How much back story do you allow/expect at the start of the game?

[Caliban]

Me (handing it back unread): "That's nice, it looks like you put a lot of work into it. Maybe you can post it to ENWorld? Ok folks, so here's what is happening right now in the tavern..."

Nothing wrong about that at all.

Since presumably I wouldn't be giving you a written background unless you asked for it, at that point I'd probably find something more interesting to do than be subjected to your idea of DM'ing.

Nothing wrong about that either, since you want to grandstand and be a jerk about it.

 

[Schmoe]

Actually, no he's not - for the most part I also prefer my character not be the protagonist in a story. The party as a whole can be, sure, and probably should be; but my character is just one more or less temporary member of said party and both (s)he and the party are seen as actual people living in the game world.

Does this mean that you never want a character's family showing up in the game, and thence showing some sort of development? And does that extend to everything in a character's background? In which case, why have a background at all?

Just trying to understand here. If you want a character's background to be relevant, then I think you have to presume some of the story is about that character specifically.

 

[Schmoe]

Since presumably I wouldn't be giving you a written background unless you asked for it, at that point I'd probably find something more interesting to do than be subjected to your idea of DM'ing.

Nothing wrong about that either, since you want to grandstand and be a jerk about it.

Two points.

1. I don't think I'm a jerk. If you saw anything condescending in what I wrote, I think it might be you projecting something that isn't there.
2. I personally wouldn't do that, I just wrote it as an example, but I wouldn't hold it against someone if they don't want to/don't have time to read my magnum opus.

 

[Caliban]

Two points.

1. I don't think I'm a jerk. If you saw anything condescending in what I wrote, I think it might be you projecting something that isn't there.

You flat out stated you wouldn't read it, so how would you know if they put a lot of work into it? Then you suggest they "post it on EN world" and without waiting for a response you start talking to the group.

That comes off as very dismissive and condescending. Also a social power play - you blow them off and then end the conversation by addressing the group instead of the person.

Not reading someone's background is one thing, but doing it the way you described is being a jerk.

 

[Desdichado]

It can be a stress reliever though. "One shot my arch-lich during his monologue with your broken ass characters will you? ...well little cousin Timmy's gonna pay the price...OP power gaming munchkins..."

Anyone with background NPCs named little cousin Timmy is just begging to have them repeatedly fall into the well. Hopefully the character is a ranger with a trusty dog animal companion to come warn him.

 

[Schmoe]

You flat out stated you wouldn't read it, so how would you know if they put a lot of work into it? Then you suggest they "post it on EN world" and without waiting for a response you start talking to the group.

That comes off as very dismissive and condescending. Also a social power play - you blow them off and then end the conversation by addressing the group instead of the person.

Not reading someone's background is one thing, but doing it the way you described is being a jerk.

If that's what you chose to take from it, then I guess I'm at a loss. Not my intent, but obviously this is an emotionally charged topic for some people, so I think I'll leave you to it.

 

[Desdichado]

I don't agree with this, though. A PC might be no one particularly famous, but nevertheless find his/her loved one being threatened in some fashion, thus requiring the player of the PC to respond in some fashion.

Not all systems work well for more low-scale/intimate adventures, but they are possible.

I have no idea what system you use has to do with this discussion. This isn't a system issue. It's an issue of style and player expectations.

 

[Caliban]

If that's what you chose to take from it...

Sorry, I didn't bother to read the rest. I'm sure you put a lot of work into though. Maybe post it somewhere else so it can be properly appreciated?

kthxbye!

 

[Desdichado]

Even that assumes you want the DM to contrive plot around your character, as though your character was some sort of protagonist in a story. For those of us who prefer to consider our character as an actual person living within that world, rather than a mere narrative construct, both types of intervention are equally bad. Whether my family is killed, or whether they win the lottery and gift me a +3 sword, anything that happens to them because I'm a PC is equally unwanted.

Orphan PCs serve to ward off the well-meaning DMs who simply don't understand that point, as well as the malevolent DMs trying to make you suffer for the sake of art.

I'm always... what's the right word here... bemused, maybe? when I hear stories like this. The degree to which people will bend over backwards to deal with social issues at the game table without actually dealing with them. The best is when they write mechanics that insulate them from misbehavior on the GM or other players' part.

Gaming is a social activity, just like going to a dinner party or any other small group social event. It's not so important in its own right that it's worth doing with people that you don't enjoy doing it with.

"Malevolent GMs" should be talked to—"hey, we don't really like that kind of thing happening in our games; it's not cool, and it's not fun." If they still can't get the point, play with someone else. Life's too short.

 

[Lanefan]

So do you also use this as a reason to make all your characters orphans?

Does this mean that you never want a character's family showing up in the game, and thence showing some sort of development? And does that extend to everything in a character's background? In which case, why have a background at all?

Just trying to understand here. If you want a character's background to be relevant, then I think you have to presume some of the story is about that character specifically.

My characters aren't all orphans...by random chance they can't all be in our system as family background/status is yet another thing we (usually) randomly roll (e.g. is your mother still alive - yes; what does she do - merchant; is your father still alive - yes; what does he do - retired pirate; are they still together - yes; how many siblings do you have - 2 older sisters; ... etc.) as it's quite true that you can't choose your family. All that stuff is just pure background; a foundation for why I'm out adventuring but not ever intended to be or become a part of that adventuring. It's also part of the foundation for why I am who-what I am.

Different from that, in my view, are things my character has done on its own. If either I or the dice have determined that my character spent some time in the Roman Legions then having some game story grow out of that at some point is just fine...even better if one or more other party members have also done Legion time. But the DM still needs to find ways to include the whole party - if there's a Legion storyline, for example, ideally my main contribution would be inside information on how things work and maybe on a few key people; but the story itself wouldn't centre on me. (side note: I've learned long ago not to centre a story on any one character as inevitably that character will die at the next possible opportunity...)

And if, say, my (randomly-rolled) secondary profession is 'spy' there's an instant gold mine for the DM, should she choose to use it.

Lan-"I have one active character whose secondary profession is 'actor' who goes around playing the role of a spy whether there's a stage nearby or not, confusing everyone including, sometimes, herself"-efan