Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/26550
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

## Background

So I see a lot of questions on the site [like this](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/26482/how-to-introduce-alien-flora-fauna-without-turning-the-fiction-into-a-biology-bo). They're all about deeply explaining worldbuilding and stuff, doing all of that explaining type of thing. Normally, I just skip that. For example:

> My 'magic' system works by calling upon the power of the ancient tales and old gods.

That's literally all I've said about it. I didn't really want to waste words on going in-depth because there isn't that much to it.

> Only details necessary to the story are mentioned.

Now I know this one is going to be particularly frowned upon, but I'm really big on not confusing the reader. I **only** mention things about the world when they have to be. Of course I have a big, sprawling worldbuilded idea in my head, but I don't want all of that to spill onto the page.

It seems different with a lot of people. Many questions asked on this site are about really in-depth, intense worldbuilding. It all seems so unnecessary to me. For [this question](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/26509/the-flux-capacitor-its-what-makes-time-travel-possible-when-to-keep-world-b) I think I'd just have the thing work and mainly show the reader how it worked through dialogue (if I really had to).

## Question

A few questions which tie into each other:

> Is it necessary to include tons of worldbuilding details?
> 
> Will a reader just 'accept' that something works, or require an explanation?

For example, my magic system is a great example of that. There is no explanation for why you can draw upon the power of the ancients **it just happens.**

Original score: 9