kyrusia's discussion seems entirely focussed on "jump drives" for which those things generally won't be the case.

As far as constraints go, the big one I intend on working on is that both linear velocity and total energy are conserved. These constrain the velocity and position a ship can drop out of warp at, at the cost of destroying the ship if it's done wrong. As far as RPing goes I'll admit It's going to be somewhat situational and depend on astronomical details that aren't always given, but some general principles should emerge.

Speed-wise, it's in the speed-of-plot camp somewhat, explained away IC as the warp drives being finicky with a variable top speed. That said a warp trip within a star system is pretty much instant, and coming over from a nearby system usually quick. Crossing the galaxy is generally considered fairly routine - it's a long trip that you aren't going to make without a good reason, but it's not like you'd need weeks just to get an expedition ready. I know that may seem a bit easy, but I feel the alternative would be making myself unable to join an RP just because of the location.

[Northwest Slobovia]

As far as constraints go, the big one I intend on working on is that both linear velocity and total energy are conserved. These constrain the velocity and position a ship can drop out of warp at, at the cost of destroying the ship if it's done wrong. As far as RPing goes I'll admit It's going to be somewhat situational and depend on astronomical details that aren't always given, but some general principles should emerge.

I wonder if it's worth saying that your ships need to do IC "work" at one end of the journey or the other. That is, either they spend time carefully maneuvering in the starting solar system, or they end up in a random place in the destination system moving in a random direction... and then need to maneuver to get to where they're going.

As far as the FTL engines I (the Kalban League) use: they're hyperdrives. Kalban ships travel and communicate through a number of named hyperspaces, each with different properties. They all have the same properties: they're out of touch with our universe during travel, so they can't change course nor detect anything in the real world. Only very large ships have FTL comms that can send and recieve while in hyperspace, and even then, bandwidth is severely limited (usually nor more than hundreds of bits per second).

[The Ben Boys]

A desert and volcanic can be natural energy planets (sure, you might have power sources superior to solar and geothermal but surely with FT technology, these methods will be efficient enough to serve as decent sources of passive energy collection). Deserts also make good junk yards(rise ye garabage men of the future).

Hmmm, energy. Well I do have machines that can draw energy from a planet's core to power my campaigns, so that doesn't seem like much more of a leap. I'll look into using lava/minerals in lava for making energy cells.

Besides having them for various resources (water, oil, gems, etc...), I use my more hostile planets as proving grounds for testing military units. If they can function in continent sized sandstorms, extreme temperatures, and other hostile environments, then they'll function pretty much anywhere.

That's a good idea. Considering most economies aren't based on a single industry, having military bases to feed off of also helps.

Though it's plausible the settlement could be in orbital stations instead, if flying between orbit and surface is cheap enough.

Arcologies and orbital habitats would be interesting, especially for a "fortress world" of sorts. What is someone has a planet of massive strategic value (like some handwaved stuff to do with FTL positioning) but it's incredibly harsh terrain, so they make arcology-fortresses across the planet, fortifying it both artificially and naturally.

Filing that under "awesome ideas for fluff".

Ice planets are an excellent source of... Ice. Water is actually quite valuable in space, as hydrogen and oxygen are not only both necessary for Earth-like lifeforms, but also make pretty good rocket fuel. Hydrogen is also useful in nuclear fusion, a technology I assume most FT nations possess.

On the whole, Ice mining is a very important part of my own nation's economy, and could prove quite valuable on an entire planet covered in it.

Deuterium and hydrogen harvesting is a good one, that's something I could put on most any planet with water and another industry for their economies.

You could always terraform them. I came to the conclusion that terraformers (Which in sci-fi are never really explained, being more akin to magic than technology) are a combination of a weather machine, an atmospheric generator, and a molecular forge. The surface of the planet is removed using tractor beams, broken down, and then rebuilt rebuilt according to a VR map the terraformer's computer had randomly generated (So that it will look unique, otherwise each planet would look more or less the same). Once the new surface is placed onto the planet, the atmosphere is stripped away and a new atmosphere is generated using the molecular forge. Finally, weather patterns conducive to human settlement and the growth of plant life (Rain and wind) are established. After all of this, the world should now be ready for you to seed it with plant and animal life. The terraformer could do that too I suppose, though it might be better if you brought in your colony ships at that stage.

The thing is it isn't as sexy in my opinion. I'm not a huge Star Wars fan but I love some of the harsh planets they have as backdrops (such as Tatooine or Coruscant).

For example, I have a "desert planet" -- single biome planets strike as lazy worldbuilding, but whatever -- that during its long history has been variously known as a:

• Struggling first outpost of a nation new to FT
• Rapidly growing mining colony
• Major, self-sufficient industrial world
• Vast cosmopolitan urban conglomerate, like Trantor or Coruscant, that was the cultural center of a major FT civilization
• Fading rust-belt economy propped up by a large military base in-system
• Post-war ruin
• "Feral" world, with a small transient population

Sadly, my notes for it aren't yet in its factbook, but I might have a chance to get to it this vacation. And I've got a couple of different "ice worlds", and other such silly things. A little creativity pays large dividends.

"Lazy worldbuilding"? In many cases, yes, but not necessarily, but that's why I chose the categories very carefully. A "forest planet" IMHO is lazy world building, since a forest needs a specific ecology that isn't present across even half of a planet in many cases (such as plains or jungles). However if a planet is in it's formative stages then volcanic activity as a central biome is perfectly valid. Even a desert-type planet has multiple types of deserts, just look at Mars. Same goes with ice planets, though these are just markedly colder (and with arctic deserts, really). And since a hive planet is just one big city, it's also entirely plausible, no matter what the original make up of the planet was.

Anyways, I like the chronology of this world you've used, it's interesting to see just one planet's history fold out like that.

[SquareDisc City]

Regarding single-biome planets, unless it happens to be a very close match to your species' homeworld, then by your species' standards it's very likely to be a "single-biome planet". But as Mars demonstrates, a "single biome" world can be as dynamic and varied as anywhere.

[Arkotania]

Regarding single-biome planets, unless it happens to be a very close match to your species' homeworld, then by your species' standards it's very likely to be a "single-biome planet". But as Mars demonstrates, a "single biome" world can be as dynamic and varied as anywhere.

You could also have said single-biome planet be as it is due to non-natural occurences. Say...total destruction of the ecosystem by an ancient space civilization.

[Delta Eridanus]

I have an issue, with FTL travel specifically.

Is there any good descriptions of slipspace travel other than a flash of light?

I swear that my spacefaring civilization should have been blinded by now...

[Arkotania]

I have an issue, with FTL travel specifically.

Is there any good descriptions of slipspace travel other than a flash of light?

I swear that my spacefaring civilization should have been blinded by now...

Experience a color shift instead of flash of light? Blue in/Red out?

[Northwest Slobovia]

Regarding single-biome planets, unless it happens to be a very close match to your species' homeworld, then by your species' standards it's very likely to be a "single-biome planet". But as Mars demonstrates, a "single biome" world can be as dynamic and varied as anywhere.

Right: that's what I'm getting at... and a bit more.

Consider Death Valley, a real desert. Absolutely hellish... in most places. But there are oases in and near it, and a saline spring and river cleverly called "Salt Creek". It even has fish! The western sides of the mountains around Death Valley get a little rain, and they're pretty bare, but they do have some scrubby plants living on them.

So, while the whole place is clearly a desert, there are places where people can live, if with difficulty. These pocket biomes are what drives detailed worldbuilding, IMO. People frequently live close to water in deserts; I've stayed in hotels in Death Valley watered by springs. People also tend to live where natural resources are: Death Valley used to have gold and borax mines, and there are still ruins of those in the modern national park, along with what's left of the miners' camps.

I scaled those sorts of features up to planetary scale. The desert world I mentioned has a few hypersaline seas, but mostly it's dry, bare rock. So, the original settlements were near the largest sea, because the colonists could capture the little bit of rainfall there was and build desalination plants to get more fresh water. Mining outposts tended to have a mix of water from very deep wells and water brought in by truck or rail from the big city. There are a few places on the planet where tall mountains have a "wet" side, and there happened to be valuable minerals in some of those mountains too, so mining towns (and later industrial cities) grew there. So, population followed the water and the wealth.

This gave me a map with one major urban area on the big sea and lots of other settlements scattered around the planet. And also plenty of empty places where I could put ghost towns, abandoned military bases, and (if I'd wanted) even lost alien artifacts without having to explain why nobody explored them thoroughly. I find this more satisfying than "eh, desert world". But to each their own.

Same deal with the "ice worlds" I mentioned. One has no land surface; it's a frozen water world. There's a little open sea near the equator that supports a thriving fishery. There's also sea-floor mining in the few places it pays.

The other is a terrestrial planet in a deep Ice Age. It's got an extreme axial tilt (~60°) and long year (~4 Earth years) so there's a slowly moving tundra belt around the planet at any given time. Forget farming; the locals hunt woolly space-mammoths and the like. Permanent settlements exist only around major geothermal areas, which tend to have lots of earthquakes and the odd volcanic eruption. Everywhere else, the people are high-tech nomads, moving with the seasons.

Why live there? Theres a few big mineral deposits, but the extreme enviroment led to the evolution of unusual plants and animals, and they're the basis for the planet's gourmet food, spice, and semi-synthetic medicine industries.

Obviously, there's no reason to go into this sort of worldbuilding depth for a large FT nation, but I like to do it when I can.

[Arkotania]

What about ultra-urbanized city planets that could only really ever exist in FT?

Would they realistically have a biome at all?

[Lubyak]

What about ultra-urbanized city planets that could only really ever exist in FT?

Would they realistically have a biome at all?

Even those are going to have different districts and what not, potentially based on what the original geography was like. There will be hyper-dense areas of towering sky-scrapers, sprawling industrial areas, and--no doubt--lots of some kind of less dense quasi-suburb based areas. There may even be relatively sparse areas where the ultra-rich or what not maintain some part of the planets original geography for their own benefit, or even 'parks' that fulfill a similar function for a more general population.

I really quite like his ideas for how to develop single biome worlds. If you don't mind Slobovia, I might nick that design practice from you.

[Northwest Slobovia]

What about ultra-urbanized city planets that could only really ever exist in FT?

Would they realistically have a biome at all?

Well, you'll probably want some sort of open green-space -- parks, gardens, or nature preserves -- to provide oxygen for people to breathe.

I'd say that unless the civilization that's building these urban planets has very advanced technology and lots of money, there's probably some sort of waste lands, such as open ocean or rugged mountains, that supports some sort of "native" life. "Native" in quotes because it may be feral domesticated plants and animals living in these areas. ("Yeah, the first settlers brought in Terran swordfish for food and sport, and they've evolved over the past 30,000 years, so now we have things that make Terran sharks look tame. Stupid, unthinking original colonists!")

[Northwest Slobovia]

Even those are going to have different districts and what not, potentially based on what the original geography was like. There will be hyper-dense areas of towering sky-scrapers, sprawling industrial areas, and--no doubt--lots of some kind of less dense quasi-suburb based areas. There may even be relatively sparse areas where the ultra-rich or what not maintain some part of the planets original geography for their own benefit, or even 'parks' that fulfill a similar function for a more general population.

I really quite like his ideas for how to develop single biome worlds. If you don't mind Slobovia, I might nick that design practice from you.

A mintie is stealing my worldbuilding? Please!