Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8243359" data-attributes="member: 22779">Sorry, I misspoke.  I don't mean that the character should be the focal point of the campaign.  I mean that the character should be tied to the campaign setting.  If your character is so generic that I could pull him out of the campaign, plunk him down in a completely different campaign, without making any changes, then that's a character I don't want to see at the table.  If we're playing in Dragonlance, then your character should come from somewhere on Ansalon (or, depending on the campaign, possibly one of the other continents), and doesn't contradict the established elements of that setting.  Fair enough.  I am not.  I've been burned by this too many times.  To me, it tells me that I have a player who has zero interest in the role playing aspects of the game and is just here for the tactical wargame.  No thanks.  I am not interested in playing that way anymore.  Yes, well, again, fair enough.  Although, as a player, I have no problems with DM's doing this - that's why I'm giving the background to the DM.  So he can make adventures that my character will actually care about.  I've mentioned before the idea of Backgrounding.  It comes from Chronical Feudalis - a fun little indie RPG.  Backgrounding is exactly what it says.  The player tells the DM, "This is part of my background, but, I want it to stay in the background and not become a focus of the game".  There is an implication there that the player will not be a dick and abuse the notion and the DM will respect it.  So, if you want to have a family, but, you don't want it getting kidnapped, you put Family in a Background and everyone's happy.</blockquote>

Verification