D&D 5E DM introducing new elements to PC background post-session 0

[Blue]

A DM riffing off an established background is good. Your background should be providing connections to the world and hooks for the DM.

Where "riffing off" changes to "adding something major enough that it changes things" is a blurry line. To use as apples-to-apples comparison as I can, my rogue player would have no problems with someone coming after him for a bounty on his head - a bit her set up. But he would (rightfully) have a problem if someone came after him for squealing to the Bracers (the local guards) and getting him throw away because that's not something his character would do.

Some players offer me broad strokes and let me fill in as needed. Others are more particular.

My table has a lot of trust around this, which also goes the other ways in that I often ask my players to flesh out details for places or organizations they would know. Or pull out a "hey, do I have any contacts in this city through my old guild" just like your player did and I run with it.

 

[Nevvur]

The example given seems like a no-brainer ok, because it leaves so much interpretation up to the player as to what their character could have done to piss off Gross Ben. Hell, for all you know, the PC doesn't even know Gross Ben, but the player does remember laughing and enjoying a summer day as a group of prisoners were hauled off to the dungeon.

I was a lot more specific about what happened with Ben. The way it played out went more like this:

"Gervais looks over the item and says, 'Yeah, I can handle it. By the by, Gross Ben came around asking about you yesterday.' Ben, you recall, was the muscle you brought on for that bank job back in Alderton, the one the guards nabbed while you and Bunnie made off with the loot."

I do like your example of how keeping it more vague opens the door for player input, and is something I'll keep in mind if/when it happens again.

 

[Nevvur]

My table has a lot of trust around this, which also goes the other ways in that I often ask my players to flesh out details for places or organizations they would know. Or pull out a "hey, do I have any contacts in this city through my old guild" just like your player did and I run with it.

Indeed, trust goes a long way toward making this approach work. I've never had players upset with these sort of storytelling additions. Generally, I think they're pleased their background is having an obvious impact on the current storyline.

I also want to add that I usually do consult with players before games where their background will prominently feature, but as mentioned in the OP, it was a bit of an impromptu situation that led to a decision of convenience. The party would be putting a lot of distance between themselves and the rogue's old haunts in the next session, making the likelihood of a confrontation with Ben unlikely, or at least more contrived, if I decided to sit on it.

 

[Oofta]

Depending on the player and how much background they give me, if I think of it ahead of time I'll send a message ahead of time. It doesn't even have to be particularly specific just that I'm going to introduce and NPC that they used to work with and are they OK with that.

If they fill in some of the the background for me, all the better and I'll reward them with inspiration. But I throw in new stuff all the time.

For example, in my current campaign my wife is playing a half-orc barbarian. She's always played her as someone who feels like they didn't fit in, etc. so I had no problem introducing NPCs that were the uppity "mean girls" that tortured her when she was a kid.

In another case I had a bard who was a bit of a Lothario, so I had ex girlfriends and forgotten lovers show up now and then at the most awkward moments. Like the time they needed the favor of the queen and the handmaiden/confidant whispered something in the queen's ear and then had them both give him icy stares and a "Oh, that's the one".

Unless it directly contradicts something in their background or personality throwing this kind of stuff in helps build a real world.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Waaaaaaay back when I started my DM'ing carreer (circa 1981) we never put a lot of effort into backstory. Hey, we were all roughly 11 years old. Anyway, after I got my chops...about 3 or 4 years of DM'ing...I wanted a bit more my my players characters so started asking for a bit more background/history. Mother, father, siblings, all alive? Only some? Feelings towards each other? Important figures they looked up to? That kind of thing. I would say I got that info about, oh, 20% of the time.

So one session I asked a player if his character had parents still alive, or any siblings. "Uh, I don't know". So I asked him to decide right then and there. "Uh, sure, I guess. Ma n' pops are still kicking. Maybe I have a brother?". And that was that. That one little exchange of DM questions kind of got the ball rolling. I'm guessing that asking them to do it before the session probably felt like homework...but asking them in-game felt like they were "playing the game". Score one for psychology!

After that, we sort of settled into a "If you don't have info on your characters background, I'll make it up for you". This got the background rate up to probably a good 70 to 80 percent or more most of the time.

When I DM my players know (or new ones told) that if they don't have something written down for their background that specifically points to some thing or other...then I get to make it up for them. For example, if a character has "Mom & Dad both dead. Grew up on the streets. Likes rats. Hates cats" and that's about it, then I am free to embellish that or add. If I need them to have a sister, I can just decide...because they never said they didn't have any brothers or sisters...and they he was an orphan anyway; maybe he has a sister he doesn't' actually know about. Maybe he has a whole family he doesn't know about. Nine times out of ten the player is cool with my "filling in the blanks", but sometimes they don't want that and we nix it. I don't think I've ever "forced" something on a character...except when playing Hackmaster4e and the player was foolish enough to take too many flaws and quirks... :evilgrin: But that's part of HM4 game style, so it works.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Lehrbuch]

I personally find it irritating if the background is more than a sentence of two. I ask players to communicate their backstory in a way that would fit in a Tweet. Just enough to ground the character as a person and give everyone else a glimpse into what you're going for. Then, develop the rest during the session when inspired by the events of play.

Absolutely.

It took us a few years to realise this, but it is way more effective and fun for everyone to develop and reveal details of the PCs' background during play.

As you say, to begin you just need a quick sketch, and I like to make sure each sketch includes one detail --- the Trinkets Table is brilliant for inspiration for this, if the player can't think of anything else. Then you are good to go. This sets the group up well for characters who actually develop and grow and become more interesting and detailed. It's a fantastic experience when, after having played a PC for many sessions, a new detail from her past is suddenly revealed in play (by either myself of the DM) which totally changes the whole group's perspective of her.