So, I have an odd situation. My players are great, when they're engaged, they have a great time Rping, and getting into character. But this is maybe thirty percent of the time, and predominantly revolves around combat, or when the players are in serious Danger. But the sessions where they're having interesting conversation, or exploring/studying half of them are trolling their phones. I have one religious note taker, and the rest either surf the web, or do other things. I pour a lot of time into really writing the histories of my game world, and I don't force feed them to my players. But when the times comes that they do receive the occasionally necessary lore dumps, I can literally feel them check out. So my question, am I doing lore dumps wrong? Do I need to ask my players point blank if they're paying attention? I don't want to be that guy, but I invest too much into this if they aren't gonna be involved.
To put this into immediate context: My players are on the road, they have a solid three day journey ahead of them. I have written a route with vistas, and locations. Each with history and what I feel is really rich texture. But last time I actually described their three day journey in any regard, they barely paid attention. My random Encounters are based around these locals. I feel like this makes an "On the road" session feel unique.
So I am not sure how you are telling your lore. But one thing I found useful was to have a npc telling my players the lore. They entered a town as your standard caravan guards, and one of the merchants began to fill them in on the sites. I made sure to engage the players as he talked. Example "John the fighter, over there is the training arena, combats are held every Sunday. Oh Timmy the wizard over there is the arcane tower of high sorcery." Player only tend to care, much like my kids on vacation, only about the stuff that pertains to them directly.
To put this into immediate context: My players are on the road, they have a solid three day journey ahead of them. I have written a route with vistas, and locations. Each with history and what I feel is really rich texture. But last time I actually described their three day journey in any regard, they barely paid attention. My random Encounters are based around these locals. I feel like this makes an "On the road" session feel unique.
Box Text as some call it or DM monologues should not be more than 5 sentences for the most part. If you are spending long periods of time narrating lots of people are going to tune out. The main premise of D&D is collaborative storytelling, so make sure you are allowing your players to engage in each scene Vs simply reading out the course of actions.
Also unless a PC knows the area, the rich history frankly will only be found out when they do research. So telling it all out is going to be boring because it is being forced on them. Find ways to weave it in, in short small doses.
I often fall into the trap of over describing things myself. You’re right, players check out. You remember high school where that one teacher would just kinda drone on and on, usually reading from a page, and nobody payed attention to them either? Yeah.... And I know better because I tune out whenever the other DMs read from pages like that too.
I have found that there are two ways that I do those info bits for players that have been most successful.
The first way is if they learn the information because it is part of a challenge. If one of the layers of the challenge before the party is “go learn about x” (one presumes in preparation for “go defeat x”), then they will be more likely to pay attention. It isn’t an “info dump” because they actually care and they care because they have been given a reason to (like hollowtpm mentioned).
The second way (also mentioned by hollowtpm) is by engaging them with the scene. As an example, they will be riveted to a description of a cave if they expect a monster or other villains to attack at any moment.
So, basically, hollowtpm gave great advice and people should listen to it.
I think there’s two separate problems to consider here.
Number one is, are you giving too much exposition? In my opinion, less is more for D&D. I’ve ruined entire campaigns by focusing on worldbuilding, because—and this is the key point—it takes the focus off the players. Towns full of interesting NPCs, conflicting factions, and mysteries to be solved are all great worldbuilding, because the players can interact with and affect them. But while I love deep historical or cosmological lore in book form, like Tolkien’s Silmarilion or the infamous Shadow of the Past chapter, it absolutely, totally sucks in game, because it pushes the players out of the spotlight. Ultimately, only you can discover how much is too much, and whether you’ve gone over that. Try to think from a player’s perspective, or even ask your players—they can help!
Number two is a separate but equally big issue. I’ve run campaigns where players are on phones or computers at the table, and it absolutely kills the energy and fun in the game. This can be a problem regardless of how exciting the combat or roleplay is. The only solution here is to talk to your players. Emphasize the fact that this is a social event, not just a game, and half the fun comes from watching your friends do and say foolhardy, epic, and occasionally heroic things in character. That’s what makes the stories that friends remember long after the group breaks up! So I don’t allow phones or computers at my table anymore, and I think you and your players might have more fun if you did the same.
Remember, communication is the key. There is nothing a DM can’t solve as long as they enlist their players to help, because it’s everyone’s responsibility to keep the game great. Good luck and have fun!
Have you talked about this at a session 0? To some degree it seems like it could be a play style issue. You prefer in depth scene setting and your players don’t. I’m not saying who is right, but you need to get on the same page. Maybe explain to them this is what’s fun for you and make a compromise that if they try to pay attention, you scale it back a bit. The other thing is as Naivara noted, scene setting takes the spotlight off the players in what is supposed to be a cooperative game. Does your extended description of a stunning vista help advance the plot? Or give them a clue to help them solve the mystery?
As far as computers, that part of the reason I prefer paper character sheets, because I know I’ll allow myself to get distracted if I use a computer. You could throw that idea out there, but it might seem too much like you’re an annoyed teacher, so that will be group dependent. Though you could sell it as having a hp box that you erased so much it tore a hole in the page is a badge of honor :)
Finally, your phrasing is a bit of a clue that you may be going overboard: A “lore dump” does not sound like a pleasant experience. There’s a term in literary circles called a forced exposition. Like at the start of a movie when two characters are having a conversation, but they both already know the information and it’s really pretty transparently for the audience’s benefit. You want to avoid that and things like it. Keep things mysterious and drip out the information. Make them a little confused, maybe is the word, and curious and they’ll pay more attention.
So, this is a problem beginning fantasy novelists have as well. They’re all Tolkiens. They want to invent Quenya and thousand-year histories. That’s what’s fun for them. But what was fun for the readers? Bilbo playing a disappearing trick at a birthday party. Galadriel giving Gimli three strands of her hair. Eowyn killing the Lord of the Nazgul. Sam carrying Frodo up Mount Doom. Most people didn’t read the Silmarillion. If you did, and you know that Galadriel is Arwen’s great grandmother or whatever, good for you. But you don’t have to.
Go ahead and create your deep lore. It might even give your world a richer texture. But don’t insist on showing everything you’ve created. That’s like being the background painter on a theater set and being mad when the lead actor stands in front of your work.
Show them a map of the three days journey, if they ask questions about some locales marked on the course, give them a _brief_ description of that area. Unless you have encounters on the road, let then ask questions out of sequence as the map prompts them to. DM monologues should only occur beyond the previously mentioned five sentences if you're actually doing a dialogue between two NPCs and the players are assuring you they don't want to intervene just yet. There's sort of a variant to the "show don't tell" rule in a lot of narrative in art, "play don't tell."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So for the lore dumps: As others have said, is it just a straight up lore dump or are you using RP with NPCs to reveal that lore? I am like you, over do it for the background I write, but none of the information is given freely, only if it is absolutely relevant and needed, interest is shown or a player asks, in character or not. Also did you mention about history and lore during a session 0? The characters being in a world that feels lived in and still living. Do they want that kind of campaign? Maybe they thought they did but now after being in a rich world, maybe they just want more encounters and magical items to kick butt.
As for the not paying attention: An example of how I dealt with it. My group were similar, but being online it was on discord, with memes and stuff popping up or the occasional written comment making a joke about something said in RP. Other times after doing RP with one individual, turn to another whose character was present and they respond "sorry I wasn't listening."
I just spoke to the group and asked for it to stop. Sure there can be moments to still have an out of character laugh, but not in the middle of some RP, wait until the RP is finished or save the comment for when we take a break/finish the session. Or pay attention if your character is there. I told them I found it disrespectful and I am sure any of the players would feel the same if I just zoned out or went on my phone if they were having an RP moment amongst themselves. Example, the group discuss a plan and turn to the DM and say "so is that possible?" only to find out I had not paid any attention to it.
The way I've written it makes it sound blunt and dickish but it was actually a good conversation with the group that lasted only a minute or two. Since then, things have been much better, people pay more attention but still have times they zone out, it happens to all of us, can't be helped. You should speak to them directly. I understand people are there for fun, but you are the DM, you are there for fun to, their investment and engagement is what makes it fun to guide them through heroic journeys. If you are not having fun, if you feel disappointed that they show little interest in the lore of the world, then why DM for them. Keep those that are good players such as the note taker, and look for others who are invested in a rich story.
Talking to the group solves most issues. Not telling. They are not there to be scolded. Just that it feels disrespectful but mostly after the effort you put into simply plan, set up and run a session, yet alone writing new lore, it kills your morale to run the sessions.
This is part of the reason I go light on the lore. Besides not being too terribly interested in it myself, I know players aren’t either...
My advice is to focus your session prep on making good dungeons and encounters, fleshing out NPCs they like, and advancing the narrative as it immediately relates to them. Don’t worry about lore. If they show interest in a particular area of lore about your world, then great you can expand on that, but wait for them to show that initial interest.
I have tons of lore in my world. I tell my players almost none of it without prompting.
What their characters needed to know to start, I provided in a written document, leaving it up to them how much/little they wanted to read. If there is something the character would know, they might ask, "Would my character know this?" I will briefly summarize and say, "Details are in that document." I also put everything up on World Anvil, all the really deep lore stuff, but I don't say all the details during the session. Two players, I know for absolute sure, read every word. They have also made accounts on World Anvil and "subscribed" to my world so I don't even need to tell them I posted anything. The others may or may not read it all -- dunno. One guy I am pretty sure doesn't read the lore stuff, unless he thinks it is important/relevant. That's fine --- it is there if they want it, and if they don't want it, nobody is harmed.
During the session I do not go into exposition. I do not give long descriptions of the history of a place -- unless someone asks. (Someone usually does -- typically one of the two who also read every bit of the WA site.) Or unless it is relevant. I put the site together and let them discover the history through investigation, should they care to explore/examine.
For example, the town of Lugdunum fell to "unknown forces" 5 years ago. The heroes were sent north to discover what actually happened. They snuck in through the sewers. When they got inside, beneath the Principia (the "capital" building as it were), they found a strange round room with some scorch marks on the floor and broken braziers. I did not go into the history... just told them what they found. On the first floor of that building, they found a skeleton in a library, most of which had otherwise been destroyed. The skeleton was reaching as if for something under a mostly-intact desk. They found a scroll behind, and pocketed it for later. Later on when they opened it, they found it was a journal, and read it, discovering that "something" had been trapped below the Principia in an Imprisonment spell and the journal writer (presumably the skeleton) had accidentally let it out. It had wiped out everyone in the Principia and at the end of the journal was coming for him. Later on, the Cleric of Apollo saw that there was a destroyed temple to Apollo and Diana here, and zoomed off to investigate it. He found a trap door that led under the temple with a part of a manuscript chiseled onto the wall, telling the story of how a creature called "Maagog the Slaughterer", who was a member of a race called "The Old Ones" had been killed by the Romans but the raised by a goddess they'd never heard of, and was unkillable now, so the Romans had Imprisoned him with a spell under the town they had just conquered, and then re-named the town Lugdunum.
This told the history of the place pretty effectively (while still leaving some mysteries like who are "the Old Ones" and who/what is goddess they never heard of), and they found and cared about these pieces of history, rather than me just "telling" it to them.
My point here is -- if you want them to care about the lore of your world, you have to make it matter somehow, and then let them seek it out and only tell them the parts that they would find, when they find them. Don't tell them the story of the Misty Mountains as they approach the mountains. Let them get captured by goblins, and while trying to escape, find Rings of Power and Swords from the Goblin-wars and THAT will tell them the history of the Misty Mountains.
But the sessions where they're having interesting conversation, or exploring/studying half of them are trolling their phones. I have one religious note taker, and the rest either surf the web, or do other things. I pour a lot of time into really writing the histories of my game world, and I don't force feed them to my players. But when the times comes that they do receive the occasionally necessary lore dumps, I can literally feel them check out.
To put this into immediate context: My players are on the road, they have a solid three day journey ahead of them. I have written a route with vistas, and locations. Each with history and what I feel is really rich texture. But last time I actually described their three day journey in any regard, they barely paid attention. My random Encounters are based around these locals. I feel like this makes an "On the road" session feel unique.
On the Lore Dumps - is this because one player has been taking action to find out said lore or is it the group enters the village of Mudville - here is the last century of history of this humble village...? If its the former then I think its ok that some players check out a little bit. If its not for them but they're not being disruptive while another player has a moment I personally think that is fine. If its the latter then you're likely just as you said giving them a lore dump and they don't care at all.
On the multi-day journey, I've found using skill challenges which can alter random encounters or the next part of the story make travel much more engaging for the players. As an example: my players were traveling into the mountains to kill a white dragon in its lair. Success on the skill challenge meant there were less minions in the lair on arrival - failure meant there were more or if they tried to camp - they'd be attacked by yetis in the night. They didn't know the exact mechanics but they knew it mattered and I think gives them more of a sense of agency in how things play out. Also its ok to not have every day in travel be something unique - especially if the players don't feel like RPing the entire sequence - some days nothing exciting happens.
So To clarify a few points: I do not lore dump willy nilly. When I go into exposition its because someone has gone to a library and is researching, or they've killed a monster and are looking through it belongings and find letters or a journal. My entire story is wrapped around each players backstory. They all have personal stakes in the game. And I've had many moments where they're having to figure out what to do, and I have given them all the answers they need to figure it out. But because half of them don't really pay attention, its more of a 'DM recounts the important information from the last 10 sessions'. Which can turn into an hour of explanation. And that kills momentum. These players signed up for this kind of campaign. I had the typical "what do you expect out of a dnd game?" And they were excited for it. Anyway I'm gonna try for the skill challenge approach, any advice on that? I've had very mixed results with Skill challenges, and I have watched the 18 matt colville videos haha.
I've had many moments where they're having to figure out what to do, and I have given them all the answers they need to figure it out. But because half of them don't really pay attention, its more of a 'DM recounts the important information from the last 10 sessions'. Which can turn into an hour of explanation.
IMO, then let them suffer and do not feed them information. I rarely remind my players of information they have been given (especially when it is on World Anvil... I just say "that journal document is on World Anvil" etc.).
Is it possible that one reason they don't bother to pay attention the first time, is that they know you will just tell them what they need 10 sessions later when the time comes?
I would not tell them. I'd say, "Well I guess you will have to try and remember." Unless the character has that feat that allows perfect recall, keen mind or whatever it is, do not let the players use their character's "intelligence" as a crutch for LORE. (I'm not saying high-Int shouldn't make the character smart, possibly much smarter than the player -- I'm saying don't let the stat allow them to ignore your lore and force you to feed it to them as needed.)
Maybe a couple of lost battles and a near-TPK or two will teach them to pay attention. Is what I am saying.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
The Lore for your world is cool and fun. You think it is awesome, how all the pieces fit together, the beautiful vistas that you can see in your mind's eye, the flora, fauna, beasts, monsters, countries, cities, politics, factions, groups, other adventurers, any number of NPCs, geography, history (battles between realms that set up the current day plot lines).
However, the fact is that all of this information is most useful for the DM so that they can properly assess the impact of the PCs on the events that happen around them. How do the PCs interact with the world, how do they affect the threads of the ongoing plotline(s)? What NPCs do the player's interact with? What do they say?
In general, the PCs and players are not interested in the detailed history, geography and politics of your fantasy world - it provides setting and context for the STORY that you are creating between the DM and the players. The players don't need or want all the extraneous detail since usually, most of it, is context and not relevant to the plot.
For example, describing a beautiful rocky mountain pass. "The sun setting in the east over a vast forest of evergreens. You are above the treeline, the blue sky fading to azure and purple as the sun descends surrounded by rocks. " as a setup for an ambush by a bunch of crag cats might be fine but trying to describe the vistas you see in your imagination is bound to fail since everyone has a different imagination. Some folks will never be able to picture it no matter how many words you use and others will imagine something completely different - so when describing "vistas" stick to a couple of sentences and allow the players to fill in the details in their own imagination.
Anyway, in general, insert lore and descriptive text in small chunks of two to three sentences so that the players can focus on and pay attention to it. Give them the lore that matters or specific red herrings not all the lore you have created. Also, unless you are specifically foreshadowing (which is a good idea) then make sure that the lore presented has some practical impact on the player decisions in the near future or the odds are good that you will have to remind them of the lore they "learned" several sessions in the past.
If you find that you like to spend 5 minutes describing the vistas on a journey or recounting the histories of the world or the paleo-geology of the mountain pass the characters are traversing - you've likely gone too far into the lore. The players shouldn't ideally have the time or interest to pull out phones when playing.
But because half of them don't really pay attention, its more of a 'DM recounts the important information from the last 10 sessions'. Which can turn into an hour of explanation. And that kills momentum. These players signed up for this kind of campaign. I had the typical "what do you expect out of a dnd game?" And they were excited for it. Anyway I'm gonna try for the skill challenge approach, any advice on that? I've had very mixed results with Skill challenges, and I have watched the 18 matt colville videos haha.
I've only used them a few times so far but I think I've had good results. My players still talk about one where the fighter carried the rest of the party since they were all rolling horribly and he got a Nat20 as his second success. I think part of it is trying to make sure you're using them in different situations so its not always just going through the woods or escaping from something. Also let them be creative, if your gut reaction is to say no you cant use that skill, talk it through with them and you might be surprised at the creativity - you can always still say now.
On the lore side, what you could try, maybe for the next campaign if its too late for this one, is having a google doc or something similar everyone can access and have players write up short summaries of the session from their character's POV, then use those are recaps / reference material for the next session. My DM for our CoS campaign did that and I think it worked really well, if you wrote like 3-5 short sentences before the session started - you got rewarded with some in game benefits. Might be useful, might not be.
The problem with the DM performing as the encyclopedia for the game is the DM performing as an encyclopedia for the game. You can continue to foist lore on them in a fashion you've realized is not captivating, or approach a game style lore stye that works for the lot of you.
If we're talking about completely new players, I'll do some hand holding, where if there's context the character should know, they get it in a few memory job bullet points, nothing more than a minute and enough to address the circumstances where the context helps. You need to trust that the blocks will eventually take hold in their minds. If you're doing an hour long recap you're not so much hand holding so much as dragging them through scenery you're invested in (because you made it) but they don't have purchase on.
If we're talking experienced players, you're going to have let them flounder eventually. And maybe it's not floundering, maybe they'll eventually take purchase of something available in your world and "boom" you have PCs now rooted.
This is why I'm not a fan of extended backstories enmeshed in elaborate world lore prior to the game. It's all thought experiment up to session 1, literally "it's pretty to think so". Now in practice it seems like there's "no there there" the connectedness wrought in pregame isn't (lit nerds may see what I did there to get where my personal aesthetics in fictional drivers is coming from). There's a more organic way to build the world, which is less frustrating and time consuming to the DM. It gives up a lot from the DM to the players and players give up some agency to let the game take shape too.
My descriptions are lengthy but I tell my players in the beginning that there are hints woven into each of my "monologues" that will help them succeed on the task at hand and I actually do weave in details into my descriptions. Unique buildings they may want to check out or unusual forest clearings in the distance. When you look out from the top of a mountain (in real life) there is so much detail you wouldn't describe it all, you describe what matters to you. In each of your monologues describe one thing that would interest each of your characters. That usually works for me.
So the things I’m hearing the most is lose anything that is DM flavor text, and opt instead for specific information that is delivered by an NPC and only give the players what they need. And perhaps the whole describing the vista type stuff should be saved for very special circumstances.
this does beg the question though: What should be considered special? My normal desire to describe a vista is to communicate the scale of the world. But maybe that’s something best said simply and let the players go from there...
I mean, yeah, describe a vista. But keep it to five sentences or less. You shouldn’t need more than that, unless you’re trying to give enough detail to navigate by, which you don’t need to. If they want to navigate, they’ll ask, and then you can follow up with more info or just abstract it with a survival check.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I have an odd situation. My players are great, when they're engaged, they have a great time Rping, and getting into character. But this is maybe thirty percent of the time, and predominantly revolves around combat, or when the players are in serious Danger. But the sessions where they're having interesting conversation, or exploring/studying half of them are trolling their phones. I have one religious note taker, and the rest either surf the web, or do other things. I pour a lot of time into really writing the histories of my game world, and I don't force feed them to my players. But when the times comes that they do receive the occasionally necessary lore dumps, I can literally feel them check out. So my question, am I doing lore dumps wrong? Do I need to ask my players point blank if they're paying attention? I don't want to be that guy, but I invest too much into this if they aren't gonna be involved.
To put this into immediate context: My players are on the road, they have a solid three day journey ahead of them. I have written a route with vistas, and locations. Each with history and what I feel is really rich texture. But last time I actually described their three day journey in any regard, they barely paid attention. My random Encounters are based around these locals. I feel like this makes an "On the road" session feel unique.
So I am not sure how you are telling your lore. But one thing I found useful was to have a npc telling my players the lore. They entered a town as your standard caravan guards, and one of the merchants began to fill them in on the sites. I made sure to engage the players as he talked. Example "John the fighter, over there is the training arena, combats are held every Sunday. Oh Timmy the wizard over there is the arcane tower of high sorcery." Player only tend to care, much like my kids on vacation, only about the stuff that pertains to them directly.
Box Text as some call it or DM monologues should not be more than 5 sentences for the most part. If you are spending long periods of time narrating lots of people are going to tune out. The main premise of D&D is collaborative storytelling, so make sure you are allowing your players to engage in each scene Vs simply reading out the course of actions.
Also unless a PC knows the area, the rich history frankly will only be found out when they do research. So telling it all out is going to be boring because it is being forced on them. Find ways to weave it in, in short small doses.
I often fall into the trap of over describing things myself. You’re right, players check out. You remember high school where that one teacher would just kinda drone on and on, usually reading from a page, and nobody payed attention to them either? Yeah.... And I know better because I tune out whenever the other DMs read from pages like that too.
I have found that there are two ways that I do those info bits for players that have been most successful.
So, basically, hollowtpm gave great advice and people should listen to it.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think there’s two separate problems to consider here.
Number one is, are you giving too much exposition? In my opinion, less is more for D&D. I’ve ruined entire campaigns by focusing on worldbuilding, because—and this is the key point—it takes the focus off the players. Towns full of interesting NPCs, conflicting factions, and mysteries to be solved are all great worldbuilding, because the players can interact with and affect them. But while I love deep historical or cosmological lore in book form, like Tolkien’s Silmarilion or the infamous Shadow of the Past chapter, it absolutely, totally sucks in game, because it pushes the players out of the spotlight. Ultimately, only you can discover how much is too much, and whether you’ve gone over that. Try to think from a player’s perspective, or even ask your players—they can help!
Number two is a separate but equally big issue. I’ve run campaigns where players are on phones or computers at the table, and it absolutely kills the energy and fun in the game. This can be a problem regardless of how exciting the combat or roleplay is. The only solution here is to talk to your players. Emphasize the fact that this is a social event, not just a game, and half the fun comes from watching your friends do and say foolhardy, epic, and occasionally heroic things in character. That’s what makes the stories that friends remember long after the group breaks up! So I don’t allow phones or computers at my table anymore, and I think you and your players might have more fun if you did the same.
Remember, communication is the key. There is nothing a DM can’t solve as long as they enlist their players to help, because it’s everyone’s responsibility to keep the game great. Good luck and have fun!
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Have you talked about this at a session 0? To some degree it seems like it could be a play style issue. You prefer in depth scene setting and your players don’t. I’m not saying who is right, but you need to get on the same page. Maybe explain to them this is what’s fun for you and make a compromise that if they try to pay attention, you scale it back a bit.
The other thing is as Naivara noted, scene setting takes the spotlight off the players in what is supposed to be a cooperative game. Does your extended description of a stunning vista help advance the plot? Or give them a clue to help them solve the mystery?
As far as computers, that part of the reason I prefer paper character sheets, because I know I’ll allow myself to get distracted if I use a computer. You could throw that idea out there, but it might seem too much like you’re an annoyed teacher, so that will be group dependent. Though you could sell it as having a hp box that you erased so much it tore a hole in the page is a badge of honor :)
Finally, your phrasing is a bit of a clue that you may be going overboard: A “lore dump” does not sound like a pleasant experience. There’s a term in literary circles called a forced exposition. Like at the start of a movie when two characters are having a conversation, but they both already know the information and it’s really pretty transparently for the audience’s benefit. You want to avoid that and things like it. Keep things mysterious and drip out the information. Make them a little confused, maybe is the word, and curious and they’ll pay more attention.
So, this is a problem beginning fantasy novelists have as well. They’re all Tolkiens. They want to invent Quenya and thousand-year histories. That’s what’s fun for them. But what was fun for the readers? Bilbo playing a disappearing trick at a birthday party. Galadriel giving Gimli three strands of her hair. Eowyn killing the Lord of the Nazgul. Sam carrying Frodo up Mount Doom. Most people didn’t read the Silmarillion. If you did, and you know that Galadriel is Arwen’s great grandmother or whatever, good for you. But you don’t have to.
Go ahead and create your deep lore. It might even give your world a richer texture. But don’t insist on showing everything you’ve created. That’s like being the background painter on a theater set and being mad when the lead actor stands in front of your work.
Show them a map of the three days journey, if they ask questions about some locales marked on the course, give them a _brief_ description of that area. Unless you have encounters on the road, let then ask questions out of sequence as the map prompts them to. DM monologues should only occur beyond the previously mentioned five sentences if you're actually doing a dialogue between two NPCs and the players are assuring you they don't want to intervene just yet. There's sort of a variant to the "show don't tell" rule in a lot of narrative in art, "play don't tell."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So for the lore dumps:
As others have said, is it just a straight up lore dump or are you using RP with NPCs to reveal that lore? I am like you, over do it for the background I write, but none of the information is given freely, only if it is absolutely relevant and needed, interest is shown or a player asks, in character or not. Also did you mention about history and lore during a session 0? The characters being in a world that feels lived in and still living. Do they want that kind of campaign? Maybe they thought they did but now after being in a rich world, maybe they just want more encounters and magical items to kick butt.
As for the not paying attention:
An example of how I dealt with it. My group were similar, but being online it was on discord, with memes and stuff popping up or the occasional written comment making a joke about something said in RP. Other times after doing RP with one individual, turn to another whose character was present and they respond "sorry I wasn't listening."
I just spoke to the group and asked for it to stop. Sure there can be moments to still have an out of character laugh, but not in the middle of some RP, wait until the RP is finished or save the comment for when we take a break/finish the session. Or pay attention if your character is there. I told them I found it disrespectful and I am sure any of the players would feel the same if I just zoned out or went on my phone if they were having an RP moment amongst themselves. Example, the group discuss a plan and turn to the DM and say "so is that possible?" only to find out I had not paid any attention to it.
The way I've written it makes it sound blunt and dickish but it was actually a good conversation with the group that lasted only a minute or two. Since then, things have been much better, people pay more attention but still have times they zone out, it happens to all of us, can't be helped. You should speak to them directly. I understand people are there for fun, but you are the DM, you are there for fun to, their investment and engagement is what makes it fun to guide them through heroic journeys. If you are not having fun, if you feel disappointed that they show little interest in the lore of the world, then why DM for them. Keep those that are good players such as the note taker, and look for others who are invested in a rich story.
Talking to the group solves most issues. Not telling. They are not there to be scolded. Just that it feels disrespectful but mostly after the effort you put into simply plan, set up and run a session, yet alone writing new lore, it kills your morale to run the sessions.
This is part of the reason I go light on the lore. Besides not being too terribly interested in it myself, I know players aren’t either...
My advice is to focus your session prep on making good dungeons and encounters, fleshing out NPCs they like, and advancing the narrative as it immediately relates to them. Don’t worry about lore. If they show interest in a particular area of lore about your world, then great you can expand on that, but wait for them to show that initial interest.
I have tons of lore in my world. I tell my players almost none of it without prompting.
What their characters needed to know to start, I provided in a written document, leaving it up to them how much/little they wanted to read. If there is something the character would know, they might ask, "Would my character know this?" I will briefly summarize and say, "Details are in that document." I also put everything up on World Anvil, all the really deep lore stuff, but I don't say all the details during the session. Two players, I know for absolute sure, read every word. They have also made accounts on World Anvil and "subscribed" to my world so I don't even need to tell them I posted anything. The others may or may not read it all -- dunno. One guy I am pretty sure doesn't read the lore stuff, unless he thinks it is important/relevant. That's fine --- it is there if they want it, and if they don't want it, nobody is harmed.
During the session I do not go into exposition. I do not give long descriptions of the history of a place -- unless someone asks. (Someone usually does -- typically one of the two who also read every bit of the WA site.) Or unless it is relevant. I put the site together and let them discover the history through investigation, should they care to explore/examine.
For example, the town of Lugdunum fell to "unknown forces" 5 years ago. The heroes were sent north to discover what actually happened. They snuck in through the sewers. When they got inside, beneath the Principia (the "capital" building as it were), they found a strange round room with some scorch marks on the floor and broken braziers. I did not go into the history... just told them what they found. On the first floor of that building, they found a skeleton in a library, most of which had otherwise been destroyed. The skeleton was reaching as if for something under a mostly-intact desk. They found a scroll behind, and pocketed it for later. Later on when they opened it, they found it was a journal, and read it, discovering that "something" had been trapped below the Principia in an Imprisonment spell and the journal writer (presumably the skeleton) had accidentally let it out. It had wiped out everyone in the Principia and at the end of the journal was coming for him. Later on, the Cleric of Apollo saw that there was a destroyed temple to Apollo and Diana here, and zoomed off to investigate it. He found a trap door that led under the temple with a part of a manuscript chiseled onto the wall, telling the story of how a creature called "Maagog the Slaughterer", who was a member of a race called "The Old Ones" had been killed by the Romans but the raised by a goddess they'd never heard of, and was unkillable now, so the Romans had Imprisoned him with a spell under the town they had just conquered, and then re-named the town Lugdunum.
This told the history of the place pretty effectively (while still leaving some mysteries like who are "the Old Ones" and who/what is goddess they never heard of), and they found and cared about these pieces of history, rather than me just "telling" it to them.
My point here is -- if you want them to care about the lore of your world, you have to make it matter somehow, and then let them seek it out and only tell them the parts that they would find, when they find them. Don't tell them the story of the Misty Mountains as they approach the mountains. Let them get captured by goblins, and while trying to escape, find Rings of Power and Swords from the Goblin-wars and THAT will tell them the history of the Misty Mountains.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
On the Lore Dumps - is this because one player has been taking action to find out said lore or is it the group enters the village of Mudville - here is the last century of history of this humble village...? If its the former then I think its ok that some players check out a little bit. If its not for them but they're not being disruptive while another player has a moment I personally think that is fine. If its the latter then you're likely just as you said giving them a lore dump and they don't care at all.
On the multi-day journey, I've found using skill challenges which can alter random encounters or the next part of the story make travel much more engaging for the players. As an example: my players were traveling into the mountains to kill a white dragon in its lair. Success on the skill challenge meant there were less minions in the lair on arrival - failure meant there were more or if they tried to camp - they'd be attacked by yetis in the night. They didn't know the exact mechanics but they knew it mattered and I think gives them more of a sense of agency in how things play out. Also its ok to not have every day in travel be something unique - especially if the players don't feel like RPing the entire sequence - some days nothing exciting happens.
So To clarify a few points: I do not lore dump willy nilly. When I go into exposition its because someone has gone to a library and is researching, or they've killed a monster and are looking through it belongings and find letters or a journal. My entire story is wrapped around each players backstory. They all have personal stakes in the game. And I've had many moments where they're having to figure out what to do, and I have given them all the answers they need to figure it out. But because half of them don't really pay attention, its more of a 'DM recounts the important information from the last 10 sessions'. Which can turn into an hour of explanation. And that kills momentum. These players signed up for this kind of campaign. I had the typical "what do you expect out of a dnd game?" And they were excited for it. Anyway I'm gonna try for the skill challenge approach, any advice on that? I've had very mixed results with Skill challenges, and I have watched the 18 matt colville videos haha.
IMO, then let them suffer and do not feed them information. I rarely remind my players of information they have been given (especially when it is on World Anvil... I just say "that journal document is on World Anvil" etc.).
Is it possible that one reason they don't bother to pay attention the first time, is that they know you will just tell them what they need 10 sessions later when the time comes?
I would not tell them. I'd say, "Well I guess you will have to try and remember." Unless the character has that feat that allows perfect recall, keen mind or whatever it is, do not let the players use their character's "intelligence" as a crutch for LORE. (I'm not saying high-Int shouldn't make the character smart, possibly much smarter than the player -- I'm saying don't let the stat allow them to ignore your lore and force you to feed it to them as needed.)
Maybe a couple of lost battles and a near-TPK or two will teach them to pay attention. Is what I am saying.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
The Lore for your world is cool and fun. You think it is awesome, how all the pieces fit together, the beautiful vistas that you can see in your mind's eye, the flora, fauna, beasts, monsters, countries, cities, politics, factions, groups, other adventurers, any number of NPCs, geography, history (battles between realms that set up the current day plot lines).
However, the fact is that all of this information is most useful for the DM so that they can properly assess the impact of the PCs on the events that happen around them. How do the PCs interact with the world, how do they affect the threads of the ongoing plotline(s)? What NPCs do the player's interact with? What do they say?
In general, the PCs and players are not interested in the detailed history, geography and politics of your fantasy world - it provides setting and context for the STORY that you are creating between the DM and the players. The players don't need or want all the extraneous detail since usually, most of it, is context and not relevant to the plot.
For example, describing a beautiful rocky mountain pass. "The sun setting in the east over a vast forest of evergreens. You are above the treeline, the blue sky fading to azure and purple as the sun descends surrounded by rocks. " as a setup for an ambush by a bunch of crag cats might be fine but trying to describe the vistas you see in your imagination is bound to fail since everyone has a different imagination. Some folks will never be able to picture it no matter how many words you use and others will imagine something completely different - so when describing "vistas" stick to a couple of sentences and allow the players to fill in the details in their own imagination.
Anyway, in general, insert lore and descriptive text in small chunks of two to three sentences so that the players can focus on and pay attention to it. Give them the lore that matters or specific red herrings not all the lore you have created. Also, unless you are specifically foreshadowing (which is a good idea) then make sure that the lore presented has some practical impact on the player decisions in the near future or the odds are good that you will have to remind them of the lore they "learned" several sessions in the past.
If you find that you like to spend 5 minutes describing the vistas on a journey or recounting the histories of the world or the paleo-geology of the mountain pass the characters are traversing - you've likely gone too far into the lore. The players shouldn't ideally have the time or interest to pull out phones when playing.
I've only used them a few times so far but I think I've had good results. My players still talk about one where the fighter carried the rest of the party since they were all rolling horribly and he got a Nat20 as his second success. I think part of it is trying to make sure you're using them in different situations so its not always just going through the woods or escaping from something. Also let them be creative, if your gut reaction is to say no you cant use that skill, talk it through with them and you might be surprised at the creativity - you can always still say now.
On the lore side, what you could try, maybe for the next campaign if its too late for this one, is having a google doc or something similar everyone can access and have players write up short summaries of the session from their character's POV, then use those are recaps / reference material for the next session. My DM for our CoS campaign did that and I think it worked really well, if you wrote like 3-5 short sentences before the session started - you got rewarded with some in game benefits. Might be useful, might not be.
The problem with the DM performing as the encyclopedia for the game is the DM performing as an encyclopedia for the game. You can continue to foist lore on them in a fashion you've realized is not captivating, or approach a game style lore stye that works for the lot of you.
If we're talking about completely new players, I'll do some hand holding, where if there's context the character should know, they get it in a few memory job bullet points, nothing more than a minute and enough to address the circumstances where the context helps. You need to trust that the blocks will eventually take hold in their minds. If you're doing an hour long recap you're not so much hand holding so much as dragging them through scenery you're invested in (because you made it) but they don't have purchase on.
If we're talking experienced players, you're going to have let them flounder eventually. And maybe it's not floundering, maybe they'll eventually take purchase of something available in your world and "boom" you have PCs now rooted.
This is why I'm not a fan of extended backstories enmeshed in elaborate world lore prior to the game. It's all thought experiment up to session 1, literally "it's pretty to think so". Now in practice it seems like there's "no there there" the connectedness wrought in pregame isn't (lit nerds may see what I did there to get where my personal aesthetics in fictional drivers is coming from). There's a more organic way to build the world, which is less frustrating and time consuming to the DM. It gives up a lot from the DM to the players and players give up some agency to let the game take shape too.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
My descriptions are lengthy but I tell my players in the beginning that there are hints woven into each of my "monologues" that will help them succeed on the task at hand and I actually do weave in details into my descriptions. Unique buildings they may want to check out or unusual forest clearings in the distance. When you look out from the top of a mountain (in real life) there is so much detail you wouldn't describe it all, you describe what matters to you. In each of your monologues describe one thing that would interest each of your characters. That usually works for me.
So the things I’m hearing the most is lose anything that is DM flavor text, and opt instead for specific information that is delivered by an NPC and only give the players what they need. And perhaps the whole describing the vista type stuff should be saved for very special circumstances.
this does beg the question though: What should be considered special? My normal desire to describe a vista is to communicate the scale of the world. But maybe that’s something best said simply and let the players go from there...
anyway, thanks for all the responses!
I mean, yeah, describe a vista. But keep it to five sentences or less. You shouldn’t need more than that, unless you’re trying to give enough detail to navigate by, which you don’t need to. If they want to navigate, they’ll ask, and then you can follow up with more info or just abstract it with a survival check.