D&D General Are your PCs "Adventurers" or just get caught up in the Adventure?

Do you build your PCs to be adventurers or based on their backstory?

  • 1. I build them to be adventurers and makes choices so they will be good at it.

    Votes: 9 22.5%
  • 2. I build them just based on their backstory, even if they start as poor adventurers.

    Votes: 2 5.0%
  • 3. Mostly 1, but some 2.

    Votes: 16 40.0%
  • 4. Mostly 2, but some 1.

    Votes: 3 7.5%
  • 5. Pretty even between 1 and 2.

    Votes: 6 15.0%
  • 6. Other, please explain.

    Votes: 4 10.0%

Adventurers dont exist in my worlds, so everyone is based on backstory. Occasionally that backstory will be curated with something like ‘you are a hunter for your village” or “you were born during an age of war, with common orc raids and are now part of a mercenary band” (ie standard adventure party) or “you are all members of a large Church organisation ranging from priests to guards, to civilian workers (any class)”.

I like the idea of common folk being swept up in adventures and having to adapt and learn to be more than they expected
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mostly 1, a bit of 2.

I'm just really not interested in playing an absolute rube. I'm 100% fine not being amazing at everything. I like having limitations, but I don't like the feeling that most things I can attempt are either pointless or so difficult they aren't worth attempting. Hence, I like having areas where I have defined, solid competence--not absolute unequivocal guaranteed success, but a solid baseline to work from as a member of a team.
 

Mechanically I build for success, but I search for a build that suits the character I want to play. I then refluff any rough edges that seem to jar with his story.
 

Remove ads

Top