Players Don't Care About Your Setting

[AnotherGuy]

Just started an all-dwarf mini campaign in Rockhome, Mystara. What helped with some player investment is letting them roll randomly for Clan, Family Status and Home which tables are all provided for within the gazzeteer. I created additional tables from those - so
Clan unlocks additional flaws that can be selected based on the clan's general ideology;
Family Status unlocks starting gold modifiers, fine/masterwork items, additional professions and proficiencies (also the foundation for backstory).
Home unlocks social modifiers with certain citizens, social attitudes and other perks.

So a lot of the seting lore is parcelled out right from the start and the players have to determine how it is that these Dwarves from disparate clans, connected despite differing ideologies and economic status. And as a DM I keep stress testing that.
It helps to build PCs integrated with the setting.

 

[BookTenTiger]

That is incredibly useful, may I please have/use a copy of it?

Of course!

 

[MichaelSomething]

I think part it is that the only way to experience the setting is the DM talking about it.

 

[KYRON45]

Thats because they dont care about your/our/my setting, the PC in this case is THEIR setting, and so we must care.

The hypocricy is always enjoyable.

Aren't players the worst?!?!

 

[Committed Hero]

If it's given that players don't read the setting and GMs don't read the backstory, the chances for incompatibility are high.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It pains me to say this, but I don't think most players care about game settings all that much. It pains me to admit this because I'm someone who really loves settings, and who chooses what games to run primarily based on how much I like the setting (I'm not looking at you Shadowrun). Most players are primarily focused on the adventures or scenarios. What are the player characters going to be doing? Do the scenarios sound like fun? Tangently this is related to the setting of course, in Cyberpunk Red your character is an edgerunner, a class of criminal that exists because of social, political, and economic change and uncertainty. Obviously there are exceptions. There are some players who fall in the love with a game's setting and really, really want to play it. A lot of Vampire the Masquerade players in the 1990s were absolutely wild about the setting. Even some of my players are really enthusiastic about the setting for every game I run.

This isn't to say that settings are a waste of time. I think people who run games are more invested in the setting that most other participants. And a good setting provides plenty of fodder for scenario ideas. But if you want people to play a game you're going to have to sell it on the fun adventures you can have rather than the setting itself.

I think this really varies. I think people don't generally like 'setting tourism' but if you are running a no prep sandbox or playing in one, the fun is having the freedom to explore and interact with the setting, to see what happened as a result of that interaction, but not necessarily to go on adventures or run through scenarios the GM has created before hand

 

[aco175]

Not caring about the setting is half the reason that every 5e campaign has not traveled far from Phandalin in my home group. One group managed to get to Waterdeep or Longsaddle, but most happened in Phandalin or Leilon. I think it has been 6 campaigns now.

 

[Voadam]

I think it varies.

As a kid I was very much into the Hobbit as an adventure story, but I bounced off the Silmarillion setting information.

"Hey you wanna play Forgotten Realms" can be about specific realms stuff or a stand in for generic baseline D&D.

"Hey you wanna play Curse of Strahd?" can be adventure focused or Barovia/Ravenloft focused.

"Hey you wanna play Dark Sun?" is generally about the setting and not the specific adventure.

A lot of D&D is heavily adventure based, although some adventures are heavily setting based a lot is just an adventure that could easily be placed in lots of setting backdrops. Some D&D is sandbox based where you can be either more exploring a setting or making your own adventure plots.

 

[darjr]

I think the setting is a big part of DM fun and that’s all it has to be for me. If the players dig it, bonus!

 

[RenleyRenfield]

It pains me to say this, but I don't think most players care about game settings all that much. ...

It pains me to agree. I know as the DM I am much more invested in my setting than my players who are often more focused on what’s next. I mean sure they appreciate some of the small touches that make it seem like a living breathing world but overall they soon forget that when compared to the next epic battle or heist.

Helps explain WoTC approach to settings. Probably only DMs really invest in the books.

Largely true. My group is great, but the only setting issues they really pay attention to are the points where setting and mechanics/challenges intersect.

To all here who have this issue... I have been running games since 1995... lots of them, like, almost a game a week every year, sometimes more....

I have never ever, not even once - had even one player not care about my worlds or setting. Like, not even close. Most of the time its quite the opposite. They dig into the world and lore a bunch!


So tell me about your games:
- What game system were you using?

• What do you feel they didn't engage with about your setting?
• How was your setting different than a similar published setting?

(Forgotten Realms or Call of Cthulhu for examples, but whatever really...)
- Did you have a Session 0, if so what was it like? (see my C.A.T.S. thread also for that idea too, in case you did or didn't do that as well...)