Many of us are enthusiastic worldbuilders. And many of us worldbuilders also try to make our RPG settings “original”.
Yet there is a danger to making a setting that has too many unique elements. After all, the setting isn’t just for the game master, but also for the players. They need to understand the setting enough to play convincing characters that exist in that world, and act accordingly. And the more setting information they have to absorb to do so, the more difficult it will be to get buy-in from your gaming group.
Personally, I think settings work best when there are a few strong, central unique elements that support strong themes on what the setting - and the campaign - are supposed to be all about, scaffolded by numerous familiar, common tropes from the intended genre (such as science fiction or fantasy). This should help convey the information the players need most effectively.
But I am curious how you see this issue. Do you regard this as a problem at all, and if so how do you approach it?
Touchstone is fine. It just would not work if some players know a lot more lore than others, especially than the GM.
Depends how collaborative you want to be. How does x work in this universe is something I often ask my players. How do we see this thing or what might that look like. Let’s creation be shared and gives us all common ground to work with. If someone is more familiar with source material than me, great they can help shape things. GM always has veto, “that’s not how it works in this world”. I’m not getting rules lawyered out of a cool plot just because one player has read (or retained) more of the setting than I did.