Players Don't Care About Your Setting

[tetrasodium]

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.

☆
Totally the Gm's fault when Bob's character gimli Skywalker (the super famous dwarf Jedi who used to adventure with drizzt) doesn't fit into a star Trek game. Nor is it the gm's fault when they just take hard pass and say no each time Bob brings up stuff like his old ship the Enterprise where they ended the Dominion war by using the force against the sith Lord known as the Borg Queen. The PC is incapable of existing or having a backstory until it is shaped by the setting. Far too many ignore that fact and simply blame the gm for not trying harder to make it fit.


IME the absolute worst offenders of this are "I made this backstory straight from Tolkien's works and since Tolkien is pretty much generic fantasy I can draw on unlimited amounts of Tolkien and expect it to fit any setting or the gm is too inflexible". A player might not need to know the details of geopolitics and esoteric religious tidbits, but they absolutely must come to the table with a PC not likely to be locked in a place like Arkham asylum for presenting like a literal DSMIV crazy person to the average commoner in ways that are out of touch with reality. I think the fact that the generic fantasy Tolkien PC even coming up in this relevant Colleville video adds weight to the idea that I'm not alone in this observation.

☆ I am aware that is not the Jedi Professor Gandalf. We should all know that is the former dalek war soldier turned rebel spice miner against the empire in the well known award winning stargate galactica series.

 

[Umbran]

FR is old hat, but what if the setting was new to you?
Would you still not be interested?

I am not him, but let me answer the question with another question: Why should Mistwell care? How much would the game actually change.

I think GMs sometimes mislead themselves on how much the setting impacts a session of play.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I am not him, but let me answer the question with another question: Why should Mistwell care? How much would the game actually change.

I think GMs sometimes mislead themselves on how much the setting impacts a session of play.

I'm coming at this from a GM perspective. I am a forever GM but sometimes, every few years a player runs something and I'm always curious about the world that they have created, the lore re the magic and technology or the history (if it's related to Earth).
If they're using a published setting which I'm unfamiliar with it is the same thing.
I'm certainly projecting my curiosity on new settings and ideas on Mistwell, but I do not imagine I'm unique in this curious fascination so I was just wondering if it wasn't FR or your typical settings would he still not care.

 

[Guest 85555]

I think it's important to remember setting isn't just history. You can be running the most genre emulative session, not particularly precious about setting like Tolkien, but if you throw A Swordsman after the party from the Crescent Moon Blade Society, those are both setting design elements. The players may not interact with everything, but they might probe his background, confront the society, etc. Having those kinds of details before hand can be vital for the players interacting with them and for enhancing their engagement and enjoyment. Also scenario and adventure design is also setting design. Writing a story even is almost impossible without some world building

 

[Celebrim]

I mean, yes and also no.

Let's say we are playing a game of Star Wars. Are the players doing so likely to care about the setting and be into it? Would the aesthetic and lore of the setting be interesting to them?

I mean it can't substitute for good gameplay, but most successful extensions of the Star Wars IP involve engaging with the aesthetics and lore of the setting in ways that engage Star Wars fans and most failures involve engaging with the lore and aesthetics in ways that don't. Sure, a somewhat aesthetic hotel with a crappy experience and a high opportunity cost might not be successful, but the fact that people were even willing to try and to propose the idea is evidence that people understand fans care about the setting. People cosplay as Storm Troopers for crying out loud.

The real question is, "Can I make fans of my settings?"

 

[Guest 85555]

The real question is, "Can I make fans of my settings?"

This I think is the key thing. And just my own experience with it, is this takes time getting to know the setting. You can't front load it by giving them a sheet of setting lore. The more they become invested in the setting through their characters, the bigger fans of the setting they become

 

[Celebrim]

You can't front load it by giving them a sheet of setting lore.

Well, I agree with that. Star Wars didn't attract fans by front loading them with a bunch of setting lore. Handing players a sheet of setting lore is probably the worst way you could create fans.

Generally, in a typical game of D&D, my players first encounter with lore is when we work together to create a backstory. They have some ideas about what they want, and I help them fill in those details in ways that make sense within the setting lore. Those ideas may be about families, secret societies, cults, or distinctive cultures. Often the player ends up adding to my lore while I add to their backstory.

For example, I had a player want to create a character who was a member of secret society of undead hunters, and so I thought about it and said, "Ok, how would you feel about being a member of an assassin's guild whose cover was that they are theater nerds who work for the temples of the goddess of the arts and beauty. And your guild is technically like a heretical branch of her cult, but then also despite being officially disapproved of, it seems like the goddess also steps in from time to time and helps out her little devoted gang of killers? And your society is called "The Flymen" which is a play on words between someone who works on the ropes behind the stage and also someone that works with carrion." And the player was like, "That's awesome." This society didn't exist in my game prior to the request, but it made perfect sense within my lore and everyone got what they wanted.

If I had tried to feed the players hundreds of pages about my setting - even if I was willing to write them all out - it wouldn't hook players as fast or as hard as drip feeding them the part they care about within the story they are enjoying.

 

[MacDhomnuill]

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.

Honestly, this kind of reflects real life where most people don’t really care about the world except for those parts that they directly interact with or effects them.

 

[DragonLancer]

My players aren't interested in anything but the basics and even then, they would prefer to learn it in game. Shame.

For me personally, give me a 50 page PDF and I'll read it thoroughly, print it out and bring to the game. To me, knowing the setting is a priority.

 

[Mistwell]

FR is old hat, but what if the setting was new to you?
Would you still not be interested?

I'm sure we'd give it attention for a session, and then it would mostly become background stuff we don't think about much.