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

I came into this thread expecting more conversation about making a setting that matters to the people playing the game. And so that's what I'm going to talk about.


Be aware that, everything else being equal, different people are going to have different levels of interest. Some players will read a novel length setting guide, with history harking back to Ancient Days. But most won’t. To get most players’ interest you’ll need to be strategic.

The most important thing to do is make the players aware of the lore. If they don't know it, they can't care about it. Pretty obvious. And yet, I’ve seen lore that completely fails this basic requirement.

Given that the lore needs to be communicated to the players we now need to consider how to do that.

What we can say without a doubt is that massive info dumps rarely work. (In case you doubt that, read advice about writing, especially writing SF.) So trickle feed lore, rather than use a fire hose. And keep the lore relevant to what is happening in the game.

I strongly recommend inviting all the players to contribute to the lore. To put it another way – at session 0 (which may be more than a single session) get everyone chatting about what sort of game they want to play, and what they want to see in the game. Discuss themes and the sort of plots people want to play through. If you want buy-in, this will get you buy-in. During the session(s) act in the role of facilitator: ask questions. Encourage others to ask questions.

e.g.: “You’re playing a tiefling? Cool! Where does your character come from? Are tieflings common? Do they form communities or are they isolated individuals? How do other people look on them? Are you Damien from The Omen or Mollymauk from Mighty Nein?”

You may not have the luxury of a session 0, pick-up games, and the like. All I can say is be even more careful about not overloading players with info dump. Keep it simple. Keep it relevant. Be clear.

Also be open to players adding lore during play. If a PC is from Big City, let them contribute things about Big City during the game.

E.g.: “If you’re over 4 feet tall do NOT go into Small Town after dark. Won’t go well for you.”

Make lore an actual part of the adventure. But remember: trickle feed it and keep it relevant.

e.g.: If you’re doing a political thriller and Baron von Nasty is planning a coup, then limit the lore to why the Baron wants to overthrow the government and who the Baron’s allies are (and maybe why they’re allies.) We don’t need to know multi-generational noble lineages or ancient history about peoples who once lived on the land.

If you’re doing a dungeon crawl, knowing that there are ancient underground complexes is enough. Who built them should only matter if and when the builders become relevant.

For some styles of game the only relevant lore is “What weakness does the monster have?”

Having overlap between game mechanics and lore can certainly help interest players. e.g. the afore mentioned monster weaknesses fall here. Another example is something like the elemental rings stats in Legend of the Five Rings. These are both mechanical representation of character abilities and linked directly into the world building. Ars Magica’s magic system is another game mechanic that feeds into/supports the game lore.

And lastly, be open to feedback. Don’t be so invested in your vision that you refuse to listen to what the other players want in the game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

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.
 

The depiction of non-human races and magic and gods in these settings is overwhelmingly reliant on shallow, one-dimensional archetypes that preclude any concept of development, evolution, or meaningful difference beyond aesthetics. Compelling worlds are defined by acknowledging the power/tech and its changes to the world over time. Fantasy settings fail to deliver any of this.
Most fantasy settings certainly do. There are two homebrewed ones that I find interesting, and they have some common features:
  • They are science-fictional, in that they have reasons why the world is the way it is. They feel that's necessary, because without explanation, a D&D style fantasy world does not make much sense.
  • They have pretty complex history. An example: I was looking at the map of one of them, and noticed a border between two styles of place names, similar to the one that still exists at the boundary of the Danelaw in England.
  • The origins and the history are not the visible drivers of adventures and politics in the present day of the settings. Those are more mundane, but they are tied into the past in ways that feel plausible.
  • Finding out about the history and the origins isn't easy. the information is fragmentary, and the clues sometime contradictory.
Both of these worlds are personal creations of their GMs, who have been running them for nearly fifty years. Most of the lore is not written down, and will be lost when they die.
 

Setting lore matters in numerous ways. Sometimes the "opponent" of or challenge to the players is the nature of the setting. Starting with environmental challenges like seeing in the dark, stepping lightly across snow, breathing underwater, or species-specific allergies/poisons like cold iron. Often with cultural expectations of the party by the societies and individuals they interact with (say alms or reciprocal gift-giving or "hat/shoes on or hat/shoes off" when entering a sacred or personal space), and possibly cultural expectations by the role of the character like when to be (and whether to act) offended.

Compelling worlds are defined by acknowledging the power/tech and its changes to the world over time. Fantasy settings fail to deliver any of this.
Quite often fantasy settings have deteriorated technology compared to the high magics of the ancients that got lost through some circumstances (like the destruction of the two trees in the Silmarillion). Other technologies may be started through breakthroughs in magic or exploration (like finding Mithril and learning to craft the material). Bronze Age settings make a great deal of the introduction of iron/steel, while late medieval/early renaissance-like settings may have the gun-powder barrier broken.

In the Lord of the Rings, enforced industrialisation was an ongoing plot (Isengard, Mordor, battle for the Shire).

It matters whether the setting undergoes a cataclysmic or major political/societal change.

There are settings with minimal intrinsic lore - the dungeon of the WIzard of Yendor in Hack or Nethack is such a setting. If that minimalist setting is enough for your party, congratulations, setting lore matters very little and should not affect your enjoyment.
 


In my experience, it was the TSR novel lines. Like, those novels aside, I've never met a single player who read more than a few pages of a campaign setting guide (unless they were a GM). But woe be the to the GM who didn't slavishly adhere to canon established in those novels. I hated this side effect of TSR novels so much. SO MUCH. (That said, I did read and enjoy some of those novels, I just didn't like players using them as shackles for the GM.)
 

In my experience, it was the TSR novel lines. Like, those novels aside, I've never met a single player who read more than a few pages of a campaign setting guide (unless they were a GM). But woe be the to the GM who didn't slavishly adhere to canon established in those novels. I hated this side effect of TSR novels so much. SO MUCH. (That said, I did read and enjoy some of those novels, I just didn't like players using them as shackles for the GM.)
I don’t know if this is what you experienced but what I saw back in the 90s was players could care less about Forgotten Realms lore that came from novels - I could mess with that all I wanted. But Dragonlance canon and lore? Don’t you dare deviate from the Dragonlance story or people would tune out entirely. It was so weird!
 

I don’t know if this is what you experienced but what I saw back in the 90s was players could care less about Forgotten Realms lore that came from novels - I could mess with that all I wanted. But Dragonlance canon and lore? Don’t you dare deviate from the Dragonlance story or people would tune out entirely. It was so weird!


I experienced it with FR specifically. My players were all a bit too overly invested in the FR novels. I have no doubt that DL would suffer from similar issues, though (luckily, only one of my players was a die-hard fan of the DL novels).
 

I experienced it with FR specifically. My players were all a bit too overly invested in the FR novels. I have no doubt that DL would suffer from similar issues, though (luckily, only one of my players was a die-hard fan of the DL novels).
I remember everyone at one game wanted to kill Drizzt when he showed up one time. 😂
 

Remove ads

Top