Experiences How much lore do you prefer?

[MDL]

So I guess in short ; keep everything written down somewhere but only share information as needed or upon request.

So with your preference being as such, how do you feel about making all the lore available, but stating to the players that it is not required reading and providing summaries and highlighting information on request?

 

[Chachalotte]

I do get your point. But sci fi doesn't necessarily need to be an infinite universe. It can be future earth, without the presence of space. Or it could be a region of space that has specific characteristics. I think what you're getting at is that there is typically more variation in fantasy and in sci fi, everyone has a few common references for what sci fi traditionally is. Or cyberpunk, for example.

Yes, indeed. I definitely agree with that as you made me see it from another way but also phrased me better.

This is an valuable experience to share I think. So was the writing and planning of the lore the main fault? Or was it just too ambitious, the GM taking on more than he/she could chew?

The introduction post from the GM was containing valid and appealing points. The villain seems fleshed out with a clear goal in mind with a world seemingly thought out with a map containing a few notes to distinct each country. But the flood of information that came after became dizzier and the characters weren't sticking to the stories. It became like a storm and only a few of us stayed until the very end. I think there was the basic but the path we took wasn't prepared in advance. Nevertheless, the GM tried and I respected that. In the end, it was the planning at fault, which was funny for me because I was finally able to discover where I had failed many times before... Not planning anything and just went along which create confusion and it can't work anymore at a certain stade. There were similar cases I got dragged into, which show how important lore can be.

 

[rae2nerdy]

So with your preference being as such, how do you feel about making all the lore available, but stating to the players that it is not required reading and providing summaries and highlighting information on request?

Well I think most of the time this just intimidates people. At least that is the feedback I've gotten every single time I've done exactly that. Because the other person feels like I have put so much work into the idea that they will have no say AND that they will eventually have to read all this information to understand what is going on.

Whereas if you do put up only the relevant information first than they get an idea of what is most important to the roleplay to start out with. Whatever information they get afterward is usually just answering specific questions that they might have. So you can either copy direct answers or the entire document. It sort of depends on the individual at that point.

 

[MDL]

that they will eventually have to read all this information to understand what is going on.

I understand that people might think like this. But what's the difference in their understanding from having the lore available or hidden? Why would they need to read the lore to know what's going on, when I could keep the same lore hidden, wouldn't they also not know what's going on by that definition?

Whereas if you do put up only the relevant information first than they get an idea of what is most important to the roleplay to start out with

Well. I am talking about presenting the lore after the interest check, as has been established as advisable in this thread.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I understand that people might think like this. But what's the difference in their understanding from having the lore available or hidden? Why would they need to read the lore to know what's going on, when I could keep the same lore hidden, wouldn't they also not know what's going on by that definition?
Well. I am talking about presenting the lore after the interest check, as has been established as advisable in this thread.

So I think your misunderstanding what I'm talking about. So let's use an example from one of my more well developed worlds.

I have one document dedicated to basic information (geography, society, government, fashion, education, etc.). I have a second document dedicated to plants/animals that are found on this world. I have a third document dedicated to specific locations that might show up in the roleplay. I have a fourth document this is mostly just character notes that I research on my own.

So say I have a roleplay set in this world with the plot - two characters start a unicorn farm.

I would send my partner information on starting a farm and on how unicorns work only. Because that is all the information they need to know to start the roleplay.

If however they asked me questions later about say the government, education, fashion, or a specific location I would link that specific information OR give them the link to the larger documents.

The reason I would not start out linking all three documents is because most of that information is never likely to come up in the roleplay itself. It fleshes out the world but that doesn't mean it is in any way relevant to the specific plot at hand. And I think that's why people get intimidated.

They see that I have three documents full of information (the plant/animal one is at least 35 pages long but the others comfortably hover in the ten page range) and they think that the world is going to be very complicated and that I'm going to be very strict on them knowing everything there is to know about it.

Whereas if I just start out giving them relevant information and then adding more when they specifically ask for it than it is less intimidating and they get answers to questions they actually care about. Not just a large info dump on stuff they don't care about / don't need to know.

Does that make a little more sense?

 

[MDL]

They see that I have three documents full of information (the plant/animal one is at least 35 pages long but the others comfortably hover in the ten page range) and they think that the world is going to be very complicated and that I'm going to be very strict on them knowing everything there is to know about it.

Erhm, what in my reply hinted at a misunderstanding? I understand that's what you meant, and I agree that the method you are using is a perfectly fine way of going about it. But I don't see the difference between making the lore available, and stating that it's simply for world-building purposes and not necessarily required reading, and keeping it hidden. That was my point. If anyone in the RP is interested in reading generally about the lore, why keep it from them? Look at Amaranth, for example, I don't see what's particularly intimidating about its lore section.

 

[MDL]

The introduction post from the GM was containing valid and appealing points. The villain seems fleshed out with a clear goal in mind with a world seemingly thought out with a map containing a few notes to distinct each country. But the flood of information that came after became dizzier and the characters weren't sticking to the stories. It became like a storm and only a few of us stayed until the very end. I think there was the basic but the path we took wasn't prepared in advance. Nevertheless, the GM tried and I respected that. In the end, it was the planning at fault, which was funny for me because I was finally able to discover where I had failed many times before... Not planning anything and just went along which create confusion and it can't work anymore at a certain stade. There were similar cases I got dragged into, which show how important lore can be.

Sorry I missed this post. It seems that maybe the GM was freewheeling a bit maybe?

 

[rae2nerdy]

Erhm, what in my reply hinted at a misunderstanding? I understand that's what you meant, and I agree that the method you are using is a perfectly fine way of going about it. But I don't see the difference between making the lore available, and stating that it's simply for world-building purposes and not necessarily required reading, and keeping it hidden. That was my point. If anyone in the RP is interested in reading generally about the lore, why keep it from them? Look at Amaranth, for example, I don't see what's particularly intimidating about its lore section.

Because people don't listen. That is the part you are not understanding. Your assuming that just by telling someone they don't need to read something they won't read it. That isn't how people work, especially not in a group setting.

People are going to see that lore section for Amaranth and be incredibly intimidated. There are SEVEN threads, which makes it seem like there is a lot of information the person is going to have to know in order to get caught up with everyone else.

Now yes looking closely you'll see most of them are a single post and presumably not that much information but we're not talking about people who actually read the lore. We are talking about people's perception of the lore.

And the perception that Amaranth gives off is of a lot of information that must be looked over before you can start a roleplay in that world.


That is why I keep hammering in the idea of giving them the relevant information and letting them ask questions. Because honestly some people won't ask questions. They'll take that relevant information and be perfectly content to start the roleplay armed only with that information.

Some people might have a handful of additional questions and some might have detailed ideas about the world.

But by only starting out with the relevant information and then leaving it up to the individual to ask you for additional insight you are letting them choose the level of lore they are comfortable engaging with.

And you aren't just linking them this intimidating wall of lore and telling them "Read it if you want."

 

[Lorsh]

a fine balance where I don't have much to read but also don't have to ask questions when I make a CS

 

[MDL]

Because people don't listen. That is the part you are not understanding. Your assuming that just by telling someone they don't need to read something they won't read it. That isn't how people work, especially not in a group setting.

People are going to see that lore section for Amaranth and be incredibly intimidated. There are SEVEN threads, which makes it seem like there is a lot of information the person is going to have to know in order to get caught up with everyone else.

Now yes looking closely you'll see most of them are a single post and presumably not that much information but we're not talking about people who actually read the lore. We are talking about people's perception of the lore.

And the perception that Amaranth gives off is of a lot of information that must be looked over before you can start a roleplay in that world.


That is why I keep hammering in the idea of giving them the relevant information and letting them ask questions. Because honestly some people won't ask questions. They'll take that relevant information and be perfectly content to start the roleplay armed only with that information.

Some people might have a handful of additional questions and some might have detailed ideas about the world.

But by only starting out with the relevant information and then leaving it up to the individual to ask you for additional insight you are letting them choose the level of lore they are comfortable engaging with.

And you aren't just linking them this intimidating wall of lore and telling them "Read it if you want."

Come on now. Let me reiterate, I understand what you're saying. I'm not a moron, I can read. I take your point, but I don't buy the extreme you're presenting. And while we have discussed this in the thread, it is certainly not the consensus so far. What we're talking about is how to present the lore without "wall of texting" it at the interest check for example. A lot of players, especially of the more experienced variety, want to play games with a little meat on the bones and are not intimidated by a couple of threads. I get that some people don't like to read that much. Should we limit how long people's character sheets should be, so potential players don't get intimidated by how long CS they have to read?

All of the best RPs I have been in during my ten years have all had considerable lore that has been available at will. That isn't necessarily a rule in and of itself, but there has been a clear pattern there for as long as I can remember.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Come on now. Let me reiterate, I understand what you're saying. I'm not a moron, I can read. I take your point, but I don't buy the extreme you're presenting. And while we have discussed this in the thread, it is certainly not the consensus so far. What we're talking about is how to present the lore without "wall of texting" it at the interest check for example. A lot of players, especially of the more experienced variety, want to play games with a little meat on the bones and are not intimidated by a couple of threads. I get that some people don't like to read that much. Should we limit how long people's character sheets should be, so potential players don't get intimidated by how long CS they have to read?

All of the best RPs I have been in during my ten years have all had considerable lore that has been available at will. That isn't necessarily a rule in and of itself, but there has been a clear pattern there for as long as I can remember.

Then perhaps the issue is more in the fact that you are unwilling to accept others personal experience as valid. I am telling you that not everyone is going to be comfortable with a lot of lore thrown at them all at once. That doesn't mean they aren't comfortable with a lot of lore at all but that they like to be given it slowly over the course of the roleplay.

I am not calling you a moron nor am I insinuating that you can't read. I am merely trying to get through to you that you experience is not a universal measuring stick for how lore is presented.

 

[MDL]

Then perhaps the issue is more in the fact that you are unwilling to accept others personal experience as valid.

What a silly conclusion to draw. I was merely trying to define the difference between having lore in the public sphere or not. Then you made the suggestion that 7 threads of 20 minutes of total reading in Amaranth's lore forum is intimidating, which I don't agree is how most people react unless they are new to roleplaying.

I am not calling you a moron nor am I insinuating that you can't read. I am merely trying to get through to you that you experience is not a universal measuring stick for how lore is presented.

I was pointing out that you incorrectly assumed that I misunderstood your plainly stated points. And I did not suggest that my experience is the definite answer to these questions. But my experience of roleplaying does not tell me that a majority of players are intimidated by lore sections, something that is demonstrated in abundance on this website. Your experience tells you something different, and I don't agree. Simple as.