D&D General Background Vs. Backstory

[Cobalt Meridian]

I usually ask that my players supply either a short backstory (no more than 200 words) or complete a short character quiz that answers some key details (where do they come from, why are they their primary class, are they a leader or a follower, etc.). This is to be supplied by the end of the third session their character is in, to give them time to find their character through play. If they are having trouble with it I'll help them come up with something suitable.

So far it's worked quite well - enough information to give me some hooks for them but not so much that I have to agonise over how to fit their character into the ongoing campaign.

 

[TwoSix]

Just start them in a small village and have them learn about the world organically.

The fundamental problem with that is that limits character concepts to "peasants from a small village." That can certainly be a fun game (and I'd recommend Beyond the Wall as a fantastic OSR-type game for that kind of play, but it shut downs a lot of options.

That being said, if you're playing in a setting where only you, as a DM, have any knowledge or interest in it, I generally think you should play in a homebrew game where your players can have more input. Otherwise, you're going to spend a lot of time DMing exposition that only you actually care about.

 

[TwoSix]

For some folks, their character's definition is "An warrior master with the glaive, which is why I'm a Human Battlemaster Fighter with Great Weapon Fighting Style, and the Sentinel and Polearm Master feats", rather than "A former cook on the Maiden's Smile naval vessel of the Sarvokian Empire who was accidentally thrown overboard and abandoned on a deserted island and have only recently returned to shore" (with then an additional four or five blocks of text talking about where they had gone and who them met before they grouped with the table right now.) One isn't better or worse than the other... but it's not surprising that people have opinions on what they feel is more important.

Personally, I can't imagine making a character without thinking both are important, because they inform the other. A unique and challenging mechanical hook adds enjoyment to the strategic and tactical layers of the game. A unique and demonstrative backstory, that ties together the mechanical abilities and links them to the campaign setting, helps the gameplay contribute to the narrative and make the character more recognizable and fun to interact with.

 

[Warpiglet]

Hmm. I'm going to be the dissenting voice here.

As the DM? I love detailed characters. So write it up, lay it on me. (even if you're not sharing it with the other players, remember I'm the DM & I'm playing any # of gods, the Fates, etc. I KNOW.)
I WILL read it. And, since it was important enough for you to spend time thinking of & writing it up, I WILL make use of it. And no, not just to screw with you later on. You also have considerable leeway to invent details about the setting/world if need be (one of my players has had a really hard time wrapping his head around the concept that).
And I will ask you questions. Both during creation & randomly as we play about misc character details.

Hell yes and amen to this!

players don’t play just to have a few possible lines in someone else’s novel! As if the dm is the only one with ideas!

I am dm’ing more lately. In my world, religion has changed. You can buy into the faith with your character (all domains for clerics are options) or you can follow an old faith—-any religion or cult you want.

it would be hard to hold sway (like an atheist for US president) but it’s a fantasy. Maybe your Thor worshipper will be the first to become a duke this millennium. Maybe you’re a warlord in the outlander and have power that way.

point being you can make a world and have some detail while still being open to exceptions and player ideas. Collaborate.

If you say your elf established a leaf beer brewery and the DM says no! Elves only drink wine! It’s time to consider your participation.

maybe your elf is an outlier...as are all adventurers in general

 

[Fenris-77]

I don't mind backstory and I do use it for adventure hooks when players botheer to write it. I like that it allows the players to have some say in the fiction - done with some respect for the setting and starting level of the character it's a great tool. What I don't like about it is that it allows the players to have some say in the fiction. Very similarly to a character brought to session zero regardless of fit, the same sort of player will try to write all manner of advantages into his backstory with little regard for the setting and especially the level of the character, generally without having spoken to the DM and with the assumption that this is all now the 'truth'. I don't mind that some advantage might accrue out of backstory, but there's a line.

So I guess I'm saying it's cool until it's abused. Obvious points remain obvious.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I think this is something that will depend on the DM and group in every game. And I’d expect it to vary from game to game even in the same group.

Doing it the same way every time would seem limiting, especially if that way was particularly restrictive.

I don’t think a lot of work is necessary on the part of the player. Just a bit to give us a sense of who this person is and what they’ve been through prior to the start of the game. I personally love this because I’ll then mine these backstories for setting elements (NPCs, organizations, locations, etc.). Obviously, such a backstory should be fitting for the level at which we’re starting the game. So if that’s level 1, having a backstory of a world weary veteran whose seen it all is probably not a great idea.

But if the players and DM work together a bit, then I think dome really great stuff can come from that. The PCs will be hooked into the setting a bit more and the DM can include elements tailored specifically to them.

But I also don’t think it’s a requirement. Sometimes a player may not have a specific backstory in mind at the start of play. Or, maybe it makes sense to limit the PCs to being a specific background or what have you. That’s fine, too.

It’s even fine if some players have ideas for backstory and others don’t. This way you have some elements established, bit also room for more to be revealed as you play.

I think that this is something that the DM and players need to consider every time they’re about to start a new game.

 

[Fenris-77]

Requiring it would suck. It's not everyone's cup of tea, and some characters are better off with a quick sketch than a portrait in oils. I tend to lean toward sketches anyway for the most part, backstory is cool and all, but my primary goal is for the characters to emerge during play.

 

[Richards]

As a DM, I like to get character backstories from my players but if they don't want to spend the time to do so I don't push them. And I don't feel required to necessarily do anything with their backstories, either - if it's just a story about how their parents met it might never see any actual use in the campaign, but it's still there for the player to have a better feel for their PC. If, however, there's a way to roll some of the backstory into a plot point for the campaign then by all means I'll do so. One PC's backstory was that her parents had been killed when she was eight years old and she'd subsequently been raised by her grandmother, a village wisewoman/witch. I was able to turn that into a vampire tale (turns out it was a vampire who had killed her parents) and gave the adult PC the means by which to slay the vampire responsible for her parents' death all those years ago. It gave a generic "kill a vampire in his lair" adventure a bit of personal motivation.

Johnathan

 

[prabe]

As a DM I ask for (but do not require) a short backstory (which I'm about to define further, to less than 2000 words). If players want to include their traits and bonds and flaws and suchlike, that's fine, but I think of those as more for the player than for the DM (and I don't use Inspiration because it's kinda garbage). I will use elements from those backstories to tie characters to the world and to the campaign, and many of those threads will be resolved over the course of play. I have added a suggestion in my standard new campaign packet that players remember their characters are closer to the beginning of their story than to the end.

I did have one player present me with a 10,000 page novella as his character's backstory, and that is ... a bit much, and seems to be demanding of the DM. That player rolled in the tables in Xanathar's, which I'm also thinking of at least asking players not to use, because it can generate a lot of backstory.

As a player, I write exactly what I ask for as a DM, if the campaign is pitched as something open-ish, not a set adventure path or just door-kicking our way through an endless dungeon or somesuch thing where backstory would be a waste. I have come to realize in the past couple of years running that I DM the sort of campaigns I'd love to play in.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree with the OP: overly detailed backstories are a burden to the GM.

This is a totally alien concept to me, as a GM.

Hmm. I'm going to be the dissenting voice here.

As the DM? I love detailed characters. So write it up, lay it on me. (even if you're not sharing it with the other players, remember I'm the DM & I'm playing any # of gods, the Fates, etc. I KNOW.)
I WILL read it. And, since it was important enough for you to spend time thinking of & writing it up, I WILL make use of it. And no, not just to screw with you later on. You also have considerable leeway to invent details about the setting/world if need be (one of my players has had a really hard time wrapping his head around the concept that).
And I will ask you questions. Both during creation & randomly as we play about misc character details.

This. A thousand times this.

I don’t need a novel, but I’m not gonna be mad at it.

I do want that backstory to be a conversation with me, though, and I want players to be open to us collectively tying their backstory to other character’s when appropriate.

Even when running a published world, I’m happy to add cultures and other elements to the world based on their backstory.

I just expect the players to also be open to modifying their concept to fit the world, like when I had a player in an Eberron game want to play a fairly classic wood elf Druid.

Cool, yes, however, we are gonna tie that into the actual lore of the world. You’re probably from the Eldeen Reaches, you were affected by the last war somehow, and as an Eberron elf your culture has hang ups about death. We can work from there.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

For those of you who expect players to provide a backstory, how deadly is your game?

In my experience, half my player's character fail to surpass 1st level, and even fewer make it to 3rd. Only a true master of the game manages to reach 5th and a 9th-level character is almost unheard of.

As such, writing a 2000 word backstory in one of my games will probably be waste of time. But if characters in your games are expected to survive for the entire campaign (arch?), I can see why you might be more demanding.

 

[bedir than]

For those of you who expect players to provide a backstory, how deadly is your game?

In my experience, half my player's character fail to surpass 1st level, and even fewer make it to 3rd. Only a true master of the game manages to reach 5th and a 9th-level character is almost unheard of.

As such, writing a 2000 word backstory in one of my games will probably be waste of time. But if characters in your games are expected to survive for the entire campaign (arch?), I can see why you might be more demanding.

In my AD&D 1/2 playing days we gave out something like 250 xp per page of backstory, at least for a couple years (then I presented enough writing that I was fifth level to everyone else's 1-2 and it stopped).
Many of my characters died. And then I created a new one. Character creation is part of the thrill of the game. Plus, extensive backstories that weave in the lore of the world as the DM spins it expand all players' knowledge of the world.

Those stories, whether off-table or on-table, are part of the game. I lost nothing by playing D&D.

 

[prabe]

For those of you who expect players to provide a backstory, how deadly is your game?

In my experience, half my player's character fail to surpass 1st level, and even fewer make it to 3rd. Only a true master of the game manages to reach 5th and a 9th-level character is almost unheard of.

As such, writing a 2000 word backstory in one of my games will probably be waste of time. But if characters in your games are expected to survive for the entire campaign (arch?), I can see why you might be more demanding.

First of all, I'm running 5E, which ... people say isn't as lethal as older editions.

I've killed one character, in nearly sixty sessions between the two campaigns I'm running. People drop, from time to time, but only the one has stayed dead.

That isn't to say they've succeeded at everything they've set out to do, of course.

I don't like meatgrinder campaigns, so I don't run one. Horses for courses; if you and your players are digging what y'all are doing, keep doing it.

 

[Helldritch]

A small paragraph is more than enough. More than that and it might be wasted work if the character dies.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

First of all, I'm running 5E, which ... people say isn't as lethal as older editions.

I've killed one character, in nearly sixty sessions between the two campaigns I'm running. People drop, from time to time, but only the one has stayed dead.

That isn't to say they've succeeded at everything they've set out to do, of course.

I don't like meatgrinder campaigns, so I don't run one. Horses for courses; if you and your players are digging what y'all are doing, keep doing it.

I’ve never understood the bolded bit. Lethality level is whatever the DM sets it at, regardless of edition.

Lethality is in the eye of the beholder. Especially the disintegrate ray eye.

 

[ad_hoc]

I go by:

If it doesn't come up during play it doesn't exist.

We're not writing novels. I expect back stories to be 1 paragraph.

 

[prabe]

I’ve never understood the bolded bit. Lethality level is whatever the DM sets it at, regardless of edition.

Lethality is in the eye of the beholder. Especially the disintegrate ray eye.

It was intended as reportage. There is enough chatter online about how hard it is to kill 5E PCs that I thought it might be a useful thing to include as part of my answer. I agree that as DM I can make the game as lethal as I want.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Even when running a published world, I’m happy to add cultures and other elements to the world based on their backstory.

I just expect the players to also be open to modifying their concept to fit the world, like when I had a player in an Eberron game want to play a fairly classic wood elf Druid.

Cool, yes, however, we are gonna tie that into the actual lore of the world. You’re probably from the Eldeen Reaches, you were affected by the last war somehow, and as an Eberron elf your culture has hang ups about death. We can work from there.

I'm of the persuasion that long and winding backstories are better, and sometimes actually necessary, when you're running published settings with minimal deviation, as the DM and the players have a shared understanding to work with, and not taking the world's history into account might not make sense. Like, the Last War ended only 2 years ago and you're telling me you were on your farm in Thrane the whole time and weren't affected by it at all? Get out of here.

When using homebrew settings, they're much harder to work with, especially if the DM doesn't already have an expansive setting history at the ready. Doubly so if the characters are being premade before Session 0...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm of the persuasion that long and winding backstories are better, and sometimes actually necessary, when you're running published settings with minimal deviation, as the DM and the players have a shared understanding to work with, and not taking the world's history into account might not make sense. Like, the Last War ended only 2 years ago and you're telling me you were on your farm in Thrane the whole time and weren't affected by it at all? Get out of here.

When using homebrew settings, they're much harder to work with, especially if the DM doesn't already have an expansive setting history at the ready. Doubly so if the characters are being oremade before Session 0...

It definitely changes how fleshed out backgrounds are made. In my buddy’s current game, we have each had a hand in building the little corner of the world where we are from, as part of making our characters. But, this requires players who actually want to do that.

for our player who wasn’t as into that idea, we quickly described some regions, kingdoms, etc, and he loved the idea of the Prussian inspired Eladrin nation with airships, so he is the captain of a small scout/messenger ship, as part of Puressik’s military intelligence service.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I've got a few different thoughts, and I think I will find the most use framing them around some of these posts, which amusingly, all come from the same poster.

My first thoughts though, come from the reasoning. I write backstories (usually quite lengthy) because it helps me. I need to figure out who a character is, why they are adventuring, what hang ups they have.

Just to throw out some examples, I had a Sorcerer who was a Jeweler, but he started life as a street urchin. He saw the magic gem that gave him his powers and led to him being taken as an apprentice (he'd tried stealing it by the way) as a blessing from the Goddess of Wealth. Because it led to him leading a quite well-off life compared to where he was before. That made him very devout, and it also made him despise thieves. He was a thief, but since he was able to rise above it as a child, he saw any adult still stealing as not only harming society and committing sins against his Goddess, but simply being too lazy to work for what they needed. But even this brief litle paragraph isn't fully accurate, because that makes it sound like he hated the poor, but he didn't and in fact he gave to charities and donated heavily to the poor, because as a person blessed with wealth, that was his religious duty. Some of this came out in play, but the seed that led to his personality and his most iconic moments in the game, started with me writing his backstory and figuring out these details.

A more recent character of mine is a rogue. The DM is running a Sarlona campaign and wanted us to be part of the Summit Road, an covert organization working to wage guerilla war on our neighbor, a despotic, psionically controlled state. I decided to run with a character who'd been on my back burner, who was raised by a "patriotic" but heavily abusive father. He'd been trained (violently) since a very young age to join the Road and fight for the country, despite how "worthless" and "pathetic" he was. I've got a signifigant amount of backstory. Who taught him medicine, his childhood crush, what his father did, where they came from. And all of it informs decisions my character makes. Because of his father, he does not question authority, almost ever. The only times he has even thought to defy the group have been to sacrifice himself for their safety, or when we came across an enemy child, who was destined to be possessed by a spirit and turned into a tyrant. This was emotionally scarring for my character, because abandoning this child who needed help, turning his back on him, made him reflect on the people who might have saved him from his Father. It was a massive impact, but I wouldn't have been able to accurately portray that if I didn't lay the groundwork. If I didn't figure out who this character was beforehand.

Just start them in a small village and have them learn about the world organically.

So, to begin with, this wouldn't do anything to change the backstory writing I would do. It also doesn't help if you as the player already know about the world, but that is a separate point.

The first point is that people do not just spring up out of the ground, fully formed, even a farm boy has had defining life experiences, people who taught him values. Is there a church in town, does he believe in that deity, how about his friends, who are they. And so on and so forth.

The second point is equipment. You are the son of a farmer, who might make a few silver per day. As a level 1 fighter you start out with 122 gold worth of equipment (Chainmail, Longsword, Shield, 2 Handaxes, Dungeoneer's Pack) That is over a years worth of labor from your farmer parents. How did you get all of that, and all the training to use it? Whatever answer you come up with starts a story. Found it? How, where, why did you keep it, why didn't you sell it? Mentor figure? Who are they, why teach you, where are they now? Self Taught and earned? Why, how, did anyone notice, approve, disapprove? This all creates a story, and as the player, I feel the need to know these answers. The person who robs the dead and decides to go on to be a glorious knight is different from the man who scrimped and saved and forged his own gear to set out and earn a place in the world by his own strength and will.

Now, I suppose you could argue that the DM doesn't need to know all of this. I could write a one sentence or two sentence blip and that might be all the DM needs to see. But, if I am going to write it anyways, I want the DM to have access to it. Because it helps them understand who the character is, so they can figure out what is going to come from that character.

Knowing I have a character who will never question authority, leads to different hooks than a character who is fully self-deterministic.

For those of you who expect players to provide a backstory, how deadly is your game?

In my experience, half my player's character fail to surpass 1st level, and even fewer make it to 3rd. Only a true master of the game manages to reach 5th and a 9th-level character is almost unheard of.

As such, writing a 2000 word backstory in one of my games will probably be waste of time. But if characters in your games are expected to survive for the entire campaign (arch?), I can see why you might be more demanding.

And this brings me to this.

None of the games I play or DM are this deadly. That is not to say I don't put my players through the wringer. I've had a few groups really struggling, but I'm very careful to avoid that level of lethality. Because it just creates issues I prefer not to deal with. My players try and react like their characters would, so a new person suddenly showing up to join the group is always a challenge.

Also, people want to build a concept, and generally their concept isn't realized until 5th level. So killing them again and again and again and again (because none of them are "true masters" of the game so none of them would ever reach 5th level) would just be boring for everyone, and prevent them from getting that concept they want.

I don't want to imply it doesn't work for your table, but... I'm reminding of a con game that was happening in the same room as our games. The DM would take each persons character sheet, write in huge red marker how they died, and pin it to the wall. Like, it was some sort of wall of shame. And they covered a massive portion of the wall, because they were running an old, deadly module.

And a lot of people who came in after they left would always ask us what was going on, and why they were doing it. And a lot of people seemed really confused, because they didn't see the point in celebrating the deaths of characters like that. Anybody can kill a character, any character can die through negligence, bad luck, or poor planning, it doesn't really matter as much as the characters who succeed and actually change the story going forward.

Maybe I'm explaining it poorly, I'm distracted by a lot of things today, but trying to picture a game where most of the characters die before level 3 makes me wonder what the point even is. I'd stop running the game, my players would leave, because we couldn't advance a story beyond the opening act. Who cares why the goblins kidnapped the merchant and stole her jeweled necklace, half the party died in the fighting and the other half died when we headed out to try and get to the next town. Only one person made it through both fights and as the most senior party member they decided to get us all killed going somewhere else.