Grounding Players in a Setting

[Hussar]

A problem that has plagued me throughout my DMing career is how to get the players to care about the setting. Whether homebrew or published, I've never really been able to get the players to sink their teeth into whatever setting I'm using. Most players have their own agendas for the game or are simply content to let the game move them forward. It's rare that a player really cares about the environment that he finds himself in.

And, to be fair, I'm every bit as guilty of this. When handed a ten page history of the DM's campaign, my eyes glaze over and, honestly, I don't usually bother to read it. Skim it perhaps, but, it's rare that I'd sit down and read every bit. I would like to appologize to every DM I've ever had.

So, with that in mind, I think there are some ideas here for how to get the players to connect with the setting that can be done right from the outset. I'm going to skip over the character creation bits, because, well, most DM's can do that. Tell the players what the game is going to be about, vet this or that source book and away you go. That's not usually an issue. At least, it's beyond what I feel like writing about.

IMO, certainly hand the campaign setting overview to the players. However, don't assume they are going to read it. Treat it as a reference, but, don't think that the players are going to take it to heart.

First Session

This one is very key. Most first sessions are taken up with book keeping. Making sure everyone's character is on board, making sure that everyone is kosher, that sort of thing. Don't. Go straight for the action. And action that is going to really set the tone for the setting. By and large, a low level party is going to be starting in some sort of settlement - town, city, village, whatever. And, probably, that settlement is going to figure into the campaign for more than a couple of sessions. So, that settlement needs to be a window to the world. A microcosm of the campaign in full.

Start the game in medias res. Don't go for long winded descriptions or detailed backgrounds yet. You have a whole campaign to come up with that. Right now, focus on the present. The players may have detailed backgrounds, but, that's not your concern at the moment. Right now, you have the stage and it's time to set the mood. As DM, you know what the campaign feel you're shooting for is. And now is the time to really nail that point home.

Start at the market. The players are all in the market in the town. Not a terribly unreasonable assumption - most people do go to the market. And at least it's not quite as cliche as starting in the bar. Describe the market - or better yet - show a picture of the market. Remember, we want to go straight for the heart on this. Keep descriptions to a bare bones minimum. Pictures are a great way to start - you can evoke the feel of the setting without spending ten minutes on a monologue.

I would avoid maps at this point. Maps are too concrete if you get what I mean. I would rather skip the front brain entirely. Take about five minutes to get the reactions of the players to the market. Let them ask questions about what is there. Locations and descriptions of different individuals, that sort of thing. Keep it moving fairly quickly, and, here's a tip, say "yes" a lot. "Is there a swordsmith?" Yup. "Is there a magic shop?" Well, there's a magician in the square talking with what appears to be a scribe. "Is there a hot elf chick?" Yup, two. Holding hands.... Erm, sorry been reading the Book of Erotic Fantasy lately.

After five or ten minutes of this, slap the players with something. Here's a few ideas:

• A man mistakenly recognizes a PC as a friend and begins loudly talking to him. Meanwhile his children cohorts begin lifting everything they can from him.
• A group of rowdy sailors (or soldiers, thugs, surly gnomes) picks a fight with the party.
• An animal breaks loose and causes mayhem as it stampedes through the market.
• A binder is taken down loudly and flashily by clergy police

Whatever you like. As long as it's very loud, attention getting and not terribly lethal. This gets the blood up and focuses everyone's attention.

Now that you have their attention, let them start wandering. Send them on a MacGuffin hunt through the city. Let them try to find something. One of my favourites which you can find on the net is "The Hunt for the Charter" which is a great little adventure where the party has to register itself with the local government. Perfect for introducing tons of NPC's and setting.

I think the mistake made by myself and many DM's is starting off with exposition. We start the game with a monologue detailing the setting to a greater or lesser degree. I believe this is a mistake. Details learned out of context don't stick in people's heads. Reading in the campaign file that MacDugan's serves great beer is one thing, but, actually going there because you are following up on something in the game makes the place come alive.

Pacing for the first few sessions should be very fast and light. Don't get bogged down in details or minutia. If the players want something, try to say yes or at least make it very clear why you are saying no. If there are no magic shops in the campaign, now is the time to make it clear, not three levels from now when the fighter finally has enough money to buy that +1 lumpy metal thing he's always wanted. If you want grim and gritty, kick the party's behind right off the bat. Leave them bloody and bruised in the gutter with somewhat lighter pockets. If you're looking for heroic fun, then a chase scene following children pickpockets is a good idea.

The biggest thing to remember is that while you may care about your setting and you may think it's bloody fantastic, no one else might. The players don't have the big picture. They can only look at things through the lens of the DM. It's up to the DM to open that lens as wide as possible and hold the camera steady. Eww, badly mangled metaphor's aside, the point is still made. The player's will only care about what applies to them. They won't care that the duke's niece is sick unless it impacts them in some way.

Make the setting reactive to them and they will start to care.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'd start by limiting the players. Instead of saying "OK, give me a detailed background" and having players give you half-planar nomads, Aragorn, Legolas, Drizzt and Elminster clones, tell them about the setting on a micro scale. Don't give them 10 pages, give them one page, the town they're starting in.

"You're all from here. Pick a family and make up your relatives. You've all known each other all your life."

Then have them protect that town while they get to know more about your setting from there.

If you give the players a blank canvas, you can't resent them if what they come up with doesn't match with each other's work or your vision.

 

[Hussar]

I'd start by limiting the players. Instead of saying "OK, give me a detailed background" and having players give you half-planar nomads, Aragorn, Legolas, Drizzt and Elminster clones, tell them about the setting on a micro scale. Don't give them 10 pages, give them one page, the town they're starting in.

In all honesty, I'd go a bit further than that. I would not ask for any background for the characters at all. None. Any background they want to bring into the character, they can bring up at the table. Then again, I only play with players that don't actively try to short circuit the campaign. I did mention that this is beyond the chargen phase of the game. That sort of thing is handled best before the start of the game. So, if you don't want a particular thing in your game, make sure to limit the sources the players can draw from.

OTOH, if you trust your players, let them have that extra-planar nomad and see how it works.

 

[an_idol_mind]

The easiest way I've found to get players interested in the setting is to let them have a hand in crafting it, in a way. For instance, in a previous campaign, one of the PCs founded a small kingdom named Lorinth. I've since expanded on that kingdom for her, and now all her characters are citizens of Lorinth. Similarly, when I got my girlfriend into the game, she wanted to create a home town for her PC. We looked on the world map, found some empty space, and then made up a village where she came from. Later on, when that village was under attack from an ogre mage, she was genuinely concerned that her little corner of the world was in peril.

You don't need to allow players to create large chunks of a setting, but allowing them to add small things to make their characters feel like a part of the world helps a lot. Among other things, I've allowed players to draw up the holy symbols of their deities, write a history about their family's swords, and come up with information about their guild. There's usually some compromising that has to be done to keep the new information consistent with what's already established, but it's usually quite worth it. First of all, it saves work on the DM's part. Second and most importantly, the players become extremely invested in the setting when they have a sense of ownership about it.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Heh, I have to agree with your first post quite a lot, Hussar. Setting introduction can wait for the rest of the game...a bit should be done during character creation ("So you want to be a cleric? Okay, in these regions, the following deities are revered for the following reasons...")...but most of it should come inbetween, supplied as "memory" or "knowledge" through the DM or through NPCs, or outright gaming.

The most recent game I am part of started with a bang...crowning festivities of the new emperor in the capitol, my priest and the others there to participate in tournaments, festivities, etc. We didn't know each other at first, just watched the greatsword finals (which out knight actually came second in), when suddenly some noble's secretary dropped dying at the feet of one of us, mumbling something before losing it.

By now, we're in the employ of a grand duke, chasing a nasty intrigue around the country, and are plotting how to get a competent emperor back on the throne.

 

[Stormtower]

Hussar, you said: "Make the setting reactive to them and they will start to care." I loved your specific examples prior to that statement, but these 12 words really sum up one of the two primary challenges of grounding PCs in a setting.

However, it's not the whole story IMO. For me, the ideal campaign setting balances its reactive elements against the fact that no group of adventurers can be everywhere at once. There is essentially a localized field of influence which they carry around with them, and within that (possibly expanding due to ripple effects of their actions) field the campaign is reactive. Elsewhere, the world still moves, wars start and stop, farmers haul their crops to town, villians still hatch evil plots, and life proceeds without any input from the PCs. As the PCs increase in power, fame/infamy and influence, their localized field of influence can also increase in size and potency... but it will never be so complete as to create a sense that the entire world revolves around their choices.

The effect this has is to create even more of those "interesting choices" that bring one's players back for more every week. Once a group realizes they can only focus their attention on a few geographic regions, and that their choice of geographical and plot focus affects their field of influence, the grounding action you described seems to occur on its own... players begin to see the world as simultaneously reactive to and independent of their characters' choices. Striking that balance is the key.

 

[Hussar]

Hussar, you said: "Make the setting reactive to them and they will start to care." I loved your specific examples prior to that statement, but these 12 words really sum up one of the two primary challenges of grounding PCs in a setting.

However, it's not the whole story IMO. For me, the ideal campaign setting balances its reactive elements against the fact that no group of adventurers can be everywhere at once. There is essentially a localized field of influence which they carry around with them, and within that (possibly expanding due to ripple effects of their actions) field the campaign is reactive. Elsewhere, the world still moves, wars start and stop, farmers haul their crops to town, villians still hatch evil plots, and life proceeds without any input from the PCs. As the PCs increase in power, fame/infamy and influence, their localized field of influence can also increase in size and potency... but it will never be so complete as to create a sense that the entire world revolves around their choices.

The effect this has is to create even more of those "interesting choices" that bring one's players back for more every week. Once a group realizes they can only focus their attention on a few geographic regions, and that their choice of geographical and plot focus affects their field of influence, the grounding action you described seems to occur on its own... players begin to see the world as simultaneously reactive to and independent of their characters' choices. Striking that balance is the key.

Oh agreed. I was specifically looking at the first two or three sessions. What you are talking about is a bit beyond my scope. Although, there is a bit of a danger that I've seen both myself and other DM's fall into here. Yes, things should happen in other places. That's cool. But, it's probably more cool to the DM than to the players.

It really depends on how grand of a scale you want for your campaign as well. I tend to keep my campaigns fairly geographically small. A single country or region for example. I tend not to have sprawling campaigns with the party traveling from region to region. So, this probably colors my perceptions.

Sure, that Country Forex is attack NewZeds is interesting and perhaps something to have the town crier start talking about, but, unless there's a reason to go there, it's purely background information. And, the players may or may not care about it. Then again, if prices start going up on import goods from NewZeds, the players may start to take an interest.

But, by and large, I agree with your assessment. I tend to chart out a calendar of events for a few years ahead of the campaign. Nothing that really impacts hugely on the campaign itself, just some tidbits to toss out onto the table once in a while. If nothing else, it gives the NPC's something to talk about.

 

[MerricB]

It's all about the characters they meet. Have memorable NPCs that they meet again and again and again and enjoy interacting with, and you have a memorable setting.

Close relationships with mentors, servants of the kingdom, apprentices, etc. are all essential for creating a setting. When the PCs care about the NPCs, they want to keep them alive... and at that point you can introduce threats to the setting that engage the PCs, because they'll interfere with the NPCs they like so much.

Cheers!

 

[Rothe]

Although I'd love to have a 10 page write-up of the setting as a player myself, I agree with the first posts that many find that to be too much information to start with. I think many players are turned off by such things because of experiences where such information makes no difference in game.

Whizbang is spot on IMHO with limiting initial character creation choice. I tend to temper this with the starting region IMC allowing for a wide variety of choices that are equally viable. On family background I tend to set that for PCs but will take some player input. All to increase versimilitude, you may get to pick your friends but you don't get to pick your relatives.

I very much agree with the sentiment that having player actions impact the setting (at least locally), and how they are reacted to by the NPCs, develops interest in setting. I can say from my own very recent experiences this works. Initially I tried to read my 4 page summary of world history, players didn't really care at that point but humored me.

Well as we've been adventuring the PCs actions have altered the political dynamic in the adventure. Their killing of the warriors of faction #1 has tipped the balance of power of in favor of faction #2. Which led to an alliance between faction #2 and faction #3 as faction #3 wished to take out faction #4, in exchange faction #3 will support faction #2s quest to exterminate faction #1. The best thing is I didn't plan any of this but just reacted to the PCs actions.(i.e., had the NPC react in the way they would based on the info they had).

In addition, when the players actually remembered a piece of setting information and acted on or used it, it had an effect. So I try to make setting history matter in game, be it via interaction with NPCs or as useful (but not necessary) information in overcoming challenges in an adventure.

Setting knowledge I often convey through NPC exposition / gossip and also via situations where character knowledge is used (e.g. trying to identify a magic item, looking at a tapestry etc.). I make use of PC knowledge-based skills quite a bit and knowledge can give players information and clues that can turn a difficult encounter into an easy one. Parley is also plays an important role IMC so setting details can be useful there as well. Since I award full experience for "overcoming a challenge" be it by sword, stealth or simply talking your way out of a situation, there is no disincentive to roleplay or use knowledge based approaches to adventure.

Anyway, we've gone from a player saying they are not really interested in campaign history to actually asking me for the next adventure to be an exploration of the setting to get a feel for the land and people. Now that brings a tear to my GM eye.

 

[rounser]

A problem that has plagued me throughout my DMing career is how to get the players to care about the setting.

I think there's an innate assumption here that could do with challenging. Why focus on the setting, rather than what's really important to the PCs, which is the adventures, hooks, encounters and overall campaign arc?

Why not just default to a "stock" implied setting clichefest, and make the campaign arc and the adventure The Thing you're trying to sell? I know that DMs love worldbuilding, but the meat of the game lies elsewhere, IMO. Perhaps try exerting all your effort there instead, and no hard sell would be required.