Starting a new game

[Jack7]

2) Personally, I've been handing out XP for roleplay since 1Ed. Its very good at encouraging character immersion, but you have to be clear when you hand out the XP that some is for RP and some is for killing, ideally revealing the proportions.

3) Making your players give you background does 2 very good things. First, it makes them think about their PCs in concrete terms, aiding them in RP. Second, it can give you all kinds of adventure hooks- a romantic rival from a PC's past shows up, a mentor asks for help, a family member is jailed, whatever.

Good advice. I give out experience for anything a person would gain real experience from in real life.

For instance for combat you'd gain combat experience, for problem solving, problem solving experience, for doing their job, job experience (in game terms, role-playing their profession), and so forth and so on. I don't differentiate, they just gain the same kind of experience points (usually, though they can exchange certain kinds of experience for other kinds of benefits) for both combat and non-combat achievements, in the form of points, but I don't discriminate either, favoring one kind of experience over another.

Part of your job in a role-playing game is almost always combat of some form, but then again it is not the only form of experience you gain, so other forms of experience are valuable as well (diplomatic, social, problem-solving, survival, etc).

So I give out experience for all kinds of things, well done, and penalize for all kinds of things done poorly, including poorly done combat. A poorly executed combat might earn a particular character negative experience or some other type of penalty. (Not for suffering bad die rolls, that is beyond the control of the player, but for making bad combat decisions.)

But as far as developing a back-story, I think it an excellent exercise. I think however that the DM/GM should also participate as much as necessary in background development because without good and detailed information on the cultures involved, the world, the religions, the myths, the societies, and so forth it is very hard to develop a meaningful back, especially one that ties to and adheres to the general campaign storyline or storylines and general milieu in which the characters will play.

That is to say, if the World is that of Victorian England (for example) unless you know exactly what Victorian England is like then making up a back for an Indian Shaman who has never been to England won't be of much benefit. Such a character will be a fringe character with little if nay direct relationship to the culture in which he must operate. But if the player can becomes in some way deeply immersed in the structure of the world in which he operates then he can devise a character that not only reflects that world, but is an interesting and natural part of it.

What I mean is that when players make up character back-stories give them as specific a set of guidelines and cultural background information as possible and they can then start to weave together the threads of a character that will not only make sense but will also fit naturally into the environment in which they must operate.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But as far as developing a back-story, I think it an excellent exercise. I think however that the DM/GM should also participate as much as necessary in background development because without good and detailed information on the cultures involved, the world, the religions, the myths, the societies, and so forth it is very hard to develop a meaningful back, especially one that ties to and adheres to the general campaign storyline or storylines and general milieu in which the characters will play.

I've mentioned this often on this site, but the best game I ever GMed was a supers game set in the world of Space: 1889 (using HERO). A little work on my part to tweak the setting and all of a sudden I've got a table of enthusiastic players who went and did research in order to fit in. EVERY last PC was thematically appropriate and fleshed out, even those by the players who were usually designers of shallow, hack 'n' slash combat monsters.

Running that game was pure pleasure. Any time I had even an inkling of writer's block, my players' speculations provided a new spark to keep the game running.

The lesson: Design or find a good setting, and you may be surprised at how good the PC backgrounds you get are, and how immersed your players get.

 

[RandomCitizenX]

RandomCitizen; I have a question. Do you find this approach to XP changes the way players approach the game? I mean if they don't get XP for killing things, do they actually start to behave like heroes often do in books/films (i.e. avoiding conflict if at all possible)?

To an extent, but they are fairly rough and tumble and don't shy away from a fight. Usually fights seem to break out when they get ambushed or when the crazy swordmage decides he wants to do something no matter who stands in his way.

 

[kolikeos]

I started thinking about the scenario I presented (who did it and why, and how can the PCs react) but the option of using published adventures seems to be better. Even though I would usually choose to make up my own adventures, my experience with published adventures has usually been more successful.
So what would you recommend? I’d prefer something downloadable, as there is no readily available gaming store around here.
The dungeon crawling classics look good and I’ve read good reviews of the adventure paths, but it seems those are only available in separate dungeon articles.
A friend of mine has RttToEE, but I understand it’s pretty combat heavy (it also does not start at level 1)
Regarding the PCs back stories: in addition to each PC’s personal background, I thought I might ask them to also come up with a group back story. Why they’re working together in the first place and what common goals do they have?
It’ll be better than trying to force them to work together through a situation such as what I planned. What do you think?