Three questions that help characters be fleshed out

[Celebrim]

<thinks about the PC's in his group>

Good Lord, I hope this isn't true!

If you really are from Philadelphia, it just might be.

Or, then again, you could be dealing with a rare group of role players.

But don't discount the Philadelphia theory entirely. I've met too many people from the Southside.

 

[Desdichado]

The first two questions I can get, although I don't know that they really define the character all that much. The third, though? Just seems like a throwaway detail that never comes up, never really gets thought about, and isn't likely to impact my perception of the character at all. Unless I come up with a suitable quirky answer and manage to work it in, somehow. "My character doesn't eat, he only drinks hard liquor for meals" or something. More likely, someone will say "roast goose with red potatos and gravy" and... then what?

 

[Andor]

Fantasycraft has that exact system.

Didn't Iron Heros have a contact feat chain as well? My books are in storage (dammit) so I can't check.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Yeah, it's the bizarre paranoia that if you detail any aspect of your character's past, the DM will inevitably use it against you.

It doesn't seem to matter that in many years of gaming, I have never done that. Well, almost never...

I think a lot of it stems from the Law of Conservation of Detail. Many players don't want to "make NPCs" (which is what family members usually are, if they're not PCs) or want to only make "useful NPCs" (like Shadowrun contacts). I find in the former case it's just a lot of wasted time and effort turning to random name and career generators, and most fantasy characters I read about don't ever mention their parents. Not even Aragorn that I recall, and we have his full family tree available! Why bother when that stuff won't come up in campaign?

And then a lot of DMs want a lot of detail. I know it won't come up in campaign (as I don't ever see that stuff used against me) so why make me waste time on all this detail?

And if it does, well, family is an obligation. They won't necessarily be kidnapped or something, but I don't want to take time off adventuring to help them fight off the tax collectors/loan sharks/rival businessmen/whatever. Selfish? Sure, plenty of adventurers are.

Recently I saw this turned on its ear once. A PC had three sisters who had been kidnapped before the campaign started, and he tried to convince the other PCs to help free them. The first ended in disaster, the second time, at campaign end, my PC went with him to free his family. (He had good reason to get out of town at that point anyway, and the PC with siblings had leadership qualities...) Of course, said player explicitly made this a part of his character (it was not imposed by DM) and I don't think he even bothered to give his sisters names, occupations, or ages.

 

[Thasmodious]

It occured to me one day that even after two years in one campaign, I could not picture the PCs, what they looked like. I knew their names, had in depth knowledge of their personalities, habits, foibles, etc., knew some of their gear, their stats, but I couldn't close my eyes and picture any of them, strangely with the exception of the dragonborn ranger/party chef. Why could I picture him and not the others? I had asked everyone to describe their characters at campaign start, yet I could only envision the ranger. When he made the character he had decided his character was a dragonborn version of the character Machete, from the fake trailer contained in the Grindhouse double feature, played by Danny Trejo. I could take someone familiar, Danny Trejo, and picture a dragonborn interpretation. I had something to tie it to.

A lightbulb went off. I just started a new game (Savage Worlds - set in the 'Verse), and besides a short few questions, I asked the players to tie their characters appearance to some recognizable figure. We have a male companion who looks like Dorian Gray from the League movie, the pilot is reminiscent of Carlos Gallardo (El Mariachi), Tony Stark (RDJr) is similar to the captain.

Now I don't picture these PCs as exactly Tony Stark, for example. But the description "thin, moneyed, well groomed with dark hair and a goatee" gives a very specific image which we all can share. After creating characters last session, everyone agreed that this method was very visual and memorable and it was a big hit.

 

[delericho]

...most fantasy characters I read about don't ever mention their parents. Not even Aragorn that I recall, and we have his full family tree available!

It's a long time since I read "Lord of the Rings", but I seem to recall him being referred to as "Aragorn, son of Arathorn" quite a bit. Plus, in the extended edition of the "Fellowship of the Ring" movie, Aragorn and Elrond have a discussion about Aragorn's mother at the grave of said mother.

Plus, of course, Aragorn's family history informs who he is to a significant degree. It establishes his right to the throne, of course, but also gives rise to his doubts as to his fitness to rule.

Why bother when that stuff won't come up in campaign?

If the stuff won't come up in the campaign, then the only reasons to do it are if it will enable you to portray the character better, or if you enjoy doing the work for it's own sake. Otherwise, it's the equivalent of the DM doing a whole load of world-building that the players will never see.

However, most good DMs, in my experience, will go some way towards bringing at least some of the character's background into the campaign in some form. They probably won't use it all, but may well use key parts. In any event, if the player does that work, then it might come into the campaign; if he does not, then the character's background cannot come into the campaign.

I think a lot of it stems from the Law of Conservation of Detail. Many players don't want to "make NPCs" (which is what family members usually are, if they're not PCs) or want to only make "useful NPCs" (like Shadowrun contacts).

I think there's a lot of truth in this. To a certain extent, I think it goes to the question, "whose campaign is it?". If it is the DM's campaign that the PCs are just passing through, then all the world-building, the NPCs, and so forth are really under the remit of the DM.

However, if the campaign belongs to the group as a whole, then why shouldn't players be empowered to add elements to it? Why not add a family? Heck, why not detail an entire home village?

And then a lot of DMs want a lot of detail. I know it won't come up in campaign (as I don't ever see that stuff used against me) so why make me waste time on all this detail?

That's fair enough. I used to think that by having a detailed process for fleshing out a character's history, personality, or background, I got a better campaign. In truth, I just got the same variations on a theme over and over, followed by the players essentially 'playing themselves'.

I now have players detail only as much as they want. I then may or may not use it. That said, I'm now leaning back towards having a slightly more detailed approach, as things seem to be getting very 'samey'.

And if it does, well, family is an obligation.

Ah, but they don't have to be. Perhaps the family provides a conventient home-base for the party. Perhaps they can shelter them from enemies when no-one else will. Perhaps they can provide an unexpected and useful contact to the PC. ("My cousin Balin will give us a royal welcome...")

Of course, that relies on having a DM who will allow the player's background to come into play in this manner.

 

[Hussar]

The problem I find with character backgrounds, more than anything, is that players create them as a solo endevour. They never sit down as a group and create backgrounds that are interlinked in any way. So, you wind up with four (or whatever) distinct backgrounds that are completely, and utterly divorced from each other.

Now, the group has to operate together. It becomes a toss up of whose background gets to get emphasized this session. And, it gets even worse when players want to start doing things based on their backgrounds which pull the group in different, and sometimes completely opposite, directions.

I did this with my last long term campaign, and I know that every long term campaign I plan in the future will use the same thing - group backgrounds. Everyone works together, as a group, to come up with backgrounds that have compatible goals. They don't have to have the same goals, but, the goals have to be compatible enough to keep the group together. If Player A wants to raze all the cities because he's a druidic eco terrorist and Player B wants to build towns to colonize the wilderness and extend the borders of his father's kingdom, we're going to have a problem.

I've found that using a Magic Cards Chargen system worked absolutely fantastically for my bunch. People's backgrounds came up time and time again during the game. Really worked. Tying background to Action Point rewards also helped.

 

[Klaus]

The problem I find with character backgrounds, more than anything, is that players create them as a solo endevour. They never sit down as a group and create backgrounds that are interlinked in any way. So, you wind up with four (or whatever) distinct backgrounds that are completely, and utterly divorced from each other.

Now, the group has to operate together. It becomes a toss up of whose background gets to get emphasized this session. And, it gets even worse when players want to start doing things based on their backgrounds which pull the group in different, and sometimes completely opposite, directions.

I did this with my last long term campaign, and I know that every long term campaign I plan in the future will use the same thing - group backgrounds. Everyone works together, as a group, to come up with backgrounds that have compatible goals. They don't have to have the same goals, but, the goals have to be compatible enough to keep the group together. If Player A wants to raze all the cities because he's a druidic eco terrorist and Player B wants to build towns to colonize the wilderness and extend the borders of his father's kingdom, we're going to have a problem.

I've found that using a Magic Cards Chargen system worked absolutely fantastically for my bunch. People's backgrounds came up time and time again during the game. Really worked. Tying background to Action Point rewards also helped.

Simple: say the players can choose up to three backgrounds, but one of them must "X".

 

[Syunsuke]

One deed, one regret, one ambition.
(Well, they were what I asked to answer as self-introduction for English class long ago. Very simple and interesting, I think.)

 

[Grymar]

At the beginning of my most recent campaign, I sent this to all of the players. It was as much meant to get them to think about the personality of their character as it was for backgrounds:

Of the following questions, pick 3-5 to answer (or more if you wish). Be as detailed or sparse as you'd like. You are welcome to return the answers just to me, or to everyone.

* what do you consider your greatest achievement?
* what is your idea of perfect happiness?
* what is your current state of mind?
* what is your favorite occupation?
* what is your most treasured possession?
* what or who is the greatest love of your life?
* what is your favorite journey?
* what is your most marked characteristic?
* when and where were you the most happiest?
* what is it that you most dislike?
* what is your greatest fear?
* what is your greatest extravagance?
* which living person do you most despise?
* what is your greatest regret?
* which talent would you most like to have?
* where would you like to live?
* what do you regard as the lowest depth of misery?
* what is the trait you most deplore in yourself?
* what is the trait you most deplore in others?
* what do you most value in your friends?
* whose are your heroes in real life?
* which living person do you most admire?
* what do you consider the most overrated virtue?
* on what occasions do you lie?
* which words or phrases do you most overuse?
* if you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?
* how would you like to die?
* what is your motto?