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

[Fenris-77]

New editions and reboots are mostly trash. IP vultures are mostly trash. The original works by the original creators are always the best.

This take is so hot it singed my screen.

 

[Belen]

I wish I could be positive like you, but I just can’t.

All of my experiences with lore are negative. If I invest in it, then it gets canceled before it gets anywhere, retconned because of some new writer whims, or rots into slop. If I don’t, then I get cyberbullied. It’s no a win scenario. What is wrong with ttrpgs? It’s like the hobby hates me. There’s no point in engaging.

So I’m pretty much just giving up on ttrpgs in favor of writing original fiction about what I wish ttrpgs would do for me. If they don’t owe me anything, then I don’t owe them zilch either. They betrayed me.

This is why I homebrew. I bounced off published settings in the 90s because I never felt like the players or I could get beyond the established fiction. I may use modules from settings but always incorporate it into my own setting.

In the same vein, I rarely set my campaigns in the same region, timeline, or world in my established setting. This means that players cannot even bring prior knowledge from the previous campaign into the next. I do this so that the "lore" never gets in the way of the game. My settings have established facts like deities, regions, etc, but I use two campaign worlds: Delos and Elisan. A campaign may feature on either and both feature routine apocalypses that often change things and set a new stage.

Even when I run Star Wars, I will set it in a time period that does coincide with existing canon. My favorite SW campaign was set 1000 years after ROTJ. The Jedi an Sith no longer existed. The galaxy was controlled by the Grey Order who used both Jedi and Sith teachings although the reality is that it was divided up into regions based on force-using Warlords and the entire galaxy was in decay. The players redicovered the teachings of the Jedi and started to make a difference. It was fun and I could use SW background lore without it getting in the way.

 

[TwoSix]

People are under no obligation to keep quiet about their criticisms in a public forum, to always be constructive, or to simply accept whatever IP holders shovel at them.

I mean, you're under no obligation to be constructive. But I generally view the times I'm not acting positively and constructively as moments of weakness; I forgive myself for them but I don't view those actions as being good.

There are million things in the world worth feeling anger, rage, and frustration about; the sanctity of a particular canon and construction of an IP franchise simply isn't one of them. If you're in a position where making posts about "I HATE WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO X" satiates your rage, you might want to rethink your positions.

 

[Fenris-77]

Constructive criticism should (ideally) lead to better results. So, while that might not prevent anyone from dropping bombs, it might suggest why dropping bombs is less than helpful, truthful as those bombs might be.

 

[Belen]

Constructive criticism should (ideally) lead to better results. So, while that might not prevent anyone from dropping bombs, it might suggest why dropping bombs is less than helpful, truthful as those bombs might be.

Polarization:

Constructive criticism is often seen in the same light as non-constructive criticism. The goes hand-in-hand with the societal move to acceptance rather than tolerance as an ideal. I feel that this has driven a large amount of moral absolutism that discourages active discussion. Few people will have discussions with opposing ideas or philosophies if they feel that the other side is morally corrupt. This results in the hardening of positions leading to active hate. This also means that really bad ideas fester within associative "tribes."

I really am not a fan of the "tribe" mentality.

 

[Fenris-77]

Polarization:

Constructive criticism is often seen in the same light as non-constructive criticism. The goes hand-in-hand with the societal move to acceptance rather than tolerance as an ideal. I feel that this has driven a large amount of moral absolutism that discourages active discussion. Few people will have discussions with opposing ideas or philosophies if they feel that the other side is morally corrupt. This results in the hardening of positions leading to active hate. This also means that really bad ideas fester within associative "tribes."

I really am not a fan of the "tribe" mentality.

Jesus. You took that term and ran an awfully long way away from what I meant by it. Let's try 'useful conversation' and see where that gets us.

In more detail, frankly, that fact that people can't pick out constructive criticism from the other sort really isn't my problem. This is a public forum, if people want to make a sideshow of their ignorance that's up to them.

 

[soviet]

I mean, you're under no obligation to be constructive. But I generally view the times I'm not acting positively and constructively as moments of weakness; I forgive myself for them but I don't view those actions as being good.

There are million things in the world worth feeling anger, rage, and frustration about; the sanctity of a particular canon and construction of an IP franchise simply isn't one of them. If you're in a position where making posts about "I HATE WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO X" satiates your rage, you might want to rethink your positions.

Well, to be clear, I don't particularly voice those criticisms. I certainly don't storm into positive conversations and say them.

I was simply objecting to the assertion that people must not voice those criticisms and must instead always be positive.

 

[TwoSix]

Well, to be clear, I don't particularly voice those criticisms. I certainly don't storm into positive conversations and say them.

I was simply objecting to the assertion that people must not voice those criticisms and must instead always be positive.

Oh sure, I certainly wouldn't frame it as a "must not". Just good advice for making life a little less painful.

 

[dragoner]

All criticism is bad on the internet, just leads to hate, and once there, no turning back. Good thing that there is an ignore button.

 

[Fenris-77]

All criticism is bad on the internet, just leads to hate, and once there, no turning back. Good thing that there is an ignore button.

Calm down darth Dragoner.