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.

 

[CreamCloud0]

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.

true yes, but unfortunately inapplicable if you ever want to deviate from those pre-existing settings into original ones or into anything your group isn't familiar with.

 

[haakon1]

I have no idea what went on in the 33 pages of posts since the original (pretty good!) post 19 days ago … it seems one needs to visit ENworld every day to keep up with popular threads.

But to the headline question, I think of setting elements like wars, climate, social and political structures, and the economy as ways to build verisimilitude and buy-in to the setting. Recurring NPC’s and locations the PC’s revisit also make the setting.

I also agree with the OP that adding more “heritages” (species, races, whatever your game calls it), classes, and magic approaches holds very little interest for me or my players. Playing a human or something close is generally enough for roleplaying. If you need to play a Myconid or Kuo-Toa, OK, I can work with that, but the roleplaying disadvantage of being a walking mushroom in human and adjacent setting is considerable - if you buy into that, instead of just gaining a mechanical advantage, I’m game as DM.

To put it another way, I think setting is “fluff” - story elements and interaction seeds. Not “crunch” - rules. Overwhelming complexity of “crunch” is not good, imho, and a bagillion choices of heritage and class subtract more than they add, imho.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

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.

I have to say, for me... this is a THING

I have to beg my players to let me run something else, otherwise they just want to go back to Star Wars. again and again...

We spent 4 moths of gaming just messing around on Naboo

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I hope the PCs killed Jar-Jar, otherwise that was 4 months wasted.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

I hope the PCs killed Jar-Jar, otherwise that was 4 months wasted.

Oh worse...

They love gungans so they picked up one of their own and now have her as a permanent crew of the ship

I now have to roleplay as a gungan

 

[Epic Meepo]

Oh worse...

They love gungans so they picked up one of their own and now have her as a permanent crew of the ship

I now have to roleplay as a gungan

If I had to roleplay that gungan, she'd have a refined British accent; she'd wear an old-timey monocle-and-top-hat combo; and she'd routinely make philosophical observations while sipping tea.

The players' reactions will tell me how deeply they care about Star Wars setting lore, because defending gungan culture as portrayed onscreen is a whole new level of caring about Star Wars setting lore.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

If I had to roleplay that gungan, she'd have a refined British accent; she'd wear an old-timey monocle-and-top-hat combo; and she'd routinely make philosophical observations while sipping tea.

The players' reactions will tell me how deeply they care about Star Wars setting lore, because defending gungan culture as portrayed onscreen is a whole new level of caring about Star Wars setting lore.

in their defense... These are people who were the same age as Anakin when they watched that movie, between ages 7 and 9. So for them, Star Wars was no more deep or cultural than power rangers. They saw characters that they liked, and they did funny things, and they were children entertained by antics and the floppy ears.

also in their defense... they have not watched star wars since that movie came out, other than little bits here and there. None of them have see all the films, none of them have finished any of the TV series, they played KotoR for a bit but it was too hard, and they only really connected with Rogue One, but not for any real star wars reasons, it was just heroic and action fun with a happy sad ending.

in the our own game's defense... we have changed A LOT of the lore, backstory, and cultures of Star Wars.. but if you want to hear our own version of the setting, well, that's best for whole new thread. because we have been playing 'trilogy's' - in setting making our own canon - for many years now

So with that said, to give you an idea, Naboo was wartorn, gungans (of no particular human-culture analog or accent!!) were a race shoved off by the Amidala imperialists, and we leaned into the abuse of the empire, and the players were the heroes to come 'fix all this' years later.

Then I fire-bombed the planet and killed everyone.

 

[Epic Meepo]

Then I fire-bombed the planet and killed everyone.

Seems reasonable.