|
I've been seeing this more and more. It seems like a player is trying to squeeze in 3 levels worth of experience to justify why thier characters development inspite of what happens to the character in game. I do a particular head shake when a person then follows it up by saying, 'But they are generally good natured and loyal.' This usually is followed after slaying the Evil Emperor's finest legion single handedly. I tend to call it the 'Drizt Drama Syndrome'. Where you are more awesome before than you are now. Does anyone else see this often?
|
I've been seeing this more and more. It seems like a player is trying to squeeze in 3 levels worth of experience to justify why thier characters development inspite of what happens to the character in game. I do a particular head shake when a person then follows it up by saying, 'But they are generally good natured and loyal.' This usually is followed after slaying the Evil Emperor's finest legion single handedly. I tend to call it the 'Drizt Drama Syndrome'. Where you are more awesome before than you are now. Does anyone else see this often?
Being as I tend to write long character backgrounds, allow me to comment on this.
There are many players in this game that are not familiar with character development (from a writers standpoint). Those that are familiar with this concept tend to not do this. I say this as I have played since 1981 and have seen my fair share of this background write up secenario... (even participated in it during my younger years).
Dont look at it like its a bad thing, re-direct your player like a teacher would a student and ask for him to re-write it with no grand achievements of epic nature...
CC
I don't see it, but YMMV.
It's ok to tell the player that that's too much information. There's no way you can have all that experience and just be starting out as a first level character with 0 xp.
Maybe the evil emperor killed his dog and he wants revenge. That may or may not be where you want to go with the story, so he may or may not get said revenge.
Tell him to keep it simple; he's no hero, but he wants to be. No more than a page. Brief physical description, personality, immediate family, place of origin, patron god, and how and where he first learned to swing a sword or cast a spell. More than that, and he becomes the source of the drama, not your game.
A 1st level character has gear that costs a fortune to the average commoner. He has to be quite exceptional just to have that.
|
|
I don't see it, but YMMV.
It's ok to tell the player that that's too much information. There's no way you can have all that experience and just be starting out as a first level character with 0 xp.
Maybe the evil emperor killed his dog and he wants revenge. That may or may not be where you want to go with the story, so he may or may not get said revenge.
Tell him to keep it simple; he's no hero, but he wants to be. No more than a page. Brief physical description, personality, immediate family, place of origin, patron god, and how and where he first learned to swing a sword or cast a spell. More than that, and he becomes the source of the drama, not your game.
A 1st level character has gear that costs a fortune to the average commoner. He has to be quite exceptional just to have that.
Whole heartedly agree.
For me, the actual leveling arc is so unbelievably fast that I try not to begrudge players who want their PCs to at least seem accomplished or competent right out of the gate.
Like so many things, it really depends on the campaign. There's nothing wrong with a desire to play a character with accomplishments or reputation, even if this isn't reflected by the stats. Within 2 months of game time the character will probably ascend to superhuman levels of competence anyway, unless the GM intervenes with the advancement system.
So it comes down to a matter of taste. Certainly there are times when I would roll my eyes, especially if the backstory created additional work for me as GM. But I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with having a story where the stats don't quite line up... yet.
For me, the actual leveling arc is so unbelievably fast that I try not to begrudge players who want their PCs to at least seem accomplished or competent right out of the gate.
Like so many things, it really depends on the campaign. There's nothing wrong with a desire to play a character with accomplishments or reputation, even if this isn't reflected by the stats. Within 2 months of game time the character will probably ascend to superhuman levels of competence anyway, unless the GM intervenes with the advancement system.
So it comes down to a matter of taste. Certainly there are times when I would roll my eyes, especially if the backstory created additional work for me as GM. But I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with having a story where the stats don't quite line up... yet.
Particularity for long lived races unless you actually think it takes 100 years for an elf to reach maturity.
Particularity for long lived races unless you actually think it takes 100 years for an elf to reach maturity.
Elf at 100: What? Are you telling me that there are people in this world who don't know how to use swords and bows, and don't know any wizards? How can that be?
I must venture forth, then, and see this strange world for myself!Older elf: Well, here, take my longsword. I've got some others back at the treehouse. See ya when you teleport back.
There are other ways to reward characters for a good back story. In the game I am in our GM has rewarded my bard with a new 0 and 1st lv spell for my back story along with some exp. He picked the spells but I thought it was really cool and made me feel like my toon was that more of a unique character. You could even grant coin or small magic item or an important contact\friend. I believe it maks GMs feel good when there players take such an interest in the game they work so hard to put together as to take the time to write a backstory. Oftin times it can come into play in the game and add a new dynamic, but sometimes it will back fire on a character that gets carried away. For example the curren game I'm in one of our younger playes literally tried to get away with mass man slaughter in his backstory something like 30 to forty people he killed in an accidental mixing of potions at a school he was teaching at ( he's the ne alch class). He packed all his stuff and changed his name. In our last game bounty hunters cought up with him and now his toon is bretty much dead for his crim and fleeing. So as the saying goes you can't let them get away with murder lol. Hope this helps.
I have to say that I find myself that players fall into two categories when they write 'awesome' back-stories at low level: Those that haven't quite 'got it' that their character is not an awesome hero just yet, and those that are looking for a way to factor in advantages by referencing their back-story ("No, no, the guard should be frightened of me and do what I say because ...").
This is not to say that back story should not be influential or contain significant events, quite the reverse. These events should not, however, confer particular advantages to the character. Let me give an example:
Of the other players, the gear that characters have in excess of 'ordinary people' was explained not by them visiting the local store with a lot of money, but via other reasons: The paladin was also a smith, and her weapons and armour were self-made; the fighter inherited his sword and armour from his father, a former guard captain; and so on ...
I outright avoid games which start at less than Lvl 5 for this exact reason. Unless I feel like playing a newbie as my character background, it will be at least 4 levels before the background makes sense.
It simply doesn't make sense for a battle veteran type of background (for example) to be represented by a level 1 fighter or barb. What happened to all of the experience he gained during those battles? If it was put into levels of an NPC class, those levels wouldn't disappear, he would become a warrior X, fighter 1. Wizards can spend years in wizard school to get to lvl 1, but that's an exception.
Tell him to keep it simple; he's no hero, but he wants to be. No more than a page. Brief physical description, personality, immediate family, place of origin, patron god, and how and where he first learned to swing a sword or cast a spell. More than that, and he becomes the source of the drama, not your game.
Maybe it is the fact that my games usually begin at 3rd-5th level, but the PCs are most assuredly heroes. And, yea -- a good deal of the drama is based on their characters. After all, it's supposed to be fun, so engaging the PCs directly and playing off their backstories is a must.
I like playing dwarves, which are also a long-lived race. I've had difficulties explaining what my dwarf has been doing for the last century. The best explanation I've come up with is, "Giants destroyed my homeland... I am a wanderer now." I know it's cliche, but it works, haha.
My most recent backstory was 3 pages, and more with the clarifications that I sent back and forth with my GM. only 1 paragraph details things that would get me XP if done in the campaign, and is easily written away as what it took for me to go from commoner to pc class. You can write a long, detailed backstory without implying that your character should be better than he is. By the time you get past where you were born, what your family is like, and what you were like growing up, you can have a few pages without so much as a major conflict.
I will give the advice here that I put on annother thread. A good backstory should do 3 things:
1. It describes the motivation of the character and why they are where they are.
2. It gives the character something special. It makes them unique to the world in some way. This can be anything from mysterious power, a definitive personality, a responcibility, or a position. Somehow, the PC is important in some way.
3. It gives the character one or more contacts/organizations in the game world that they can interact with. I find 3 to be about ideal. One they can ask for help, one that will likely ask them for help, one that is somehow opposed to them. There are plenty of other types, but I find this works well. The goal here is to tie them into the world arround them.
I outright avoid games which start at less than Lvl 5 for this exact reason. Unless I feel like playing a newbie as my character background, it will be at least 4 levels before the background makes sense.
It simply doesn't make sense for a battle veteran type of background (for example) to be represented by a level 1 fighter or barb. What happened to all of the experience he gained during those battles? If it was put into levels of an NPC class, those levels wouldn't disappear, he would become a warrior X, fighter 1. Wizards can spend years in wizard school to get to lvl 1, but that's an exception.
I love playing at low level ... it's where the thrill is the most, you are in a way writing the back-story then ... but yes, it is fun to start at higher level sometimes and write a more dramatic background.
|
|
I love playing at low level ... it's where the thrill is the most, you are in a way writing the back-story then ... but yes, it is fun to start at higher level sometimes and write a more dramatic background.
I like lower levels for the thrill possibility of being killed easier. Not so much for the lack of special abilities and spells.
Caineach - I sometimes miss the random origin charts that some RPGs used to have, like Mekton Z and Cyberpunk. Didnt 3E have a hero background generator? Hmmm. I may have to see if I still have that book...
I love playing at low level ... it's where the thrill is the most, you are in a way writing the back-story then ... but yes, it is fun to start at higher level sometimes and write a more dramatic background.I like lower levels for the thrill possibility of being killed easier. Not so much for the lack of special abilities and spells.
Caineach - I sometimes miss the random origin charts that some RPGs used to have, like Mekton Z and Cyberpunk. Didnt 3E have a hero background generator? Hmmm. I may have to see if I still have that book...
Your thinking of the "Hero Builder's GuideBook" (dnd 3.0)
I have looked through it and it is detailed in generation, as it includes a family generator
I also agree with you on playing in the lower levels in that you are more killable and it adds to the critical part of you characters development, but I also tend to write my characters background before the game. But I keep it real in that my character can only do things inside of their current parameters. The character backgrounds I write have plot hooks for the DM along with a list of predefined NPCs with their personality traits and looks that the character knows.
I love playing at low level ... it's where the thrill is the most, you are in a way writing the back-story then ... but yes, it is fun to start at higher level sometimes and write a more dramatic background.I like lower levels for the thrill possibility of being killed easier. Not so much for the lack of special abilities and spells.
Caineach - I sometimes miss the random origin charts that some RPGs used to have, like Mekton Z and Cyberpunk. Didnt 3E have a hero background generator? Hmmm. I may have to see if I still have that book...
Traveller and Mechwarrior have good ones. But if you leave your backstory at what is randomly generated and do not expand it, you are losing out on a lot. You may roll "survived a firefight" or something like that, but if you don't flesh out the battle then does it really mater? Each roll can be expanded to a paragraph, and by the time you are done with the random generation you would have a couple sheets.
Edit: Both of those systems do not assume players will be of equal power or experience when they start the game, which I like.
You could always rule that the long saga they come up with is merely what the character boasts is his history (Tasslehoff Burrfoot anybody?) the truth could be something quite different. They could even believe this story themselves like in the Dr Who episode "The Next Doctor" where a traumatised man becomes exposed to a concentrated energy archive about The Doctor, then subsequently believes himself to be the last timelord and sets out to save the world!
My most recent backstory was 3 pages, and more with the clarifications that I sent back and forth with my GM. only 1 paragraph details things that would get me XP if done in the campaign, and is easily written away as what it took for me to go from commoner to pc class. You can write a long, detailed backstory without implying that your character should be better than he is. By the time you get past where you were born, what your family is like, and what you were like growing up, you can have a few pages without so much as a major conflict.
I will give the advice here that I put on annother thread. A good backstory should do 3 things:
1. It describes the motivation of the character and why they are where they are.
2. It gives the character something special. It makes them unique to the world in some way. This can be anything from mysterious power, a definitive personality, a responcibility, or a position. Somehow, the PC is important in some way.
3. It gives the character one or more contacts/organizations in the game world that they can interact with. I find 3 to be about ideal. One they can ask for help, one that will likely ask them for help, one that is somehow opposed to them. There are plenty of other types, but I find this works well. The goal here is to tie them into the world arround them.
This sounds like my stories...
Granted I've had a few extravagant ones before, and in pathfinder... with the new rules and the new rules I haven't really dealt much with backstories yet...
But I LOVE backstories. My favorite was probably 10 pages long... and it basically described his training period. There is a serious jump between 'npc commoner' and 'PC level 1'. Feel free to explain it.
You've got a weapon... your trained in it... you have FEATS... How did you get them? Who trained you??
When I plan out a background... I usually give my DM 2-3 allies, and 2-3 villains. along with a couple contacts that could go either way.
I've found that DMs like to make the stories (prefab or otherwise) there own and tweak things around to make it more special to the players. Handing them NPCs with built in vendettas helps bring your motivations front and center. If they can use them GREAT... If not.. Oh well. It's still part of your character development.
There's nothing as thrilling as stopping an assassin thinking it had something to do with the plot... only to find out they were after YOU!! And it had NOTHING to do with the prefab adventure!!!
Or when it's necessary for someone to bail you out of a jam... finding your old buddy you haven't seen for a couple of years standing there.
Admittedly I PREFER to start out at level 3... but most stories that aren't CRAZY insane can still be worked into a level 1 backstory. Besides... if you've already saved a princess and slain a dragon... what are you doing adventuring?!?!
I'll try to be as brief as possible, but this is a bit complicated. I played a goliath dragon shaman in an Eberron game a year or so ago. His tribe had been "conscripted" by warforged slavers during the last months of the big war (I forget details about that) and were being made to mine metals from the mountain. At first I only wanted to play the dragon shaman class to breathe fire because that just sounded awesome. His 'honorific' name was Flametongue because of that. But then I decided he needed a reason for that name because at level 1, he still had a few levels before he got a breath weapon.
Sparing the extended saga I wrote up for his backstory, he attempted to overthrow the warforged and was ratted out by cowards in the tribe. When he lashed out at them, he was shunned and given the name Flametongue for his caustic verbal abuse. He escaped and left them all to die, full of rage. THEN I needed to come up with a reason for him to have a level in the dragon shaman class...
You can see how this snowballed on me. The story ended up being quite long, so I revealed it a bit at a time to everyone over Facebook as we played.
And nothing was quite as awesome as when one of Flame's brothers jumped aboard a lightning rail with a team of warforged in tow. He'd been enchanted and sent to assassinate my character, but I didn't recognize him until I found a note on his corpse. He had essentially sacrificed himself by volunteering for the mission to deliver an SOS from the tribe. Everyone was like "OMGWTF!?"
I much prefer a backGROUND to a backstory. I guess that's a matter of semantics, but I think that a small, general outline of where a character comes from, what his/her motivations are, etc. leave it more open for later development. That way the GM can take bits and pieces and weave them into the campaign. If a player writes up that they have a rival or enemy from before the game starts, for example, it lets the GM figure out how to incorporate that rival. If the rival is fully fleshed out, or even statted up, by the player, it makes it harder for the GM to fit into the game he or she is creating.
I award players who give me a good background to work with, but I wouldn't want to see pages upon pages of story that may or may not even fit in the world. Working with a player to make up a plausible background helps both the GM and the Player find a connection with the campaign. This also allows for the game itself to organically contribute to the development of the characters story, past, present and future.
|
D&D has always had the fun potential to play someone who *was* hot stuff in the past, through the level loss mechanic.
I've only used it once (playing a cleric who had been level drained to the point of death, lost his faith, and started over as a 1st level fighter, having only level-appropriate gear, since his old mid-level gear was donated to his church, but still remembered being able to cure wounds and turn undead), but it's a fun technique.
I much prefer a backGROUND to a backstory. I guess that's a matter of semantics, but I think that a small, general outline of where a character comes from, what his/her motivations are, etc. leave it more open for later development. That way the GM can take bits and pieces and weave them into the campaign. If a player writes up that they have a rival or enemy from before the game starts, for example, it lets the GM figure out how to incorporate that rival. If the rival is fully fleshed out, or even statted up, by the player, it makes it harder for the GM to fit into the game he or she is creating.
I award players who give me a good background to work with, but I wouldn't want to see pages upon pages of story that may or may not even fit in the world. Working with a player to make up a plausible background helps both the GM and the Player find a connection with the campaign. This also allows for the game itself to organically contribute to the development of the characters story, past, present and future.
Who would stat up their rival? Seriously. If I tell the GM that a six fingered man killed my father, I don't want to stat him out so I know about when I should face him. I may also say "he appeared important by the way he dressed" or "He was cool and calculating" or "his gaze gave me the chills" or something like that. On the other hand, for someone that I grew up with and knew, I need to explain why we didn't get along, how I think of him, and why. I may not be describing him how he actually is, but at least how I percieve him.
How much detail you put in things like the setting should really be based off of what you have of the setting. If the GM doesn't give you anything to work with, you have more freedom to do what you want. Its his job to communicate the framework of the game to you before you make your backstory. Its the player's job to work within that framework, and to modify what needs to be modified to fit the story before game start.
If you want some grand achievements of epic nature, and the character being a wreck because of that, look no further than Harry Potter: the kid slew the Evil Overlord as a baby.
Of course, it was more complicated than that, and it was more a case that mom put a good Spell Turning spell on the baby, making the Evil Overlord zap himself with his own curse, but this is a perfectly decent model.
So your first level fighter slew the evil duke? Sure. You got the evil duke after he'd been roughed up by other fighters, level drained, poisoned, and he had multiple levels of Aristocrat too. The stories of him being unbeatable on the battlefield? PR from the evil duke hiring bards to spread stories of his battle prowess where all the fights were actually set up or just plain invented lies.
Which isn't to say that some stories don't need to be readjusted, especially ones that give the character ungodly powerful patrons, but almost anything can be made to fly if you just find the right angle on it.
|
I've been seeing this more and more. It seems like a player is trying to squeeze in 3 levels worth of experience to justify why thier characters development inspite of what happens to the character in game. I do a particular head shake when a person then follows it up by saying, 'But they are generally good natured and loyal.' This usually is followed after slaying the Evil Emperor's finest legion single handedly. I tend to call it the 'Drizt Drama Syndrome'. Where you are more awesome before than you are now. Does anyone else see this often?
Not really but there are only so many darn farm hands I can stand by now.
|
Here is the way I look at it. People (townies and the like) are 0 level. This stems from 1st ed when a townie had 1 - 4 HP's depending on who or what they where. They had basic skills just like you or anyone else in real life.
A Character had to have done something to get them to where they where. Be it going being handed off to the monestary to learn, to be handed over to a local lord to become a page, then squire, now 1st level Paladin/Cavalier/Fighter etc.
it is OK to have killed 1 or 2 people or done something "heroic" to now be where they are.
It IS feasable to have "Some" Experience and still be a zero XP level 1 PC if you look at them as zero level townies. But I would say the background would have to be in reason and explain the character.
For example one of my players characters has a dwarf that he stood to an army of undead ready to give his life for a friend and his diety granted a "favor" on him and smitted the undead. The players character dedicated himself to the church and years latter came forth as a cleric of the diety and at 1st level.
So I can see within reason very detailed backgrounds
I've been seeing this more and more. It seems like a player is trying to squeeze in 3 levels worth of experience to justify why thier characters development inspite of what happens to the character in game. I do a particular head shake when a person then follows it up by saying, 'But they are generally good natured and loyal.' This usually is followed after slaying the Evil Emperor's finest legion single handedly. I tend to call it the 'Drizt Drama Syndrome'. Where you are more awesome before than you are now. Does anyone else see this often?Being as I tend to write long character backgrounds, allow me to comment on this.
There are many players in this game that are not familiar with character development (from a writers standpoint). Those that are familiar with this concept tend to not do this. I say this as I have played since 1981 and have seen my fair share of this background write up secenario... (even participated in it during my younger years).
Dont look at it like its a bad thing, re-direct your player like a teacher would a student and ask for him to re-write it with no grand achievements of epic nature...
CC
When I do a character background for a 1st level character, I tend to go into a fair amount of detail with regards to family history and the like (to give him an interesting story and give the DM potential fodder should he choose to use it) but keep his own individual experiences in line with a 1st level character.
I much prefer a backGROUND to a backstory. I guess that's a matter of semantics, but I think that a small, general outline of where a character comes from, what his/her motivations are, etc. leave it more open for later development. That way the GM can take bits and pieces and weave them into the campaign. If a player writes up that they have a rival or enemy from before the game starts, for example, it lets the GM figure out how to incorporate that rival. If the rival is fully fleshed out, or even statted up, by the player, it makes it harder for the GM to fit into the game he or she is creating.
I award players who give me a good background to work with, but I wouldn't want to see pages upon pages of story that may or may not even fit in the world. Working with a player to make up a plausible background helps both the GM and the Player find a connection with the campaign. This also allows for the game itself to organically contribute to the development of the characters story, past, present and future.
Who would stat up their rival? Seriously. If I tell the GM that a six fingered man killed my father, I don't want to stat him out so I know about when I should face him. I may also say "he appeared important by the way he dressed" or "He was cool and calculating" or "his gaze gave me the chills" or something like that. On the other hand, for someone that I grew up with and knew, I need to explain why we didn't get along, how I think of him, and why. I may not be describing him how he actually is, but at least how I percieve him.
How much detail you put in things like the setting should really be based off of what you have of the setting. If the GM doesn't give you anything to work with, you have more freedom to do what you want. Its his job to communicate the framework of the game to you before you make your backstory. Its the player's job to work within that framework, and to modify what needs to be modified to fit the story before game start.
Meh... the statting up was an extreme example. I've never seen it, but it came up in a few different posts in a thread about long backstories a while back. I think the examples you gave, like "he appeared important by the way he dressed" is just the right amount of info. If you gave that to me before we started a campaign, it would get my creative juices flowing. "Ok, so he was important.... maybe he was a minor noble with an undeserved sense of importance. He dresses above his station to try to impress and intimidate commoners" Or "Maybe he's the son of a Duke who was trying to gain influence in the King's council. Maybe the Duke is worried his son will embarrass him, or even try to take his position." You gave me just enough info to figure out how to fit him into the world, without giving yourself, and your character, too much info about him. Obviously, if your character did grow up with him, then you would know more. I think we agree on most parts concerning backstory. I wasn't trying to deride you for making long backstories, yourself.
You could always rule that the long saga they come up with is merely what the character boasts is his history (Tasslehoff Burrfoot anybody?) the truth could be something quite different. They could even believe this story themselves like in the Dr Who episode "The Next Doctor" where a traumatised man becomes exposed to a concentrated energy archive about The Doctor, then subsequently believes himself to be the last timelord and sets out to save the world!
I have used this before many years ago when a player tried to get cheese out of their back story by claiming they were a 20th level paladin reincarnated, level drained etc. after saving the known universe (several times) and being hailed as a god by several kings and emperors.
First time he tried to use his 'influence' from his back story he was laughed at by the palace guards, and when he stalked away angrily heard them laughing about 'that crazy again' he got the hint. He also quit the game, but that was no great loss.