What makes setting lore "actually matter" to the players?

[GobHag]

Okay but like...how on earth does player character vibe desire not trump someone elses desire for fantasy hegemony?

I genuinely dont understand the mindset where person A wants a given vharacter vibe and person B doesnt love that vibe and somehow person B's preference isnt given less preferance compared to person A.

It seems unavoidably and objectively obvious to me that person A's character concept is more important than person B's dislike of furries.

It's because Person B is implicitly the GM, which has more power than A

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's because Person B is implicitly the GM, which has more power than A

That is nonsensical. Why would that give person B's largely irrelevant preference more weight? And why is person B implicitly the DM in the first place?

How is that a answer to my question at all?

 

[GobHag]

That or anything like would be a terrible thing for rules to say, and I would not only happily ignore said rules, I likely would never play such a game.

That is basically the compromise between me and you, if the lore says that Tabaxi's act like this(inhuman) but so many players play them like that(human) even with rules that support or even force to act like this(inhuman) then one of the ways to reconcile is to make the lore and rules to act like that(human)