Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Boots" data-source="post: 7490959" data-attributes="member: 92239">I agree with you at the altitude you're operating at.I think it's important to think about where a campaign is, what storylines are in flight and what other players want in contrast to what one player wants.  Personally, when doing backstories two things from my past come to mind when my group was doing our standard pre-campaign world building exercise and character stuff.For context: We do a round table mad lib with players spending "fate threads" in the form of poker chips to cover things that they want in game.  The DM has his own amount of currency so he can modify certain things that get brought up.  Players as a whole have more currency than the DM but the DM has more currency than any individual player.  The way it works is the player will put down some of his currency and leave an open-ended statement that becomes as "real" as the amount of currency put down.  Going once around the table, any player can add to the open ended statement with the DM closing the thread or adding his own take to it then closing the thread.  Each player has 30 seconds to get their idea out symbolized by a sand timer.Each person needs to add an amount of their currency to their modification equal to the amount of the original spend.. so if anyone screws with anyone else, it reduces the amount they have to spend on themselves.  It balances nicely and depending on how careful a player is with how he or she states his or her desires it can end up with some really good, and really whacked outcomes.  Nice ice breaker.Back to point.  These two things come to mind Player: There's something about my character that he can't put his finger on, but he believes he's destined for greatness. - 4 chips out of his 10.DM: Times up, lets go around the table.Player 2: It's his spleen... 5 chips.  (this player is the table's humor guy.  He's well-liked by everyone including the player he just borked.)Table: laughter, horrified look on player 1's face.DM considers intervention but this is player 2 telling everyone that he wants a lighter game than "player one saving the world and grit".  It flies but by the time it matters the point has been significantly abstracted.  (read: it may very well be that the player has a mystical spleen/physiology, but I don't have the evil guys constantly mentioning his spleen.  It's a table joke.)Next example.Player:  I have tons of friends in high places, I know many of the nobility and their my close friends. (3 chips out of 10)DM: Ok, lets go around the table (gives me time to think.)  None of the players add or subtract, because I think they're trying to see if I'm going to break the game or break the collaborative environment by saying no.DM: (adding to player's point): They're all imaginary friends.Table: Dies laughing and we break for a few minutes to get food.  Player's face drops.By the time this matters I had enough time to think through it and the imaginary friends were spectral ancestors of the existing nobility.  It would have given the player a lot of backstory on the nobility and enough information to manipulate things on occasion, but not enough to screw the game over.  Granted, sometimes this works and sometimes it doesn't because you never know how long a game is going to last or if the players are going to be at the table to see it through.  I do think though that if you put a bunch of creative minds together you can make anything work.KB</blockquote>

Verification