Relaying setting

Note: This is an old draft, slightly reworked. I think it makes some valid points, but I'm doubting the distillation argument a bit. Concretely, it now seems to me that what is actually reducing overhead is presenting lore through things that the referee can relay verbatim to the players, or that the players can read themselves in the book. If this is true, it also includes less-spectacular things like boxed text and actual lore sections. Because of this, I've added a note on how distilling lore into fragments could be useful anyway. 

-

I've been thinking about a sort of distillation process for presenting lore through in-game objects and locations. This has to do with my fascination with patterns and hidden meaning in rpg products. What I call "patterns" here is essentially what happens when presenting setting through a wandering monster table. Consider this small encounter table

25% giant scorpion
50% gnolls
25% nomads

From this table, you can infer that the region is sparsely populated by humans, dominated by gnolls, and that it is arid - a steppe or even a desert. From the monsters, you can also conclude that the region is rather dangerous. Giant scorpions are 7HD, and gnolls are about 5HD. So as a consequence, the nomads would either be capable fighters themselves, or have some reliable way of hiding. All of these things can be learned from the encounter table. All referee-facing descriptions of the region could therefore focus on other things. But the encounter table will also convey things to the players, by just existing. For example, if the players spend time in this region, they should soon learn that the most common encounter is gnolls, that scorpions and nomads are equally frequent, and what the general threat level of the region is.

This is the idea about a "pattern": to take advantage of aspects of the game that is communicated directly from the designer to the player, to say something about the world. Say for example that in this game, Druids are worse than Clerics: they get worse bonuses and less powerful options, etc. Even if the rules never state this, players will eventually figure it out. Or the online community will. And once people realize this, they won't play Druids unless they are highly committed. And so, via selection you have created a setting where Clerics are common and Druids are very invested, or where an new faith is replacing an old through numbers and resisted through zeal, without writing a single word about it in your game book.

My point here is that there is information about the setting that is hard-coded into the rules and procedures, and therefore external to the referee's rulings, and that can be exploited to create consistency and predictability without increased overhead.

But other aspects of the game can serve this function too. Building on Kyana's analysis of layered lore in Dark Souls, I'd like to contend that a) lore can be presented in fragments instead of info-dumps; b) this can lead to more, rather than less, engagement in the lore; and c) the resultant head-canon can be highly aligned with the "intended" canon, if supported by codified things that convey setting directly to the players.

I imagine a distillation process that goes something like this:
You begin with a raw lore statement, say: giants used to live here. From the implications of that statement - giants lived, have now died - you extract a specific, representative event (1). Say: Queen Yssa, last of the Giants, trading her kingdom for the corpses of her warrior-children.

From this event, you extract the material and mythical remnants (2). The hall where she surrendered her kingdom, the Giant crown she handed over, the great cart that carried the bodies, the broken armor of her daughters, the all-consuming sorrow, the Giants' tomb.

Then, you transform these remnants to game-objects, with uses, names, descriptions and locations (3). So the hall becomes a location on the map, the crown remains a crown, the cart might become a cart-wheel shield, armor is armor, sorrow becomes a spell or magical object, tomb becomes a location.

Finally (4), the game objects are given names and descriptions that alludes to the original event through association rather than explicitly. So the once hall-now location might become "Yssa's Surrender. A ruined palace of giant proportions, ravaged by war. It is considered sacred by those who grieve".

Like the encounter table, this information is transmitted directly from the game to the players, without increasing referee overhead: the players look at the map, note the location Yssa's surrender, and are free to draw their own conclusions how this relates to the giant crown they found last session, aided by their observations that there are no giants here anymore (but they fought skeleton giants), and that there is a spell in the spell list that induces a sadness that is too large for any human heart.

Addendum: Success is probably limited to rather basic setting ideas. However, as a rule of thumb, most good settings can be reduced to a limited set of basic ideas. (A Fascist space-faring empire in decline, venerating a dead feudal lord, locked in eternal war. Settler-colonists fleeing a necromantic war, hunting for treasures in a cursed forest. Etc). So if nothing else, the distillation process might help reinforce a theme and weed out everything unnecessary, making the lore more engaging even if you decide to go with the lore dump anyway.