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

[zarionofarabel]

Oof long thread.

In my experience over the decades, one of the few things that makes players care about the lore is if the game is happening in an established franchise that all of the players are fans of already.

40K, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings etc... and only if they're already interested in it.

The popularity of video game adaptations help too. The Witcher, Baldur's Gate, Fallout etc really gets players interested.

I guess that's super obvious but it's a strategy I've used to increase player engagement: get THEM to ask me to run a game in a setting that they already care about. Instant win.

That's probably the easiest way!

I know that was one of the primary motivatiors for why Star Wars became the main game I ran in my teens. While a couple members of the group liked the D&D novels, everyone loved Star Wars. That and, as the forever GM, I liked the D6 Star Wars mechanics way better than D&D mechanics so I was totally on board. I've probably ran more hours of Star Wars games than anything else.

 

[Selvarin]

I think the question is driving precisely around (or through) what you're saying---what properties must lore possess to make it such that the players cannot ignore it because it represents a real, tangible material aspect or aspects in play?

Of course if the "lore doesn't matter" then "caring about the lore" is purely a matter of preference.

I'm asking to dig deeper---what properties of setting lore make it so that "the lore does matter" and that players are compelled to care about it or play cannot continue?

When it changes events.

When it creates a cost to players' choices.

If it really is just a series of encounters then it matters much less.