Backstory - How Not To

[thewok]

I certainly don't require that the players reveal all their characters' background to the rest of the players, so there can still be elements of discovery during the campaign.

One day, I'll convince my DM to allow me to make a Changeling without telling the other players. It should be incredible fun to try to keep the secret for as long as possible.

 

[Ydars]

I have no idea how anyone roleplays without a backstory, but if you are, then please continue enjoying yourself and don't worry.

For me, backstory literally IS the character, and without one, I usually just end up playing 'myself in funny clothes' as it were. Most people I have roleplayed with are like this and if I filmed them playing 5 different 'characters' and mixed the shots up, no-one would be able to tell one 'character' apart from the others, except by mechanics.

For me to be interested in playing a character, I have to know how they think and react and what happened to them to shape them.

Most of all, they have to have emotional ties to something or someone. That thing does not have to be present in the game; indeed I DON'T write my backstory for my DM, I write it to influence how I PLAY.

An example; I am just about to start playing in a D&D3.5 campaign with a group of players whose characters have been defending a worn-torn village against monster incursions. I know nothing else about the campaign, except that my character can be 2nd level.

I have rolled up a Swasbuckler 1/Wizard 1 character called Selka.

She is a young gypsy woman whose people have a long and ancient history of folk beliefs, many of them centered around ancestor worship. I know that Selka's people follow 'wandering stars' through the night sky to guide their travels and that there are thirteen such stars. The original twelve clans of Selka's people never followed the 'thirteenth star' because it is a symbol of death.

Selka's people also believe that at the end of this world, the gods will cause all the dead to rise up and inhabit new forms; when they do, all those who are buried together will be a part of the same tribes or clans. So Selka's people are all buried together in huge burial mounds in the hope that they will all be together in the next world.

Since Selka is the last of her people, she is a Gatherer; one who seeks out and find the bones of those who died without being interred with the rest of the clan; all their names are written in the 'Book of the Dead' kept by her people for centuries. She feels a strong obligation to do this, as if she fails then those souls will be 'lost to her clan in the next world'. One sad part about this is that when Selka dies, there is no-one left to place her bones with her people.

Another irony of all this is that Selka was a rebel and left her people to live normally in a city for part of her life, angering her father Jacob by doing so. They were in fact never reconciled and an older and wiser Selka now feels completely inadequate to the task of 'saving' the dead and does not know if she even believes half of the old stories (most of which I have invented already so that I can drop in references to them when I am playing her). So I plan to have Selka explore her people's beliefs as we adventure and eventually work out who she is and what she believes.

Selka also has her own wagon, which is over a hundred years old and belonged to her grandfather and was actually built by her great grandfather; her horses are called Mishka (mouse) and Magnus and that the former is a coward and the latter has a heart of a lion. So even Selka's equipment list is 'living and breathing'.

So now Selka is actually real to me; she is not just in the game to 'kill the monsters and take their stuff'. I don't need the DM to alter one tiny grain of their world to take my character into account as the 'old stories' of Selka's people don't have to be true; she just has to half believe them.

So how do I fit into Selka into the game; well the village the other characters are defending is close to a burial mound of 'the clan of the fourth star' and some of he people of the village might be related to Selka because they may have inter-married with her folk (some of the clans abandoned the wandering life in ages past).

So Selka will now defend the village, even though she can hear 'the song of the dead' at night; a kind of lament sung by her ancestors, calling her to them.

I will not reveal all this to the DM or other players as a huge 'info dump'; I will allow it to emerge, little by little, as we play. For example, one night when we are close to the village doing something else, I might play a scene where Selka is crying because she can hear the voice of grandmother on the night-wind. Then I will reveal a tiny, tantalising piece of her backstory.

Well it beats most 'in character discussions' that usually comprise arguing about how to divide up the loot!

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem that I'd encountered which led me to that was conflicting backstories that carried over into play. And the longer the backgrounds were, the more chances for them to conflict. When Player A had background that said:

"It was only last summer when the Orcs of the Western Hills burned my village, murdered my parents and carried my little sister off into slavery."

And Player B had a background that said:

"My father was a crusader against the Eastern Infidels and died fighting them. I've vowed to recapture his sword, which is my birthright!"

After more mild versions of that (the loner who should have just left the party after the first session to never be heard from again), I've taken to telling everyone in advance "This is why you are all coming together and where the plot is going to start off. Anyone who wants to head east should be playing in a different campaign." That holds them for about a dozen sessions - and if they split after that, they split and exit stage right.

 

[chaochou]

The problem that I'd encountered which led me to that was conflicting backstories that carried over into play. And the longer the backgrounds were, the more chances for them to conflict. When Player A had background that said:

"It was only last summer when the Orcs of the Western Hills burned my village, murdered my parents and carried my little sister off into slavery."

And Player B had a background that said:

"My father was a crusader against the Eastern Infidels and died fighting them. I've vowed to recapture his sword, which is my birthright!"

Yeah, I run across these problems with intricate backstory. I've generally found that stuff a player writes down as his/her backstory might motivate them but often does a poor job of motivating anyone else.

I tend to see: "It was only last summer when the Orcs of the Western Hills burned my village, murdered my parents and carried my little sister off into slavery" and think to myself "Well, why are we starting the game now and not last summer?

If someone wants their parents murdered I'd rather do it in game. I've found it a more effective way of bringing everyone in on the theme.

 

[Plaguedguy]

Back-story isn't terrible in of itself but it should probably be generic and simple enough that one or two players aren't going to be dictating the direction or theme of the game for everyone else. This allows a DM to slot character background into a campaign without having to re-write or write entire segments or sessions around just one or two players.

 

[Rel]

I have no idea how anyone roleplays without a backstory, but if you are, then please continue enjoying yourself and don't worry.

I've been running a lot of Savage Worlds over the past year and I'm gearing up to start a new SW campaign in the new year. One of the features of that system is Hindrances, which are basically flaws that almost every character has. They are selected by the player and not rolled randomly, but I think they can help define some roleplaying aspects of a character without them having to have much in the way of actual backstory.

If you decide that your character is Mean and Bloodthirsty then those traits have some mechanical and roleplaying consequences that will define how you tend to roleplay. You don't have to decide in advance (or ever really) why exactly you are Mean and Bloodthirsty so long as you generally act that way during the game. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy hearing some backstory explanation for how the character got that way. But even without that I have a sense of what the character is like.

 

[Haltherrion]

One day, I'll convince my DM to allow me to make a Changeling without telling the other players. It should be incredible fun to try to keep the secret for as long as possible.

I'd consider giving that ago. I like situations where one of the players isn't what he seems. It would depend a lot on the player, though. This could be easily abused.

THere's the benign version (the PC is a changeling but the fact he/she is a changeling doesn't have any negative consequences for the other PCs) and the malevolent version (the changeling is going to get the party into serious difficulty at some point.

The malevolent version can be difficult but if handled well could make for a very memorable campaign. The difficulties I see relate mostly to giving the players a chance to recognize the peril and do something about it without under- of over-playing these hints. To my way of ref'ing, causing the players serious harm (dead PCs, serious loss of gear) without giving them some chance to do something about it is not good.

As a partical matter, on the malevolent path, the changeling player would have to understand that at some point his PC would go away or not be in his control. It would be killed, chased off, become a persistent NPC foe, whatever; assuming, of course, he doesn't get the entire party killed off or otherwise cause the campaign to end.

Another partical matter I might have executing this idea is meta-knowledge. Specifically, my players are pretty good about keeping what their characters know separate from what the players know. The problem this can cause is that the players may not act on something in-game if they feel some of the knowledge they gained was from out of game sources. This can be a very gray area when, for instance, the changeling player is roleplaying an encounter but makes an out of character reaction. Is it just bad roleplaying that should be interpreted ingame? Or unfair information to act on?

We often have PCs with secrets in their background that the players know and the other PCs shouldn't know so this happens frequently. One case in point, we have a tiefling PC with no obvious tiefling characteristics except for certain circumstances. Given the nature of how we create PCs, all the players know the character is a tiefling, the players have also been more forgiving than they probably need to in having it still be a mystery to their PCs. But this knowledge, while interesting, isn't probably going to turn into a life-or-death situation. That PC may yet betray them but not because she is a tiefling but because she acts untrustworthy and that aspect of her personality is well understood in-game and out-.

Interesting concept; I think I'll start a separate thread on it.

 

[Haltherrion]

Back-story isn't terrible in of itself but it should probably be generic and simple enough that one or two players aren't going to be dictating the direction or theme of the game for everyone else. This allows a DM to slot character background into a campaign without having to re-write or write entire segments or sessions around just one or two players.

I personally wouldn't minimize backstory to that extent but you do recognize a possible pitfall: some players hogging the spotlight through excessive backgrounds. One common place to see this is a new gaming group where most players come with a typical, thin background, one does an uber background, the ref singles that player out for lots of favors tied to the background (the king gives him the magic sword, etc.).

But as long as the playing field is level: players understand expectations, most provide equivalent backgounds and the ref doesn't draw too much on one PC, it can be a powerful tool.

As a player, I don't see any harm in a detailed background. It may or may not get pulled into the campaign but for me, the exercise helps me "get into" the character.

 

[Dausuul]

I just prefer the backstory be short and sweet with a couple vague hooks (see above) rather than some half-baked amateur novella. Players can flesh it out more in game as their character gains experiences.

Yeah, I think this sums up my attitude. Keep it simple. I will add that I take the same attitude with campaign background material when I'm a player; give me a quick sketch of the campaign world with a few key details, not a twenty-page world history.

 

[Haltherrion]

For some years now we have used new character systems that as part of the process give the players elements they need to work into their background. Sometimes, these are a mixed bag (in the current campaign, they can be an outlaw but get some bonuses for that in compensation). These are meant to be general enough the players have wide latitude in how to map into the background but still forces certain elements into their backstory (we used tarot cards and the various arcana had background changing roles, with the major arcana being the most dramatic. A sample background with the card influence noted here.)

This is something my group has been doing for ages (the player who did the sample background introduced it about 12 years ago.) The draft by design is intended to nudge the players to play races, classes and backgrounds they may not otherwise pick. It's a carrot and no stick system though- the players are given reasons to pick these cards and such that might come with some baggage. There are plenty of ways to avoid the nudge if you choose and there are usually a few who do so.

This is obviously not for every group but our group loves the system. We were all getting into ruts with PC creation and this breaks it wide open. It has also turned the PC creation step (we call it a draft) into a fun game in itself with folks analyzing the options to great detail. It also ties in with our in-house painter who makes a new set of PCs for each new campagin.