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

[Bill Zebub]

In my experience, lore only matters for players, if it becomes relevant to their decision making during playing the game. Anything else is fluff that rarely becomes of any relevant meaning to the players.

Absolutely this.

Too often GMs, or adventure authors, indulge their desire to craft a whole backstory for their world, and expect the players to understand some part of it.

The only way I've seen lore/backstory work well, which includes the players being able to remember it, is when the bits and pieces emerge because they are immediately relevant to player goals.

I'll add that the same is true for lore intended for the GM in adventures/settings: too often the very first section is the history/backstory/lore, with the implication that the GM needs to understand all this stuff. I hate it. I want to know the state of things in the present. All that lore and backstory can be put into an appendix, if it's necessary at all.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I remember everyone at one game wanted to kill Drizzt when he showed up one time.

I totally get that. Death penalty for crimes against literature. Sounds about right.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

This is a bit of an aside, One of the coolest PBTA “knowledge” moves is from Freebooters on the Frontier:

“Establish

When you introduce a potential fact and the Judge agrees that it might be true, say how you heard about it. When its truth is tested (now or later), roll +INT: on a 10+, it’s just as you say; on a 7-9, you were right, but there’s a caveat or complication of the Judge’s choosing; on a 6-, mark Intelligence, and the Judge makes a move.”

OMG! Someone else knows of Freebooters on the Frontier! yay!!! That is such a masterclass game!

Sorry for aside, just gushing

 

[aco175]

In Game of Thrones, nobody would have cared about the knowledge of Tyrion Lannister being the one who was in charge of rebuilding the sewer system if it was in an info dump in the start of the campaign. It only became important for the episode with the siege and him using the knowledge to sneak into the city.

This brings up letting players add background to their character as the game unfolds. Does it help and make sense if your PC grew up in that city and was a noble or is it a cheat of sorts to declare that your character now knows X.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Absolutely this.

Too often GMs, or adventure authors, indulge their desire to craft a whole backstory for their world, and expect the players to understand some part of it.

The only way I've seen lore/backstory work well, which includes the players being able to remember it, is when the bits and pieces emerge because they are immediately relevant to player goals.

I'll add that the same is true for lore intended for the GM in adventures/settings: too often the very first section is the history/backstory/lore, with the implication that the GM needs to understand all this stuff. I hate it. I want to know the state of things in the present. All that lore and backstory can be put into an appendix, if it's necessary at all.

See, I love history (real or imagined), so I want the history of the setting front and center. That's the most fun part for me. That history is what makes the setting make logical sense, and it needs to in order for me to appreciate it properly. Verisimilitude is a very high priority for me in RPGs (though certainly not my only one).