DMs: What are your character pet peeves?

[Mark CMG]

http://lawfulindifferent.blogspot.com

Interesting blog.

 

[Thotas]

In follow up to the amnesia thing:

Elf Witch, you cite instances of amnesia being incorporated into a background, and as you well prove, that's not the same as using it as an excuse not to have one. This guy came to the table unprepared to play his character in terms of info on his character sheet, too, so I'm pretty sure there was no long-range plan.

Votan, yup, if I'd been DMing, that's probably the way I'd have gone.

Verdande, funny you should bring up the being late/not showing up issue. Since that's the basis of the story of why I don't game with them any more ...

 

[The Shaman]

. . . "My character is boring and has no interesting background" . . .

My character has no interesting background because the interesting events of his life are ahead of him.

I don't give a crap about an interesting background, only an interesting future.

 

[haakon1]

I tried a group a few months ago in which one character's background was that they couldn't remember their background because they had amnesia.

I wasn't even the DM and I wanted to call "BS" on that.

An evil DM could have a lot of fun with that, as people try to arrest you for the murder you can't remember and may or may not have committed, as you inherit the haunted house, your long lost lover shows up (perhaps of a gender that makes the player uncomfortable!), your old enemy plots against you, your "brother" hits you up for money, etc.

 

[jorgeo]

My character has no interesting background because the interesting events of his life are ahead of him.

I don't give a crap about an interesting background, only an interesting future.

In general a good background (interesting or not) sets the motivation for characters. Without motivations, you might as well be called "Player 1".

I do however enjoy when the players, background or not, take the storyline by the horns and add their own plots to it during gameplay. But I've never seen this happen with a no-motivations character. And no-motivation generally goes hand in hand with no-interesting-background.

 

[Barastrondo]

My character has no interesting background because the interesting events of his life are ahead of him.

To play the gentleman advocate to your position once again, I would say I prefer "the most interesting events of his life are ahead of him." A world where nothing interesting happens to PCs until they reach the age of majority, or where their parentage and old ties don't actively affect their lives in meaningful ways, strains my credulity just a tad. For some PCs, sure. For all... it is a difficult fiction for me to swallow.

That said, I admit my favored play style is mortally dependent on players who are interested in each other's characters beyond shared experiences. I'm lucky to have them -- I've got players who say "You can't let Ettorio meet his parents again in-game until we can all be there for the fireworks!" -- but without them, background callbacks are a rigged game.

 

[The Shaman]

In general a good background (interesting or not) sets the motivation for characters.

I start with a sketchy, general goal - "Out there is a fortune waiting to be had. You think I'll let it go? You're mad!" - and let my motivations develop from my character's experiences in actual play.

That's as much background as I require.

I do however enjoy when the players, background or not, take the storyline by the horns and add their own plots to it during gameplay. But I've never seen this happen with a no-motivations character. And no-motivation generally goes hand in hand with no-interesting-background.

In my experience, a character background, which consists of events no one at the table, including the person who created it, ever experienced first-hand, can be a distraction from the events occurring in-game.

To play the gentleman advocate to your position once again, I would say I prefer "the most interesting events of his life are ahead of him." A world where nothing interesting happens to PCs until they reach the age of majority, or where their parentage and old ties don't actively affect their lives in meaningful ways, strains my credulity just a tad. For some PCs, sure. For all... it is a difficult fiction for me to swallow.

Whereas, "Well, I can spend the rest of my life plowing a field and hoping I don't get eaten by an ankheg or stung by a giant wasp or carried off by slavers, or I can take up my spear and my sack and find out just what's in those old ruins in the hills," seems no less credible to me than, "Father was a warlord and Mother was a demon and my birthmark matches a constellation associated with the goddess of blah blah-blah blah-blah."

That said, I admit my favored play style is mortally dependent on players who are interested in each other's characters beyond shared experiences. I'm lucky to have them -- I've got players who say "You can't let Ettorio meet his parents again in-game until we can all be there for the fireworks!" -- but without them, background callbacks are a rigged game.

Fair 'nuf.

I'm getting together again with my group in a couple of weeks. First order of business is a visit from a procureur - a prosecutor - for the provincial court of Dauphiny who's job it is to figure out which of the adventurers' enemies sent a gang of bravos to ambush them and a case of arsenic-laced wine to poison them.

Make mine shared experiences anytime.

 

[The Aberrantion]

Not at all because I telligence and strength are different. A weak person can be smart enough to know their limitations and accept them. A moron is a moron and and unwise moron is even worse because they are not wise enough to know they are better off letting others help them.

Here's on thing you really need to learn. A stat of 10 means you are average, while an 8 means you're a bit below average. Not a dammed retard with no common sense! Even an idiot is capable of recognizing hey, magic guy talk good, he get more gold for axe I found. Sheesh.

Finally add in the low charisma and now you have an unwise moron who doesn't realize how dumb he is and whose general psonality is so abrasive that people as a rule don't want to help them.

I'm sorry but this is also kinda dumb. If a character is so abrasive you're not willing to do him a favor (and thus help the party overall), then why the hell is he adventuring with you in the first place? Why in the world do you choose to spend the majority of your time in a high-risk occupation with someone you can't stand? What you're saying simply makes no sense! Have you never read a single novel with the gruff tough guy who's still likeable? When the half-orc cuts down a dragon that was about to tear your head off I think you be thinking that you'd owe him one, even if he was a bit of a douche before/afterwards.

Save their life? Maybe, it is a party trying to work together for a common goal. But doing all the shopping for the prick of a half Orc barbarian who isn't going to say thank you or appreciate it (in character at least) just so the Orc saves a few gold is very poor gaming and a pet peeve.

Why won't he at least mumble some thanks? an 8 of charisma may mean he's not charming or sociable, but it hardly means he lacks any manners at all. You want to get into that we're talking 4-6 at least (with 6 being a stretch).

It also allows a poorly designed min maxed completely ignore the massive hole in their character design.

Since when is focusing at what you're good at min-maxing? You want a strong guy who can take a few hits for the party, why the hell waste chargen and lvl-up resources on something that's not only going to detract from your role and thus hurt the party, in exchange for sucking a little less at something another guy will do far better than you anyways? Party members specialize and fufil roles, the Face is one of them and it's as timeless as the hobby itself. You had best get used to it, because it's not going away.

 

[Barastrondo]

Whereas, "Well, I can spend the rest of my life plowing a field and hoping I don't get eaten by an ankheg or stung by a giant wasp or carried off by slavers, or I can take up my spear and my sack and find out just what's in those old ruins in the hills," seems no less credible to me than, "Father was a warlord and Mother was a demon and my birthmark matches a constellation associated with the goddess of blah blah-blah blah-blah."

The question that lingers with me is "why must I have just one?" Adventurers are such a diverse lot. Plus there are fun simple ones in the middle like "I got into bed with the wrong woman and had to leave town to avoid starting a feud", which puts an urbanite in the countryside for a beginning adventure and yet provides questions of what will happen when the party goes to his hometown. The patch between "no background elements of note" and "backgrounds of such import that the player expects the entire game to be about his background details" is quite wide. I roll around in it like a haystack.

I'm getting together again with my group in a couple of weeks. First order of business is a visit from a procureur - a prosecutor - for the provincial court of Dauphiny who's job it is to figure out which of the adventurers' enemies sent a gang of bravos to ambush them and a case of arsenic-laced wine to poison them.

Make mine shared experiences anytime.

I choose neither A nor B, but A + B! (For this game, at least.)

For us next week the order of business is trying to frantically prevent an assassination (while hoping the one they commissioned goes off smoothly) and deposing the local head of one of the Houses who's about to set the city at civil war. Admittedly, the players could have accidentally driven Bravadi Rovino into his warmongering state even if (a) one of them hadn't turned out to be the same young blade who slept with Bravadi's daughter and fled town, and (b) another hadn't been a member of House Rovino who's used her family contacts to get close to him, setting up the accidental drive into paranoia. But the backgrounds helped things move along in record time, and there was really nothing quite like the looks on the players' faces when I said "Scorpis looks at you in surprise, and then his eyes narrow in recognition."

The whole bit where they chose to commission assassins to take out the Prince's champion and arrange for plague-apples to be discovered on his body? That's not inspired by part of anybody's backstory. But my group is kinda nuts. They manage to have a lot going on at any given time.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In my experience, a character background, which consists of events no one at the table, including the person who created it, ever experienced first-hand, can be a distraction from the events occurring in-game.

That's a player issue -- special snowflake syndrome -- not one inherent in having a background.

Even if all a player does is detail who is mentor is and why he's going out and sacking dungeons, it at least informs who a character will be to start off with.

Even Conan, Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser all had backgrounds, despite the fact that they spent most of their time getting into mischief. Conan and Fafhrd, especially, could have been nearly identical characters, otherwise.