Where Has All the History Gone?

Jack7

First Post
ESSAYS ON GAME DESIGN

Essay Nine: Where Has All the History Gone?
On Heirlooms, Legacies, and Inheritances



Synopsis: Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances form a vital part of human history and culture. Yet they are often overlooked or ignored either intentionally or unintentionally in game, milieu, and character development to the detriment of the overall game design. Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances should take their natural place in-game as important and fundamental aspects of game and character development in role-play games.

This essay is part of the series’ Essays on Game Design. It is, however, like the short essay, Where Has All the Magic Gone, too broad in scope to be presented within the boundaries of that other thread. So I have instead posted it here as a separate thread.

Interactive Essay – This thread is also an Interactive Essay. See link for an explanation of what this means.

the%20broighter%20hoard%20torc%20002.jpg

Part One: There are three aspects of human life that are common to many cultures (but most especially to most of the Western cultures and countries that were the basis of the basic idea behind the D&D fantasy game settings and milieus) throughout the world that I think are conspicuously missing in many fantasy role play games. These three aspects of human life (and it seems to me that at least one of these absent aspects would likely also be common to Western based non-human fantasy races, such as Elves and Dwarves) missing from the game are those very things so often mentioned in both real world history, and in folk and fairy tales, legend, and myth. Those three things are what we today call heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances.

Now not all three seem to be missing from every fantasy based role playing game (though most all are missing to some degree from most such games), and indeed heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances could be equally applied as important factors in Pulp games, Western games, Sci-Fi games, Mystery and Horror games, and even to some extent Detective and Military and/or Espionage based games. But in the field of fantasy, at the very least, things like heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances should be stressed as a far more important general aspect of role play gaming, not to mention general character development than is currently the case. Because in real life people often passed between different generations, not to mention among various same generation family members and friends and associates, heirloom objects, matters of personal and family legacy, and inheritances (due to premature death by war, exploration, accident, misadventure, or disease) as a common matter of course and cultural practice. (At this point I won’t even mention things like family and personal blessings and birthrights, but they too weigh as a form of inheritance or legacy. And such things as these were often of extreme importance to our ancestors. More so often than physical inheritances.)

However, in fantasy gaming these important aspects of human life and relationship are often entirely missing from personal matters of (character) interaction, or perhaps more importantly from the developmental background of how characters become created, established and are evolved. Think to your own family for just a moment, especially if you live in most Western cultures (thought that is definitely not a necessary precondition), and ask yourself, have you or another family member not directly received, benefitted, or befitted yourself from the legacy, inheritances, or heirloom objects of your family and ancestors?

It is as if, in most fantasy games, a character is considered pre-developed with no history but his individual self, as if he or she sprang like Athena from the forehead of Zeus without any prior progeneration or ancestral ties, responsibilities, or inheritance of any kind. Without a real background, or relationship to their own historical legacy. Yet even Athena inherited the Aegis. Even she drew wisdom, insight, and wealth from her father’s legacy. But for most fantasy based gaming characters it is as if the common and assumed practice of character creation is of a person completely devoid of family history, inheritance, legacy, and background. In all practical effect orphaned by and within the world they inhabit. And with nothing of real value to effectively describe and define their past.

Yes, I am aware that character creation often considers or expresses a sort of loosely sketched and generalized “background story.” At least in theory or in part. Meaning that I, the character, came from this or that town, had this or that general background, my parents may have been named so and so, and I may have an older brother or sister. But that is usually the extent of character background development (at least initially so, and in many games), aside from the usual gaming demands of establishing the attributes of Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, or whatever (other) abilities are practiced and measured in-game. But little, if any, attention is ever given to matters such as “what was passed on to me by my family or friends,” “what did I inherit of importance,” or “what was the legacy left me by my family, for good or ill, or for both?” Indeed I could find no mention at all of the terms heirloom, legacy, or inheritance in any of the First Edition, Third Edition, or Fourth Edition D&D books (I cannot speak about Second Edition having never played it, but the other editions are, I think it would be agreed the basic framework of what are usually considered the most important or at least most popular fantasy RPGs), a seemingly strange omission if one stops to think but a moment on the matter. And in only a couple of cases were concerns involving heirlooms, legacies, or inheritances even vaguely, briefly, or indirectly mentioned or implied in relationship to character, setting, or game creation and development.

(I fully understand that many individual games and settings, such as private homebrew efforts, do consider play aspects such as heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances. And that is well and good. However such factors are rarely considered systematically even in individual settings or milieus, and in this case I am not really talking about individual settings or private homebrew efforts. I am encouraging game developers and writers to include these important aspects of human, and likely demi-human, cultures and societies within the formal structure of their work. That is, as a matter of real and inherent game structure. For indeed as both Medieval and Modern societies often show considerable considerations regarding heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances of great family, clan, personal, legal, societal, and cultural importance it seems a strange oversight (or is that not truly more of an undersight) to omit them from the body and structure of role play games. So game writers and developers should pay far more attention to matters involving heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances than is often the case. This is true when developing games whose genres include horror, pulp, modern, historical, and especially fantasy elements or settings. However even gaming genres involving historical war gaming and science fiction could probably benefit either directly or indirectly by the inclusion of elements regarding heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances.)

sutton_hoo_helmet_sword_lg.jpg

How many oral accounts and written records in human culture, how many folk tales, fictional stories, legends, and myths are built specifically around matters dealing with these important expressions of human life? Frodo inherits the heirloom of the One Ring, Arthur inherits the heirloom of Excalibur (not to mention his family legacy, which is then passed on to others), Harry Potter inherits his family’s dark past and future hope, the Sagas and Eddas are likewise filled with tales of inherited and rich objects, and so forth and so on. I could go on practically ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Need I even mention the numerous accounts of Greek and Roman (the Iliad and Odyssey, Jason and the Argonauts, the Aeneid), Scandinavian, Germanic, Celtic, Japanese, African, Indian (indeed, sources from around the world) myths and legends in which heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances play an important if not the most vital role in the development of an heroic character, clan, or culture? I could also mention numerous real world historical examples such as Attila and the Sword of War (Mars) and the White Stag, the legacy Augustus took up from Caesar, the generals who inherited the legacy of Alexander’s conquests, The Byzantine continuation of the legacies of Rome and the Orthodox church, the Muslim expansion of the legacy of ancient Greek and Roman science and engineering, the Judeo-Christian legacy and inheritance in Europe and the West, how modern societies have benefitted from the inherited scientific and technological legacies and heirlooms of the past, and on and on and on I could go citing example after example. As other illustrations of my meaning in a more direct and material sense just look to the Relics and Icons of religion, the heirloom Crown Jewels of government, the civil, court, and legitimacy claims of princes and kings, and to various other physical and cultural signs of authority and asserted rights and responsibilities. Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances abound throughout history as obvious indication of both grand and powerful physical objects, and of unresolved issues and concerns that continue to haunt men and the tribes, clans, families, societies, and cultures from which they have been generated and evolved. So, within the storied tales of myth, legend, fairy and folk tales, fiction both ancient and modern, and even within the hallowed halls of history records are replete with events in which heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances of one kind or another shape and mold the course and sweep of both the character of individual men and women, and the movement and scope of history itself.

Yet within the game it seems as if most characters spring from the air, free of, and for the most part, completely divorced from and ignorant of the responsibilities, obligations, histories, legacies, inheritances, and heirlooms that make up the treasure horde of their family, community, and/or cultural background. Character background development is usually little more than a Spartan and anemic exercise in “naming and attribute rolling.” Some in-game characters, of course, will be orphans and urchins, doomed by fate or circumstance to have become separated from their natural background and antecedents, but most will be, as in real life, the product of where, and whence, and through whom they arose. Therefore, most will carry upon their person, seen or unseen, the marks, marques, and effects of their history. They will to a large extent be who they are because of whom and what has come before them.

(I have a personal theory as to why most games approach character background development as they do, as if it is an activity quite divorced from what would actually be entirely natural among most peoples, not to mention what is divorced from historical precedent, and natural to myth, legend, and fiction. And others can discuss this somewhat separate issue among themselves in this thread if they choose to do so. However, at this point let me merely say that whatever the reason or reasons, and I suspect more than one, the important point in this thread is that with game and character creation it is not so vital a matter as to why so many RPGs tend to so often lack real substance regarding background, as it simply is that they do.)

Therefore to correct this dearth of developmental potential, this lack of character legacy and substantiality, I suggest including three (you may suggest more, I am suggesting three) new facets of character and game background and development. These three facets of background being the Heirloom, the Legacy, and the Inheritance.

Part Two: At this point I think it would be entirely constructive to define the terms being employed and then to show how those terms could be (re)defined and employed in game terms.

1. Heirloom – An heirloom is any property that is considered by law or custom as inseparable from an inheritance and is inherited with that inheritance. It can also be defined as anything that has been within the possession of a family for generations, and as anything that is possessed by a family and that contains great sentimental, historical, and/or physical and monetary value.

2. Legacy – A gift of personal property by will. It is also generally understood by at least implication to be any aspect of inherited duty, responsibility, or occupation, and these more nebulous and immaterial aspects can also include conditional and often overlooked features of a family’s history, such as when it is said that a group of people have a "family legacy.” This implies that a family, or even an organization or group of people such as a Guild, has a particular interest or set of interests upon which they have devoted much time, resource, and energy. Such as the fact that some families have a legacy of charity work, science, religious devotion or calling, or industry.

3. Inheritance – An inheritance can include many things. Such as; Hereditary succession to a title or an office or property, or That which is inherited; a title or property or estate that passes by law to the heir on the death of the owner, or (genetics) attributes acquired via biological heredity from the parents, or simply, any attribute or immaterial possession that is inherited from ancestors. An inheritance can include anything from a famous family sword that has been passed from father to son, to inherited lands and estates, to money, to even something as seemingly immaterially unimportant, but psychologically valuable and vital, as a family blessing.


I have used fairly simple and straightforward definitions in describing these terms, but definitions that are complex enough to imply some of the rich possibilities inherent within the terms. For each term is similar in some respects to the other, and as to what is implied thereby, but different enough in individual character, definition, and potential to be of enormous value in developing new gaming ideas and prospects.

As for me personally I have been passed and obtained numerous family heirlooms, part of my family’s legacy (especially as regards science and technical and technological matters, not to mention matters like law enforcement and military history, – although I have rejected other parts of my family legacy, such as certain kinds of employment – I have often followed a very different employment and career track than most of my family), and inheritances, such as the family estate which I partially inherited and partially bought and renovated. I also expect to inherit more at some time in the future. In other words I am a living example of how these important matters manifest themselves in human life, and I suspect many of you, if not most of you, have been the beneficiaries of, in one way or another, family heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances of your own.

Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can be employed with great value as both a method of overall game and campaign development, and as the method for the production of individual adventures and quests. In the case of game and campaign development heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can provide thematic background material for players and important NPCs alike. In the case then of developing individual adventure material heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can provide valuable story plotlines and story progression points so that the DM or GM can personalize the experience of individual characters for the benefit of both the player and the overall setting or milieu.

Now, on to the matter as to how these things could express themselves in game terms. There are many defintional ways in which heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can overlap or become expressions of one another. So for purposes of this essay I will ignore those occasions and definitions in which these three aspects of historical background can impede upon each other, or indeed, even become for all practical purposes mere variant expressions of the other terms. Instead for purposes of game and character development I shall concentrate upon the divisions and differences of these various terms in order to stress how each term is and can be unique in function and construction. In other words, I’m not going to discuss how an heirloom can be simply a form of material inheritance, but rather how an heirloom can be expressed differently in game terms from an inheritance. I have already defined these terms above (for purposes of this essay) and so won’t bother to redefine them again. Instead I will describe some, but not all, of the ways in which heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can be used in-game to develop, organize, and enrich those same games, settings, backgrounds, and milieus.


Heirlooms – Heirlooms can be used in-game as both social and personal value material objects, providing there is some deep and intimate connection between those generations or groups of people who possess them. Heirlooms can be either secret or obvious magical (or even technological) objects; they can contain within them other secret or hidden objects (such as keys or jewelry, or messages or gemstones), etc. Heirlooms can contain codes or even be codes in and of themselves. They can be inscribed with glyphs, magical scripts, or even with phrases from dead languages, or mathematical symbols and mysterious signs. Heirlooms can point the way to an undiscovered or long hidden set of ruins. Heirlooms can be long extinct tools or devices whose purpose has been lost over time but could possibly be resurrected or revised. Heirlooms can contain old family secrets or relay information about a covert multi-generational family occupation, avocation, or concern. Heirlooms can be disputed, either by members of the same family or group, or by outsiders who likewise lay claim to the object. Heirlooms can be full of secrets and otherwise unrecorded history. They can be relical or miraculous in nature. And, of course, they will be practically a’swim in great sentimental and kinship value. Heirlooms can and should be used as the background for stories, undiscovered history, and the future development of the characters of the various players.

Legacies – Legacies can display themselves in the forms of titles, occupations, historical events, mysteries, and Quests (formal or informal - of clan, group, nation, culture, or person). Indeed a Quest, especially a multi-generational one can often be a kind of legacy in itself. Legacies can sometimes involve events as large as the turning of the Worm or the passing of an Age, involving whole societies or cultures (Alexander Hellenizing Egypt, the Near East, and eventually that legacy being passed down to most of Europe in one way or another), or legacies can involve individual or family responsibilities and duties, personal governance, or private patronage and economy. A reputation can be inherited as a legacy, as well as can be a real object. A reputation of leadership and honor to be lived up to and mastered, or a legacy of cowardice and dishonor to be overcome and put down. Legacies offer a varied and robust type of inheritance, even if legacies are often subtle, deceptive, and cunning in all that they imply. A good legacy is a thing of great value, a poor or malignant legacy is a thing of great concern, and yet either is superior to no legacy at all. Especially within the confines of a fantasy world. Yet one should also remember this, the very act of living and acting allows one to further build upon the legacies of the past, or to reshape them, or even to create new ones when and where desired or necessary.

Inheritances – In describing inheritances I shall concentrate primarily upon material inheritances other than heirlooms. I have also already described legacies as a form of family, societal, cultural or non-material inheritance. So instead of revisiting those terms I’ll describe inheritances in primarily physical, material, monetary, and technical terms.

Inheritances are matters of real wealth, physical objects (other than heirlooms), real estate or estates, money, and treasures of all sorts. A friend, ally, or inferior may have given an object to an ancestor that became an heirloom, to be passed with honor between generations. But those same people, and others as well, may have given not objects of necessarily sentimental or personal value, but objects of material, monetary, or more mundane wealth. They may have given gemstones, gold, silver or other precious metals, well-wrought jewelry, money, rare objects, artwork, lands, estates, houses and homes, keeps, castles or fortifications, and various other possessions which are then passed on to the character in the form of an inheritance. Then again ancestors may have accumulated their treasure through their own desires, efforts, labor, luck, and work. In any case an inheritance is a form of great blessing for it provides material surety against some forms of misfortune (such as chronic poverty) and it allows the character the necessary economic power and prosperity to pursue various personal aims and interests. Furthermore an inheritance may be in nature immediate, or it may be delayed, it may be granted and willed by an ancestor or friend, or it may have to be earned through hard labor or dangerous enterprise. Inheritances can be, and often are, contested. Inheritances offer a wealth (pun certainly intended) of new possibilities for role-play, unusual adventure, hostility, and complex character development.


How to Use and Employ Heirlooms, Legacies, and Inheritances – Heirlooms, Legacies, and Inheritances do not have to be used crudely, or even immediately in order to benefit setting, campaign, adventure, and character development. They can be employed at any time. For instance upon returning home from an expedition or adventure a character might discover that his great uncle has unexpectedly left him a mysterious and unexplained heirloom. It is up to the character to discover the nature and purpose of the heirloom. Another character might inherit a number of heirlooms and family artifacts after his father’s death. A third character might discover that his family has a secret legacy involving the Grail, or was part of a movement or organization that he was previously completely unaware of. A fourth character might inherit an old mansion and estate, long abandoned, that he goes to occupy only to discover it has several secret passages and was the site of mysterious rites and bizarre conclaves.

The point is that there are many ways to make use of heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances, at least as many in-game as there are in real life. One need only employ a little imagination, or tap the fertile storehouses of legends, myths, fairy and folk tales, fiction, religion, or history.

And one does not need to employ heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances in all of the immediately obvious ways. A character might inherit an heirloom that sits idle and in hibernation for an entire campaign or more before something triggers it into action. A character might discover only bits and pieces of his family’s legacy over a great period of time, slowly piecing together the mystery of what it all means only with great effort and expense. A character might discoverer that his inheritance is one that must be earned through several dangerous adventures and labors, not merely granted by statement or will. He may also discover that what he expected to inherit is in fact quite different from what he actually inherits.

In any case heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can provide an ongoing source of role-play adventure, action, mystery, conflict, and intrigue. And perhaps most importantly they can be individually tailored to particular characters, lending an air of realism and real connection between game world, setting, milieu, and campaign, and the involved players and their various characters. In a role playing sense it is almost entirely advantageous to integrate heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances into any role play game, setting, or background, and a loss of real potential to fail to do so.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Interesting, Jack. I'm surprised no one has replied, as you make some good points.

There was some of the legacy/hierloom/inheritance stuff in AD&D Oriental Adventures, where you rolled up elements of family history. As I remember, it affected your character's honor and could give cash or item benefits too.

In my own campaigns, I've allowed PC's with this sort of thing. One PC started out as the son of a noble, with a "Lord" title, but no extra cash or equipment. Another PC started out as a knight, with an inherited magic sword. But we haven't done much to develop significant backstory for either.

I think once a character is in play, they turn out a little different than we originally thought, and get more interesting, but folks see as a "cheating" to tweak the background. What's you're view on that -- are background changes/fleshing out OK, once the character is in play?

Another issue is that PC's, in what I've seen, are very often either orphans or from somewhere far, far away. Players don't seem to like characters with (relevant to the current game) roots. I'm not sure why -- it's just as true for people who just started playing as for people who have been doing it for 20+ years. Maybe people just aren't that interested in background, or like looking at a big continental map and picking a place, regardless of where the campaign actually is set.
 

There was some of the legacy/hierloom/inheritance stuff in AD&D Oriental Adventures, where you rolled up elements of family history. As I remember, it affected your character's honor and could give cash or item benefits too.

Since I was basically concentrating on the sort of Western based (in D&D and many other fantasy games) developmental background as a sort of philosophical origination point for the idea of why heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances should be a natural in-game component of fantasy games, I overlooked that. But I've got that book as well, and in addition many real world Oriental cultures do indeed make very strong use of things like heirlooms, legacies, and hereditary inheritances. Japan for instance. (Japan is also to me in many ways the single most Western-like Oriental culture in existence, though it is very, very different from most Western cultures in other ways as well.)

As far as gaming with Oriental characters I can definitely see how heirlooms, legacies, inheritances, and especially family background would and could affect things like honor and social standing. (I have a party of Oriental Characters but many of them are, though not all, non-attachment type of individuals. Except for guys like Wu Lee and Sraddnayar) It would effect social standing in Western cultures as well, though honor would, I suspect, tend to be more a matter of personal achievement and behavior. It could be so in the East as well, depending on culture, though I think the East, at least up until very, very recently tends to be more social and class (and caste) conscious than most current Western cultures. Of course in games terms the West could be said to be very Oriental-like in certain past eras as regards class, honor, standing, social position, and so forth.


I think once a character is in play, they turn out a little different than we originally thought, and get more interesting, but folks see as a "cheating" to tweak the background. What's you're view on that -- are background changes/fleshing out OK, once the character is in play?

If I'm reading you right Haak, then I have no problem with characters changing over time. I'm all for it. That is why I said a really good way to employ heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances is "poco a poco," little by little, and bit by bit. Heirlooms reveal themselves over time as something not expected, or more than expected. Legacies are slowly revealed. Inheritances have costs and sometimes require great labor either to claim or to retain. To me I see things like this as part of a larger background which is always in motion anyways. That is I'm of the opinion that the world ought to be changing right along with the characters. (Think of any individual you know in real life, do they ever remain static and unchanging? Does the world remain static and unchanging? Then, why should a character?)

And we've had some fanatic games involving heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances. But to tell you the truth I can't recall that we've ever used them in a specifically straight-forwards way. That is to say we have almost always let them develop slowly over time, usually with some mystery, and often connected to other in-game events. Like connected to a campaign, a political movement, a war, an adventure where some secret is revealed, and so forth and so on. (I don't just let inheritances be handed out to characters and say, "there, well, now that that is over would you like to convert your inheritance into gold or invest it in real estate? No, usually they become fully aware of the details of it after their father dies or when they have to undertake some labor to claim it.) So characters might start out with a background, which they think they know all the details of, but later discover that there are aspects of their own family history that they were unaware of until they encounter the heirlooms, legacies, inheritances, and events surrounding what they did not previously know about themselves and their family. I don't see it as cheating in any way at all, but as changing, as discovering new things, as a process of aging and maturing. This happens all of the time in real life. No reason it shouldn't in game.


Another issue is that PC's, in what I've seen, are very often either orphans or from somewhere far, far away. Players don't seem to like characters with (relevant to the current game) roots. I'm not sure why -- it's just as true for people who just started playing as for people who have been doing it for 20+ years. Maybe people just aren't that interested in background, or like looking at a big continental map and picking a place, regardless of where the campaign actually is set.

I have my own theories as regards this matter. For one thing, and this is not my entire theory by any means, I think most people want to be "something other" than themselves when role playing which is perfectly understandable. However being extremely wealthy or from a family with a covert or secret background or which is involved in a family Quest, or that stands to inherit a Castle if they can tame the surrounding countryside, that is also very different form most folks nowadays. If one stops to think about it a second. But I'll let others talk about that if they wish.

Right now we've got a tremendous mutha of a storm rolling in. We're gonna get a big visit from the thunder goblin and lightning giant as I used to tell my girls to scare them. I'd best bug out for awhile.

Anyways, I hope I answered your questions. Assuming I understood you correctly. Later.
 

My thoughts usually run this way:

1 sp = day's wages for a common laborer or about $50.

1 gp = 10 (or 20) sp = $500 (or $1000)

And starting character's average wealth to invest in adventuring gear is about 110 g.p.

110 g.p. = $55,000 (or $110,000)

That's a huge chunk of disposable income.

The only way to explain such wealth is inheritance and heirlooms.

So what you start with in some fashion is an inheritance - either indirectly in the form of money, or indirectly as of the third son of a knight inheriting a horse, sword, and shield and being forced to go and earn his living as a sellsword.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what you describe as being general and endemic to the game. It's true that D&D has never required this in the core rules, but the 1st edition OA rules made it very explicit and there have been all sorts of optional rules over the course of the game for describing a character's origin. Other gaming systems like C&S very much went in for minutia in describing a character's origins and role in society. I seem to remember a whole 3rd edition hardback devoted in no small part to making inheritances a part of the game.

The single biggest obstacle to making inheritances a significant part of the game has always been that anything that would be relevant in the hands of a 15th level character would be overpowering in the hands of a 1st level character. Any reasonable inheritance granted to a 1st level character, would be of no practical value to the same character at 15th level. Unlike the character's of stories, you don't generally get to inherit your father's +5 sword or an artifact level ring of invisibility at the start of the story.
 

My thoughts usually run this way:

1 sp = day's wages for a common laborer or about $50.

1 gp = 10 (or 20) sp = $500 (or $1000)

And starting character's average wealth to invest in adventuring gear is about 110 g.p.

110 g.p. = $55,000 (or $110,000)

That's a huge chunk of disposable income.

The only way to explain such wealth is inheritance and heirlooms.

So what you start with in some fashion is an inheritance - either indirectly in the form of money, or indirectly as of the third son of a knight inheriting a horse, sword, and shield and being forced to go and earn his living as a sellsword.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing what you describe as being general and endemic to the game. It's true that D&D has never required this in the core rules, but the 1st edition OA rules made it very explicit and there have been all sorts of optional rules over the course of the game for describing a character's origin. Other gaming systems like C&S very much went in for minutia in describing a character's origins and role in society. I seem to remember a whole 3rd edition hardback devoted in no small part to making inheritances a part of the game.

The single biggest obstacle to making inheritances a significant part of the game has always been that anything that would be relevant in the hands of a 15th level character would be overpowering in the hands of a 1st level character. Any reasonable inheritance granted to a 1st level character, would be of no practical value to the same character at 15th level. Unlike the character's of stories, you don't generally get to inherit your father's +5 sword or an artifact level ring of invisibility at the start of the story.
I agree with most of this. In fact, I'm reasonably sure that somewhere in 1E there's a mention that the starting money a character recieves is, or can be, just such an item or items. (Unfortuately I no longer have my 1E books, so can't check.)

As for using three different words for what most people think of as pretty much the same things, I can only envision the most detail oriented groups 'wasting their time' on such minutia.

Also, most of this is definitely a GM thing. I can't think of many GMs who'd allow a player to just announce at the beginning of play that his character is Count Yourchange, son of Duke Nukem, without prior approval. (Rolling on a table can be just as bad, or even worse, as the results can be quite inappropriate or cause resentment.)

And there are at least a few published adventures out there that I've seen over the years that use the old 'You've inherited a castle/keep, now go clear it out' as an adventure hook.

Finally, any work put into an item as a plot hook goes out the window if the character dies, it gets destroyed, or he just plain sells the thing before finding out how important it is. (It is a not uncommon trope in stories for a character to sell an heirloom object when times are really bad, so why shouldn't an RPG character?)

Basically, IMO, most of what you've suggested is a group concern, rather than a game concern. (Although it should certainly be discussed in the GM section!) I also suspect that one of the reasons so few players don't bother with backgrounds is that they feel they don't know enough about the world to make one without stepping on the GM's toes. These are things that the players need to discuss with the GM, regarding his specific world, unless the group is using a published setting. And those come out after the basic game, usually.
 

That is to say we have almost always let them develop slowly over time, usually with some mystery, and often connected to other in-game events. Like connected to a campaign, a political movement, a war, an adventure where some secret is revealed, and so forth and so on. (I don't just let inheritances be handed out to characters and say, "there, well, now that that is over would you like to convert your inheritance into gold or invest it in real estate? No, usually they become fully aware of the details of it after their father dies or when they have to undertake some labor to claim it.) So characters might start out with a background, which they think they know all the details of, but later discover that there are aspects of their own family history that they were unaware of until they encounter the heirlooms, legacies, inheritances, and events surrounding what they did not previously know about themselves and their family. I don't see it as cheating in any way at all, but as changing, as discovering new things, as a process of aging and maturing. This happens all of the time in real life. No reason it shouldn't in game.

Ah, cool. Perhaps I should do something more with the hooks in the PC's in my campaign (which are indeed pretty darn interesting):
-- Served in the Furyondy militia along the Veng River frontier, fought Iuz's orcs, kicked out for being involved with a woman above his station. He's from a group of people descended from Dunlending refugees from Middle Earth, who once served the Witch-King but later fled.
-- Priest of St. Cuthbert from Onnwall, old friend of militia guy (who is the sober, non-womanizing opposite of his friend).
-- Second son of nobles from Furyondy who have something do with the Chateau d'Amberville (which none of us have a copy of or know much about), his family include mages, and he was raised by his uncle in Bissel (where the campaign is set). I'm thinking his parents run the Gold County, since that fits pretty well of the Marklands Furyondy places.
-- Scout from an isolated Suel survivor city that worships Wee Jas. She was supposed to report back on the outside world, but has other priorities.
-- Monk from the Hold of the Sea Princes, who was frozen as a statue for 200 years in the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, before being rescued by the party. He was on a mission against Iggwilv, who ruled the place, at that time . . . his country has since fallen to slave lords.
-- Celene elf son of member of Melf Brightflame's secret order (the Knights of Luna) to given elven help to the lesser races. Accompanies . . .
-- Celene elf weaver who was attacked by bandits and rescued by humans. She then became an adventuress and decided to help humans as payback.
-- Son of a village river fisherman, became a local militia member to see the world, rose to sergeant, allowed to go off with the adventures with his lord's blessing.

Yeah, there's some awesome stuff there, I need to use some of it, and I hadn't thought about it in far too long.

So how to change my ways? Should I go deep on one of these strands, or get a little of several into it? Knights of Luna or something involving Furyondy beckon. Involved Iggwilv or Iuz, already got those flavors milling about. :)
 

First off Jack7, there are two issues with your writing that I need to get out of the way first. Please bear in mind that I am only offering these as constructive criticism, so that you can improve your writing in the future.

1) Your writing style is way too verbose. While your essay is almost 4,000 words long, your basic point is pretty simple and straight-forward. You probably could have made your point in as little as 500 words, maybe 1000. Every writing teacher I have ever had has emphasized the importance of being concise. As it is, your essay is so wordy that I am having trouble reading it.

2) I suggest that you drop the "Interactive Essay" concept. I read the blog post you linked to, and to be honest both the idea that you invented this concept and that this is something more than a post on a message-board come off as being very pretentious. Despite your intentions, this is still just a thread on ENWorld, and you can't do anything to change the way people post.

Now then, on to your arguments.

As far as I can gather, you make five major arguments:
1) Most characters in roleplaying games are created without consideration for their family history, and the effect that family history would have on the character.
2) Family history is an integral part of most of human literature.
3) Adding in more developed backgrounds for PCs and incorporating elements of those backgrounds into campaigns would make RPGs more fun.
4) Currently, no version of D&D does anything to support the creation of detailed family histories.
5) Game designers (and the makers of D&D in particular) should add in more support for this kind of character detail.

Now then, I generally agree with point number three. I for one love having PCs who have families (preferably living families), family histories, inherited property, and so on. That is why I plan on using an idea my brother utilized before, and having every player fill out a questionnaire that asks about such background details.

On the other hand, I have some serious issues with some of your other points. For one thing, point number one is something that you don't back up with evidence, and I believe that it is impossible to produce hard evidence for it, since that would require detailed market research well beyond what any of us are capable of. Furthermore, I have seen plenty of examples of D&D characters from various editions possessing legacies, heirlooms, and inheritance, so I am not convinced that the game design is preventing people from doing this kind of character creation.

As for points four and five, I think your essay is severely weakened by the fact that you are only talking in general terms, and you don't seem to have an concrete solutions to the problem you are speaking of. While you deride multiple editions of D&D for a lack of support for these things, you don't offer any examples of what they could have done to support these things system-wise. Generally speaking, I tend to agree with Ed_Laprade that this is more a DMing/group issue than a game system one.

Anyways, the main reason I decided to post is actually in response to point number two: the role of heirlooms, legacies, and inheritance in literature; I actually think that you are grossly overstating the role of such things in most stories. To illustrate my point, I will start by pointing out a factual error on your part: Excalibur is not an heirloom. In fact, Uther Pendragon never once touched Excalibur nor the Sword in the Stone. The only relevance that Uther Pendragon has on Arthur's life is that Arthur is the rightful king because he is Uther's son. As soon as Uther dies and the story centers on Arthur, Uther's influence over the legend disappears.

It is worth pointing out that characters in works of fiction, including D&D characters, are not real people. Unlike real people, who are strongly influenced by their families and backgrounds, fictional characters are typically created first based on a character concept, while details such as what their childhood was like are created later as justifications for why they turned out the way their creator wanted them to. Most details such as heirlooms and inheritance are only added in if they are pertinent for overall story. For example, Frodo only inherited the One Ring because the story itself revolved around the Ring. In most literature that I have read, character background details that are not pertinent to the story are typically not mentioned at all. For example, Tolkien never mentions how much money Frodo inherits from his dead parents. As such, if there is nothing about a character's background that is pertinent to a story, then nothing about their background is ever mentioned. There are actually several prominent character archetypes that really do more or less spring out of someone's head fully formed, such as wandering swordsman and vagabond-type characters. So I don't really think that inheritance, legacies, and heirlooms are really necessary for every character, or are a necessary component of literature.
 

2) I suggest that you drop the "Interactive Essay" concept. I read the blog post you linked to, and to be honest both the idea that you invented this concept and that this is something more than a post on a message-board come off as being very pretentious. Despite your intentions, this is still just a thread on ENWorld, and you can't do anything to change the way people post.

I gotta go somewhere this morning. So I'll return to some of the other comments later on. But on this one SO, I didn't say anyone had to post by responding with an essay. I said they could. That it was an experiment in new forms of communications. I also said they could respond as per any normal post. I laid out a series of options. Which one the reader or responder chooses to employ is their business. I'm not dictating the method, I'm suggesting possibilities for developing different forms.


The single biggest obstacle to making inheritances a significant part of the game has always been that anything that would be relevant in the hands of a 15th level character would be overpowering in the hands of a 1st level character. Any reasonable inheritance granted to a 1st level character, would be of no practical value to the same character at 15th level. Unlike the character's of stories, you don't generally get to inherit your father's +5 sword or an artifact level ring of invisibility at the start of the story.

This is why I said one is free to let the heirloom or inheritance develop slowly over time. That you don't have to use them in all of the old and obvious ways. An item can be inherited without the person inheriting it knowing exactly what it is or how it operates. The relationship between the item and character develops over time. It doesn't have to be given out to the character with a textbook write up of plus this and plus that, and "it grants a special saving throw against fire breathing dragons." If for instance the item were magical (and heirlooms and inheritances don't have to be magical, they can be, but I sketched out a number of other possibilities in the original post as well) I would consider that type of situation (all information is transmitted to the recover at the same time as the object or inheritance) to be a matter less of magic and more of a technical schematic. It's not the way I'd go about using heirlooms or inheritances in-game, and it's not the way I imagine magic functioning. Like a mechanical device with an owner's manual and a service number to call if you need more information. You wouldn't get that in the real world in all likelihood (I've received several heirlooms over time from various relatives, I've though never received a detailed write up or description of even one - if I wanted to know about it I had to go do some research and ask for stories involving it) and I don't see why you'd get that in a fantasy setting. Personal discovery of all potentialities it seems to me is or should be a natural part of most fantasy settings, and even most role play settings. If not you're not really role playing, discovering, exploring, or investigating, you're just playing a "data game" in disguise.


Finally, any work put into an item as a plot hook goes out the window if the character dies, it gets destroyed, or he just plain sells the thing before finding out how important it is. (It is a not uncommon trope in stories for a character to sell an heirloom object when times are really bad, so why shouldn't an RPG character?)

It doesn't matter if they obtained the item by personal effort and adventuring, or by inheritance and will. It is still lost. To them anyways. But I think here you're missing the vital point about heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances. If the involved character dies, the object or legacy still continues on. That is the very point about such things. They "carry on through time."

A character dies and then his family members receive his heirlooms. A character dies and then his brother, or uncle, or son or daughter or niece or nephew takes up his mantle and legacy to carry on with whatever he was involved in. A character dies but his money and estates do not die with him. They go to someone, perhaps a family member, perhaps a friend and associate. A character can die, but the heirlooms he possesses, the legacy he was a part of, and the wealth he has inherited does not die with him. That carries on, and that is exactly the point I was making. There is continuation of things, rather than characters and events in the world being disconnected, isolated, and divorced from each other and form their own background. Characters die, but storylines (in a game sense) and histories does not. Character histories then become more than just a "background story," and an academic writing exercise, they become part of the on-going story, and a role play exercise.

As for selling an heirloom (I accidentally gave away an heirloom once by mistake) or some other inherited object, I have no objection to the idea, but well, it is very easy to correct that problem when it occurs. You just do what I did. You buy it back. You recover what you had lost. An excellent opportunity for sub-plots, adventure, and role play. Just because a character has sold an heirloom (or had it stolen) for instance in no way means the opportunities for adventure and role play involving that object diminish. You just do what you'd do in real life. If it is stolen, you'd go get it back. If you sold it and later on discovered that it contained important information, or was valuable, or was magical, then you have the options of trying to recover it by force, by negotiations, economically, or perhaps by labor exchange. (The labors of Herakles spring to mind. The new owner says, "I'll give you back this heirloom if you do this task for me.") therefore the role play opportunities are never finished until such time as the object is destroyed or lost. The possibilities are practically endless regarding these objects, it just depends upon how much imagination one employs.

As for a legacy, well, that's the reason I defined heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances differently (stressing their differences rather than their similarities). That is to say you can't really lose your legacy, it is passed on in your work or interests. Maybe to family but also possibly to friends, companions, comrades, and associates. Though now that you mentioned it obliquely, (losing or selling what you had previously possessed) I kinda like the idea of an adventure built around the concept of "selling of a legacy." That idea intrigues me.


Basically, IMO, most of what you've suggested is a group concern, rather than a game concern. (Although it should certainly be discussed in the GM section!) I also suspect that one of the reasons so few players don't bother with backgrounds is that they feel they don't know enough about the world to make one without stepping on the GM's toes. These are things that the players need to discuss with the GM, regarding his specific world, unless the group is using a published setting. And those come out after the basic game, usually.

I will almost completely agree with you here. If the world the characters inhabit is a plastic and artificial (in game terms) one, one with no real history, background or reason to exist other than as a sort of moving backdrop for single adventures, then it is very likely that things like heirlooms, legacies and inheritances lose most (though not necessarily all) of their power and force. For intake if one has a character in a world that has no social or other real connections to anyone other than to the other adventuring characters then the only legacy one can possess is that of the momentary adventurer. If he has no family but himself then he is likely to possess no heirlooms, and to receive no inheritance. Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances depend to a large extent on a game world being "real and having a history" (that is to say that the game world is more than a series of ruins that you hop to in order to adventure and all other forms of adventure and role play, social, religious, historical, political, occupational, interactive, etc. are disregarded or ignored.) So yes, I'd say, that's a good observation you made. You could have a "ruins or dungeons only world" and a character could still receive an heirloom or inheritance but it would likely be not nearly as important an object as it would in another, more fully developed world.

Ah, cool. Perhaps I should do something more with the hooks in the PC's in my campaign (which are indeed pretty darn interesting):

It sounds like Haak that you have precisely the kind of setting or world that could make great use of things like heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances. I especially like these characters:

-
- Served in the Furyondy militia along the Veng River frontier, fought Iuz's orcs, kicked out for being involved with a woman above his station. He's from a group of people descended from Dunlending refugees from Middle Earth, who once served the Witch-King but later fled.
-- Priest of St. Cuthbert from Onnwall, old friend of militia guy (who is the sober, non-womanizing opposite of his friend).
-- Second son of nobles from Furyondy who have something do with the Chateau d'Amberville (which none of us have a copy of or know much about), his family include mages, and he was raised by his uncle in Bissel (where the campaign is set). I'm thinking his parents run the Gold County, since that fits pretty well of the Marklands Furyondy places.-- Monk from the Hold of the Sea Princes, who was frozen as a statue for 200 years in the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, before being rescued by the party. He was on a mission against Iggwilv, who ruled the place, at that time . . . his country has since fallen to slave lords.
-- Celene elf son of member of Melf Brightflame's secret order (the Knights of Luna) to given elven help to the lesser races. Accompanies . . .
-- Son of a village river fisherman, became a local militia member to see the world, rose to sergeant, allowed to go off with the adventures with his lord's blessing.


Should I go deep on one of these strands, or get a little of several into it? Knights of Luna or something involving Furyondy beckon.

I can't tell ya exactly, not knowing any real details but I can give you my general experience. When you start to weave heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances into your game (in the way I have described) then you might wanna do so in a way so that the various members of your party can assist each other in what they are doing. This creates party cohesion, and I don't just mean character cohesion, I also mean player cohesion. For instance an heirloom might go to your Priest but later on the party would find out that the heirloom has something to do with a number of different party members.

And often when I'm involving things like this in a game I have an overall, or underlying theme in the background, a sort of Quest which involves heirlooms, legacies, or inheritances, but that Quest ends up involving all of the party members, not just the "receiver."

But it sounds like you have a lot of built in potential that you could explore in relationship to the background and history of those characters. I'd experiment around and see what works best for you.

Well, it sounds like the wife and kids are about ready so I gotta bug out.
I repsonded in a hurry and that's all I have time for.

See ya.
 

HOLY WALL OF TEXT, BATMAN. You have some good ideas, but Vaarsuvius thinks this essay has too many words. You could say the same thing in less than a tenth the space:

Legacies, heirlooms, and inheritances are a vital part of human culture. From Frodo inheriting the One Ring, to Arthur claiming the kingship of Britain, to the Sword of Attila, characters in history, fiction, and myth gain depth and color from their connection to the past. Yet this is often overlooked in RPGs; most player characters are created as if in a vacuum.

Players and GMs could make characters much more interesting by including these elements in their backgrounds. For example:

Heirloom: An object that has been passed down through a family for many years. A PC's heirloom could be a magical treasure of some kind. It might also contain a secret, such as an item in a hidden compartment, a coded message, a long-forgotten purpose or power, et cetera.

Legacy: A duty, occupation, or idea that is part of the family's identity. One such legacy could be a title of nobility which the family has been trying to reclaim, after losing it to a usurper. Others might include the duty to guard a certain sacred place; or the quest to slay the dragon that killed the founder of the line; or a curse that bedevils each member of the family until someone breaks it.

Inheritance: A valuable possession, other than an heirloom, which a character is bequeathed by someone else. A house, a castle, a quantity of wealth, a business, or any number of other things might be given to a PC as an inheritance. Such things are generally very useful to have, but might have unexpected consequences. The house could have a secret room, the castle might be built over a dungeon (the adventuring kind), and a hoard of treasure might have been stolen from someone very dangerous... someone who's looking for it.

Heirlooms, legacies, and inheritances can be incorporated into a character's background at the time the character is created. They can also be added later - a family member or benefactor can die at any time, and leave the character something. Moreover, such things can be uncovered in bits and pieces over time, as the character learns more and more about his or her family history. All this can add depth to a character and make a campaign far more interesting.

To my own thoughts on the topic: As Celebrim says below, this is the sort of thing that has potential for abuse by players. Still, if the GM manages it carefully, it could add a lot. In general, I would say that players should be allowed to give themselves legacies fairly freely, and heirlooms within reason (which is to say, you can declare that your PC has a family sword, you can even declare that it's magical, but you can't declare that it's a +5 holy avenger). Inheritances should be mostly for the GM to hand out.

I'll post some more on the subject this evening after work.
 
Last edited:

Also, most of this is definitely a GM thing. I can't think of many GMs who'd allow a player to just announce at the beginning of play that his character is Count Yourchange, son of Duke Nukem, without prior approval.

In my campaign, you can be related to anyone you like provided you gain no advantage of it. Want to be a part of the the royal family? No problem, just explain how you're a part of it but obtain no real advantage from it. Reasonably, this means that you can be related to anyone provided you give yourself some restrictions on the relationship like: you're illegitimate, you're the black sheep of the family, your family hates you, you've been disinherited, you're the 10th of 12 kids and you don't stand to inherit anything, etc.

If you actually want to have a tangible starting advantage from your background, like the ability to call in favors, recieve loans, legal protection, have an income, have some significant noble rank, etc. then then you have to buy a trait that confers a social advantage like: patron, noble birth, wealthy, heirloom, or whatever.

The reason I have no problem with being 'the third son of the Baron' or '18th in line to the throne', is that so long as it confers no special starting advantage it actually confers no additional long term advantage as well. In the long term, the characters - if they survive - are going to be wealthy heros who will themselves be powerful and who will be able to obtain the favors and friendships of the powerful whether or not they have in their background some theoretical connection to these people. By having a theoretical connection to 'the Baron', it just makes the future role play with those that much more interesting and involving. If it makes the player feel his character is more 'cool', then I'm all for it.

What I'm not for and greatly dislike is a player who invents a background expecting to cash in on that background for some free loot, extra skill points or other advantages. "It says in my background X, so you should let me do Y.", is a statement I consider to be very hostile and adversarial. If you can do Y, it should be reflected on your character sheet. Your character sheet is who you are; your background is only how you got to where you are. You can come up with any background you want to explain your character sheet, but you can't come up with any character sheet you want by explaining your background.
 

Remove ads

Top