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

I try to keep in mind (with lore), how ridulously "foggy" our societal recollection is regarding events 1000+ years ago. Particularly if you are traveling to less civilized regions (or fallen civs)... So, I have my DM EXACT events of the past in mind, vs what tidbits of this past is "common knowledge" -hint not much is :) . Then you have perspective history vs. "Eye in the sky" history. Eye in the sky is going to be the classic DM mistake of giving too much lore perspective from your EXACT history framework.

So, throwing perspective based lore around and making it matter has been a fun process.

I've used Abyssal language and a demon's true name to summon a demon Smith to make a badass cursed weapon... the characters would have been in terrible shape if they didn't read a previous journal that emphasized the casting of a protective circle before conferring with a demon

Stonetop tends to present “everybody knows / some might know / very few if anybody knows” levels of world details for things that recede into the deep past or esoteric topics. I find that’s a nice way to bin things, like of course everybody knows there’s demons that lurk in dark water but few know who they’re an agent of and almost nobody knows what a demon truly is.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Stonetop tends to present “everybody knows / some might know / very few if anybody knows” levels of world details for things that recede into the deep past or esoteric topics. I find that’s a nice way to bin things, like of course everybody knows there’s demons that lurk in dark water but few know who they’re an agent of and almost nobody knows what a demon truly is.
This is good. In our setting alot of it falls under "very few knows" category, it has been some adjustment by my players to not metaknowledge things that tennured fantasy RPers might assume is common knowledge. Our party Wiz, is just starting to get good at some investigate/arcana to make a higher level of lore "matter" in combat... mattering in combat usually involves writing some invulnerabilities and some non-traditional vulnerabilities into challenges. Also, our Warlock has used some intimidation and masquerading to sway cultists to stop ritualistically aiding a boss into having a bunch of lair actions
 


I thought I'd post some examples of "lore" mattering to the players.

Here are two, both from high level 4e D&D play:
the PCs had escaped into the Mausoleum of the Raven Queen, which had been warded with a Hallowed Temple ritual. Because she is a lich, and hence undead, Jenna Osterneth could not follow them in.

<snip>

Their reason for being there was that the Mausoleum of the Raven Queen - like other lost things - had ended up on The Barrens in the Abyss. And Osterneth, as an agent of Vecna, had gone there to try and learn the Raven Queen's true name from her dead (mortal) body. The PCs were there to stop Osterneth - but with various degrees of enthusiasm, because they don't all exactly approve of the Raven Queen and her growing divine power. (Even though nearly everything they do seems to increase this!)

The Mausoleum had three areas: an entrance room, with a large statue and modest altar; a set of stairs with slightly elevated ramps on either side leading down to the principal room - very large (about 90' x 50') with a huge statue and two pools of water, corrupted by the Abyss; and then a smaller set of stairs leading down to the burial room, with a large altar and five statues and 4 side rooms (the sarcophagus room, the room with canopic jars, the grave goods room and the treasure room).

The PCs started in the entrance, where they took a short rest. This let them regain encounter powers, allowed the paladin to heal up to full from his ring, and then allowed some healing involving sharing the surges around the party (the ranger-cleric has the Shared Healing feat; our table convention for short rests and healing powers is to allow spending regained encounter healing at the end of the rest). They studied the murals and reliefs in the entrance chamber, which showed the Raven Queen's victories during her life, becoming the most powerful ruler in the world (crushing her enemies, being adulated by her subjects, etc - I told the players to think of Egyptian tomb paintings, Mesopotamian reliefs, and similar).

The invoker/wizard and ranger-cleric (having the best Perception in the party) then heard a slithering sound on the ramp. With his ring that grants darkvision the invoker/wizard could see a guardian naga. And the sphinx then came out, and told them that they must answer a riddle before they could pass further into the Mausoleum. I had mixed together abilities from a MM and MM2 sphinx, so they could either choose between accepting the challenge but suffering a debuff until answering it; or rejecting the challenge but granting the sphinx a power up. They chose to accept.

I wrote the riddle a few weeks ago on the train:

In the green garden, a sapling grows,​
In time the tree dies, a seed remains.​
In the grim garden shall that seed be sown,​
Among the black poplars a new tree, a new name:​
Shade shall it cast,​
Frost endure,​
Dooms outlast,​
Pride cure.​


Appropriately enough, it was the player of the ridiculously zealous paladin of the Raven Queen who first conjectured that the subject of the riddle was the Raven Queen herself - first her mortal life, than her life after death in which she took on a new name ("the Raven Queen") and took control of the Shadowfell and death, of winter, and of fate.

When the players had reached agreement on this, they offered their answer. The sphinx accepted it, but insisted that they also tell him whose pride will be cured. After generic answers ("everyone dies"), which did not really satisfy the sphinx, the fighter/cleric answered "Us". The sphinx replied "Well, yes, you," and this was the clue for the player of the invoker/wizard, who answered "The gods" - because the fighter/cleric is now God of Jailing, Pain and Torture (having taken up Torog's portfolio). The sphinx then allowed them to pass down the stairs to the principal room, to venerate the dead queen.
The PCs erected a magic circle around the Mausoleum of the Raven Queen, in order to prevent anyone from entering it and potentially learning her true name (backstory here); then rested; then scried on the tarrasque, which they knew to have recently begun marauding in the mortal world, identifying its location and noting that it was being observed by maruts. They decided that, to return to the mortal world to confront the tarrasque they would first teleport to their abandoned Thundercloud Tower, and then take that with them through another conjured portal and fly it to where the tarrasque is.

<snip>

When the PCs step through the portal from their resting place to the top of the tower, they find that it is not where they left it - on the disintegrating 66th layer of the Abyss - but rather in the palace of Yan-C-Bin on the Elemental Chaos. This brought the PCs, and especially the chaos sorcerer, into discussion with the djinni who had retaken possession of the tower and were repurposing it for the coming Dusk War. Mechanically, this situation was resolved as a skill challenge.

Sirrajadt, the leader of the djinni, explained that the djinni were finally breaking free of the imprisonment they had suffered after fighting for their freedom the last time (ie with the primordials against the gods in the Dawn War), and were not going to be re-imprisoned or bound within the Lattice of Heaven, and hence were gearing up to fight again in the Dusk War. He further explained that only Yan-C-Bin (Prince of Evil Air Elementals) and the Elder Elemental Eye could lead them to victory in the Dusk War.

The PCs both asserted their power (eg the paladin pointed out that the reason the djinni have been released from their prisons is because the PCs killed Torog, the god of imprisonment), and denied the necessity for a coming Dusk War, denouncing warmongers on both sides (especially the Elder Elemental Eye, whom Sirrajadt was stating was the only being who could guarantee the Djinni their freedom) and announcing themselves as a "third way", committed to balancing the chaos against the heavens and ensuring the endurance of the mortal world.

Sirrajadt was insisting that the PCs accompany him to meet Yan-C-Bin, declaring that mercy would be shown to all but the sorcerer. (The reason for this is that the chaos sorcerer - who is a Primordial Adept and Resurgent Primordial - has long been a servant of Chan, the Queen of Good Air Elementals, who sided with the gods during the Dawn War and is resolutely opposed to the Prince of Evil Air Elementals; hence the sorcerer is a sworn enemy of Yan-C-Bin.) As the PCs continued to debate the point and explain their "third way" reasoning (mechanically, getting closer to success in the skill challenge), Sirrajadt - sufficiently unsettled by their claims - invited them all to resolve the matter in conversation with Yan-C-Bin, who moreso than him would be able to explain the situation. The PCs therefore went to meet Yan-C-Bin himself, as guests and not as prisoners - not even the sorcerer.

Yan-C-Bin greeted them, but mocked the sorcerer and his service to Chan. There was some back and forth, and some of the same points were made. Then the PC fighter/cleric Eternal Defender, who has recently taken up the divine portfolio of imprisonment (which position became vacant after the PCs killed Torog), spoke. Both in the fiction and at the table this was the pivotal moment. The player gave an impassioned and quite eloquent speech, which went for several minutes with his eyes locked on mine. (We tend to be quite a causal table as far as performance, in-character vs third person description of one's PC vs out-of-character goes.) He explained (in character) that he would personally see to it that no djinni would be unjustly imprisoned, if they now refrained from launching the Dusk War; but that if they acted rashly and unjustly they could look forward to imprisonment or enslavement forever.

The player rolled his Intimidate check (with a +2 bonus granted by me because of his speech, far more impassioned and "in character" than is typical for our pretty laid-back table) and succeeded. It didn't persuade Yan-C-Bin - his allegiance to the Elder Elemental Eye is not going to be swayed by a mere godling - but the players' goal wasn't to persaude Yan-C-Bin of the merits of their third way, but rather to avoid being imprisoned by him and to sway the djinni. Which is exacty what happened: this speech sufficiently impressed the djinni audience that Yan-C-Bin could not just ignore it, and hence he grudgingly acquiesced to the PCs' request, agreeing to let the PCs take the Thundercloud Tower and go and confront the tarrasque - but expressing doubt that they would realise their "third way", and with a final mocking remark that they would see for whom the maruts with the tarrasque were acting.

The player of the eternal defender had already noted that, when I read out the description of maruts and their contracts earlier in the sessin, the only being actually mentioned by name was the Raven Queen. So he predicted (more-or-less in line with what I had in mind), that the maruts observing the tarrasque would be there at the behest of the Raven Queen (who is served by three of the five PCs), to stop it being interfered with.

When the PCs then took their Tower to confront the tarrasque, that was indeed what they found. Upon arriving at the tarrasque's location they found the tarrasque being warded by a group of maruts who explained that, in accordance with a contract made with the Raven Queen millenia ago, they were there to ensure the realisation of the end times, and to stop anyone interfering with the tarrasque as an engine of this destruction and a herald of the beginning of the end times and the arrival of the Dusk War.

(Why the Raven Queen wants the Dusk War has not fully come to light, other than that it seems part of her plan to realise her own ultimate godhood. One idea I had follows in sblocks.)

[sblock]With Ometh dead, it seems possible that those souls who have passed over the Bridge that May be Traversed But Once might be able to return - repopulating a world remade following the Dusk War and the restoration of the Lattice of Heaven.[/sblock]

I wasn't sure exactly what the players would do here. They could try and fight the maruts, obviously, but I thought the Raven Queen devotees might be hesitant to do so. I had envisaged that the PCs might try to persuade them that the contract was invalid in some way - and this idea was mentioned at the table, together with the related idea of the various exarchs of the Raven Queen in the party trying to lay down the law. In particular I had thought that the paladin of the Raven Queen, who is a Marshall of Letherna (in effect, one of the Raven Queen's most powerful servants), might try to exercise his authority to annual or vary the contract in some fashion.

But instead the argument developed along different lines. What the players did was to persuade the maruts that the time for fulfillment of their contract had not yet arisen, because this visitation of the tarrasque was not yet a sign of the Dusk War. (Mechanically, these were social skill checks, history and religions checks, etc, in a skill challenge to persuade the maruts.)

The player of the Eternal Defender PC made only one action in this skill challenge - explaining that it was not the end times, because he was there to defeat the tarrasque (and got another successful intimidate check, after spending an action point to reroll his initial fail) - before launching himself from the flying tower onto the tarrasque and proceeding to whittle away around 600 of its hit points over two rounds. (There were also two successful out-of-turn attacks from the ranger and the paladin, who were spending their on-turn actions in negotiating with the maruts.)

The invoker/wizard was able to point to this PC's successful solo-ing of the tarrasque as evidence that the tarrasque, at least on this occasion, could not be the harbinger of the end times whom the maruts were contracted to protect, because it clearly lacked the capacity to ravage the world. The maruts agreed with this point - clearly they had misunderstood the timing of celestial events - and the PCs therefore had carte blanche to finish of the tarrasque. (Mechanically, this was the final success in the skill challenge: the player rolled Insight to see what final argument would sway the maruts, knowing that only one success was needed. He succeeded. I invited him to then state the relevant argument.)
The lore matters to the players because it is what establishes the situation the PCs find themselves in. It explains, and indeed constitutes, the stakes - both threats and possibilities.

Here is something further that I posted in the context of the second examples (maruts and tarrasque):
The session with the djinni and the maruts I found pretty interesting. This was the first time that the players (in character) concretely articulated their commitment to a "third way", between a divine victory in the Dusk War that would reinstate the Lattice of Heaven, and a victory for the elemental chaos that would see the mortal world reduced to its constituent parts so that it might be rebuilt.

Relating this to some of the "RPG theory/method" discussions that take place on these boards, this is a very clear example of the players imposing their wills upon the fiction. Their "reading" of certain key setting ideas (eg the Lattice of Heaven, which the players have interpreted as fascistic stasis; the nature of chaos/motion, the natural order, etc, which most of the players have seen as somehow connected to mortal life and wellbeing) is informing the way they respond to challenges and engage key NPCs; and success in these challenges is then vindicating those readings of what the setting is about. They have conceived of a "third way", and have now brought the duergar, the djinni and these maruts into alignment with it.

It's true that the idea of a Dusk War comes from the pre-authored setting material via me as GM. But the players have chosen their PCs' orientations towards that Dusk War via choices both of PC build (class, theme, epic destiny) and via declared actions. Their play of their characters, therefore, is making it true, in the fiction, that those who seek the Dusk War are warmongers; that a god of imprisonment need not be insane (as Torog was); that elemental chaos can be accommodated within the plan for mortals of at least some of the gods (eg Corellon); etc. It also reveals new things about the gameworld, and the metaphysics and ethics of order and chaos.
I think if lore is just background, that lampshades the quest/adventure/dungeon that the GM presents to the players, then the players have no real reason to care about it.

If lore provides the solution to riddles or puzzles or challenges that the players have to solve or overcome, as part of the play of the game, then they might pay attention to those bits of lore.

But for them to be really invested, I think the lore has to be part of the actual stakes of play.

Here's a slightly different illustration of lore mattering:
Relationship 4.jpg

This chart was prepared by one of the players in a long-running Rolemaster game, in order to keep track of the PCs' allies and enemies, and how all the different beings and factions and artefacts related to one another and to the PCs (in the Earthly Realm, Hiroshi, Hideo, Su Ki, Kochi and the Tao clan are all PCs). As the chart indicates, one of the PCs was once an Animal Lord, and another has a dragon as his girlfriend: more generally, the PCs are deeply enmeshed in this muti-planar social world, and again this creates the field of threat and possibility as the players make choices for their PCs.

I would also add: this has nothing to do with whether the game is "simulationist" or some other sort of "-ist". It's about the way that these elements of the fiction matter to the framing and the resolution of actions.

And by way of contrast: if the most important decisions that the players make for their PCs are which doors to listen at or to open, and which creatures/NPCs to attack or loot - basically, if the game resembles fairly classic D&D play, in which the lore is merely flavour - then players will (rightly, in my view) not worry too much about the lore. They'll focus on local elements of the fiction - immediate facts about the dungeon, its architecture and furnishings and inhabitants, etc.
 

I thought I'd post some examples of "lore" mattering to the players.

Here are two, both from high level 4e D&D play:


The lore matters to the players because it is what establishes the situation the PCs find themselves in. It explains, and indeed constitutes, the stakes - both threats and possibilities.

Here is something further that I posted in the context of the second examples (maruts and tarrasque):

I think if lore is just background, that lampshades the quest/adventure/dungeon that the GM presents to the players, then the players have no real reason to care about it.

If lore provides the solution to riddles or puzzles or challenges that the players have to solve or overcome, as part of the play of the game, then they might pay attention to those bits of lore.

But for them to be really invested, I think the lore has to be part of the actual stakes of play.

Here's a slightly different illustration of lore mattering:View attachment 423874
This chart was prepared by one of the players in a long-running Rolemaster game, in order to keep track of the PCs' allies and enemies, and how all the different beings and factions and artefacts related to one another and to the PCs (in the Earthly Realm, Hiroshi, Hideo, Su Ki, Kochi and the Tao clan are all PCs). As the chart indicates, one of the PCs was once an Animal Lord, and another has a dragon as his girlfriend: more generally, the PCs are deeply enmeshed in this muti-planar social world, and again this creates the field of threat and possibility as the players make choices for their PCs.

I would also add: this has nothing to do with whether the game is "simulationist" or some other sort of "-ist". It's about the way that these elements of the fiction matter to the framing and the resolution of actions.

And by way of contrast: if the most important decisions that the players make for their PCs are which doors to listen at or to open, and which creatures/NPCs to attack or loot - basically, if the game resembles fairly classic D&D play, in which the lore is merely flavour - then players will (rightly, in my view) not worry too much about the lore. They'll focus on local elements of the fiction - immediate facts about the dungeon, its architecture and furnishings and inhabitants, etc.
I only read snippets, but the lore info, at bare minimum makes a large difference in scenario preparation there
 

And here's a separate thought on PC race/species/stock.

Most recently, I've been GMing Torchbearer 2e. TB2e combines Burning Wheel's ultra-JRRT-esque approach to Elves and Dwarves with a tip of the hat to classic D&D play. Each choice of "class" brings stock with it - for instance you can be a Halfling Burglar (modelled very closely on Bilbo) or a Halfling Guide (modelled very closely on a not-yet-corrupted Smeagol) or a Dwarven Outcast (modelled very closely on Thorin) or an Elven Ranger, etc.

Each PC in TB2e has a Belief, and if above 3rd level also a Creed (which is really another type of Belief in BW terms, but not as readily changed as a Belief in the strict sense). Here are some of those for the PCs in my game:

Telemere, Elven Ranger

Creed: This world of humans needs guidance away from their follies and struggling

(This PC also has Folly of Humanity-wise, as one of his three Wises.)

Fea-bella, Elven Dreamwalker

Creed: These are dark times – the free peoples must stand together!

(Prior to her most recent Respite, her Creed was These are dark times – all Elves need help!.)

Golin, Dwarven Outcast

Creed: Elves are lost in dreams; they need grounding in reality

Belief: Elves are unstable!

(Earlier Beliefs for this character have included Elves have too many secrets! and Surely Elves can’t be so bad! He's had the current Belief for about 14 sessions, in a context where it can be changed at the start of any session.)​

So the players have chosen to make their particular takes on the JRRT-esque relationships among the "free peoples" a focus of play. I think that's the most reliable path to making lore matter.
 

I only read snippets, but the lore info, at bare minimum makes a large difference in scenario preparation there
In my 4e game, my scenario prep was really about statting up creatures/NPCs, and drawing maps: because 4e D&D really needs these details to run well, especially if fights break out. The direction of play - eg that the Raven Queen, or Chan the Queen of Good Air Elementals, would matter to the PCs - was determined by the players.
 

In my 4e game, my scenario prep was really about statting up creatures/NPCs, and drawing maps: because 4e D&D really needs these details to run well, especially if fights break out. The direction of play - eg that the Raven Queen, or Chan the Queen of Good Air Elementals, would matter to the PCs - was determined by the players.
I mean player: equipment, spell prep, etc. If you know you are going up against a historic "lich queen", and a knowledge character knows what that entails.. it matters as to how players may prep for a dungeon... could still need to read more though 😉
 

And by way of contrast: if the most important decisions that the players make for their PCs are which doors to listen at or to open, and which creatures/NPCs to attack or loot - basically, if the game resembles fairly classic D&D play, in which the lore is merely flavour - then players will (rightly, in my view) not worry too much about the lore. They'll focus on local elements of the fiction - immediate facts about the dungeon, its architecture and furnishings and inhabitants, etc.

I'd suggest it also matters whether a player gets into the game interested in playing in faction politics and the like in the first place. It may well be you screen out people who don't (either directly or by simply not offering the kind of play they're interested in), but some will go in expecting your example here to be what they care about anyway and ignore the rest.
 

This chart was prepared by one of the players in a long-running Rolemaster game,
I was ready to poo-poo this when I first glanced at it, assuming it was GM or setting-creator background, but I love seeing this type of stuff from players. And I think I'm safe in assuming this information wasn't info-dumped on the player, it was accumulated through play, which is what makes it matter.
 

Remove ads

Top