Backstory

[Vicon]

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

Vicon wrote:

Man! I LOVE backstories!!! Traits are just about the coolest thing I've found in the pathfinder system... my favorite character creation system for an RPG used to be "Traveller" -- man, the stories and histories you could cook up during character creation were AMAZING... sometimes your character even DIED while it was being generated! Hilariously detailed.

I loved those; I sometimes wish there was a way to do that for D&D (now PF) - but it doesn't fit the game engine.

Many of my Traveller guys had to do bootleg anagathics during character creation, otherwise they'd be so aged by the time I was done generating that if they didn't die during their character creation career, they'd be in danger of dying of old age as soon as it was over. :p

And, yeah - Vicon is right; done correctly, "character creation backstory" can be an adventuring session in-and-of-itself, and not a boring one.

Whooo! great to see another member of the faith out there.

True about the creation session. Although with my most recent PF character I went with my Desna Cleric, I was actually far more attached concept wise to a Pharasma build I tried first... (I made a backstory for them in that for 1000 years his ancestors were evil humans that collaborated with the undead to enslave the humans in Ustalav, who at the end of the burning crusade were mostly executed, but some were allowed to repent through the church of Sarenrae. The Family, still feeling a bond with the undead they served, had in generations since served the church of pharasma to hunt the undead and (as my plot seed) It was an objective of mine to hunt down undead ancestors of mine (or just their inanimate remains to bury in sacred ground so they might rest in peace) ...

Elegant character creation mechanisms are some of my favorite elements of RPGs!

[Kobold Catgirl]

So if you don't mean exactly what you say, you've got no place in an argument?
If I took every post in a debate literally to the extreme, I'd be very confused. For instance,

You wrote:

...nobody's going to want a long backstory about your character early on.

So you're saying if I searched the entire world, I'd not find a single person who wants a long backstory about my character early on? Is it about that pesky 'starting a war with the gnomes under Canterlot castle' incident again? 'cause nopony can prove I was the one who cast magic missile on the gnome king during peace talks! I'm being unfairly ostracised!

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I said that the idea that unless otherwise stated the character was not created in a laboratory by a computer should be obvious to. . .wait! nobody. . .please don't report me to Friend Computer for Treason.

D'oh! I forgot that not everyone might know about this.

Stay Alert
Trust No One
Keep Your Laser Handy.

Trust The Computer
The Computer Is Your friend.

Tsk. Are you suggesting I would request that something be kept a secret from Friend Computer? Did you not see my yellow robes, pal? Watch yourself.

[Ciaran Barnes]

I write a half a page to a page for each character, and I find that sufficient. Two is the most i have ever done. As a dm I know that tying character stories into an adventure is rewarding and what I prefer, but can be troublesome as well. Thusly, as a player I enjoy background tie ins but don't mind a switch with campaigns that don't rely on backgrounds. Strong background tie ins more or less protect characters from dieing easily too.

[Porphyrogenitus]

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

So you're saying if I searched the entire world, I'd not find a single person who wants a long backstory about my character early on?

Yes.

Please conduct a through global research* and report back your findings to Friend Computer.

Note that if anyone claims to want a long backstory about your character early on that is obviously evidence they are a mutant member of a secret society. Which of course is treason. Which of course is punishable by. . .well, you know.

*:

*Without going "Outside" - there is nothing "Outside." Claims to the contrary are. . .

[TriOmegaZero]

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

Well, if it's so obvious, then people can stop saying it and actually give OP some, I dunno, helpful tips, instead of saying "hey, as far as I care, my character was an amnesiac drooling vacantly into a cup on a streetcorner - or not! Hey, whatever - prior to the first die roll for initiative."

I want to go back to this and point out that the OP said...

Daemyn wrote:

How do people feel about having to create a backstory for your character? I know I like have a sense of where my character has been and where he/she wants to go.

Do you think your DM/GM should use your history for in game experience?

Is a backstory necessary for any character? I know I believe so, how else does a goblin rogue party with a Fetchling Paladin.

I realized as I was making a new character for a campaign today that the longest and hardest issue I have with characters is making their backstory work. Does anyone else experience this?

So helpful tips are not required, as I am answering the OPs questions truthfully. Now, the OP and other posters are welcome to inquire about my answer and what causes it and what other elements of my opinion on the subject exist.

As I see it, you chose to take my words literally and twist them around to your own idea of my opinion, based on similar responses from other posters.

Which is fine, because I love posting statements that can be interpreted multiple ways. The responses illustrate the responders in interesting ways.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Those dirty mutant Commies...
*Goes and asks five Red Suits, emphasizing what will happen if they fail to give the correct answer*
100% contradict you so far. Notify Friend Computer!

[Porphyrogenitus]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

As I see it, you chose to take my words literally and twist them around to your own idea of my opinion.

I apologize for taking your words at face value.

Of course, "taking them literally" is - literally - incomparable with "twisting them around" but I see that rhetorical flourishes are de rigur.

Note also if you weren't so busy taking offense where none was meant, I gave you (and the others) credit for not meaning it literally, and, again, the only person who I slighted, openly or otherwise - while other people here are taking not-so-veiled shots at me - was myself (the only person I have said has a poor ability to come up with backgrounds, or even names, for characters was myself).

Spoiler:

I hesitate to put this in here, because it will no doubt be taken the wrong way and used against me, but I do know there are people on these boards - from observing behavior in other threads - who would infer from the "no need for a backstory, we're making the backstory" that the people saying that do so because they lack the ability to come up with one. I do not believe this is the case, and did not say so. What I do say is that a minimal background is effectively unavoidable if you're actually roleplaying, and that even the people whose posts are suggesting otherwise, in practice I believe - I give you credit for - having a minimal background for all your characters, which I have said is all that is needed at first anyhow. In other words, I'm being charged with "taking literally" something I explicitly did not take literally, and was myself pointing out should not be taken at face value, because no one literally has no idea whatsoever about their character's personality and background. But I suppose I should keep taking this twisting of my post and words with good humor, even as others react in high dugeon as if they've been slighted, and thus are free to respond with hardly-veiled-not-really-subtle jabs at my. . .character.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Those dirty mutant Commies...

*Goes and asks five Red Suits, emphasizing what will happen if they fail to give the correct answer*
100% contradict you so far. Notify Friend Computer!

They've been directed to the Food Vats for resource reassignment duty!

[TriOmegaZero]

See, you say I'm taking offense when none has been taken. Your own perception has given it that color.

But enough threadjacking, eh?

[Porphyrogenitus]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

See, you say I'm taking offense when none has been taken. Your own perception has given it that color.

I supoose, given the tone of your overall post, this was meant favorably? Do please be more explicit, then about it:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

The responses illustrate the responders in interesting ways.

Now, btw, my first reply that people objected to said:

Quote:

Now, I know people don't mean something like this. . .I doubt any of the people making that retort really have absolutely nothing in mind regarding where - at least in general terms - their character may have grown up, why they worship the diety you chose for them (or why they worship none at all, or several), at least a vague idea of how they might have acquired their basic class skills, if not an idea of who might have mentored them.

So, then you write a post devoted entirely to accusing me of being the one twisting words, only to now say:

Quote:

But enough threadjacking, eh?

Making no insinuations about anyone else, I've been on topic. Even this reply to you contains (quoted) substantive remarks on-topic for this thread (to the effect that yes, I bet even those who are, if one were to take their words literally, saying 'no backstory' really don't mean 'none whatsoever," but have at least a sketchy initial concept, which is all I can claim to accomplish at first, - even if others are capable of more but choose not to have more than a sketchy minimal initial background, at first, for good reasons, several of which I listed in other posts - not claiming I might have overlooked other good reasons).

[Black_Lantern]

I'm not a fan of long winded backstories that end up having only a little to do with a campaign. In the end I think that developing a personality and having a paragraph or two to describe my background is just fine.

[TriOmegaZero]

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

So, then you write a post devoted entirely to accusing me of being the one twisting words,

Accusing? No, observing.

[Porphyrogenitus]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Accusing? No, observing.

When an exchange reaches this state, where substance has entirely been replaced with scoring rhetorical points and "counting coup," the best thing I can do is withdraw from the thread.

Spoiler:

Feel free to reply to this however you want; I won't see it. Not because of you, but on account of me; while I have remained substantive up till now, this post contains no substance and I have a character flaw that I will continue the exchange, replying to your every kind remark with one of my own, unless I depart "cold turkey." So that's what I'll do. This is not an attempt on my part to "have the last word" or anything. Feel free to have that. The only thing I ask not to take my lack of future contribution to this thread as implying anything one way or another, and to not have this exchange carry over to other threads or into PMs.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Accusing? No, observing.

When an exchange reaches this state, where substance has entirely been replaced with scoring rhetorical points and "counting coup," the best thing I can do is withdraw from the thread.

** spoiler omitted **

Your FACE reaches this state where substance has entirely been yeah I already did this joke.

Happy trails, Porph.
Okay, let's all take immature potshots at him now that he's gone! That sick 'your face' burn was a good start.

[baalbamoth]

Clone 001 reporting for duty! ALL HAIL THE HIGH PROGRAMER! ALL HAIL FRIEND COMPUTER! (where did I leave those corpor metal pamphlets...)

wow what a great topic!

It's a "role playing" game, and how you play a role is by acting and figuring out what the character's motivations are.

A character without a backstory isnt a "main character", its just a bunch of numbers and a loose idea of how it got that way, that might qualify as supporting cast or re-occuring character (like buddy the doorman), but not a major feature in a story. If a player just absolutely does not want to write up a clever backstory, even with help from me or other players... they want to play buddy the doorman with a sword or wand... thats fine, but they dont get to bitc# when the story shifts to deal with backstory and all the characters but his have more playtime/influence etc. buddy the doorman's player should be doing what buddy the doorman was designed to do... sit in the corner quietly waiting to roll more dice.

The way I run, I always create the subplots around the character's back stories and more often than not the subplots converge and become the main plot. (this is one of the main reasons I am not a big fan of AP games because what is most common to great movies, comics, and books is not present, there is no personal tie-in to the character's history)

As a former therapist I understand how important personal history (backstory) is to psychology. IF you want to play a convincing character, IF you want to RP well, the expirences the PC's have had before the game begins should be directly influencial to how you play them. (and I do give out XP penalties for playing "out of character") if your just making it up as you go along, I as the DM have no idea what is "in character or out of character" and backstory seems more like an excuse for irrational behavior than a story aid.

Generally I prefer point buy games (like hero games system) because your backstory is what pays for your character's abilities.

Even without a point buy system I will ask players in my game to come up with personality quirks, psychological issues (fears/phobias/secretes that must be kept, etc) and life events (traumatic expirences, organizations or groups who may be interested in the PC's activities and why etc) details about a few NPC's who have affected the PC's lives (family, tribe, instructors, guild members, former brothers in arms, etc) either positively or negitively, living or dead (or undead).

also, I generally allow players to take skills in powerful or useful NPC's that they know to be able to get info or aid from them. lots of times this will be much more important than say KS-local history in moving along a gaming session.

all of this helps to flesh out a character, and help the player to know what makes the character tick even if its not what makes the player tick. (does your character love it when the odds are stacked against them or do they only strike when they know absolutely they can win etc)

It also helps me as the DM to tie party members together (maybe having the same dueling instructor, or who both have angered the local asmodian merchants guild, etc)

To me, backstory is the absolute MOST important part of character generation.

As a side note... a L1 backstory should never look like a L20 backstory, if a player has a backstory similar to what Geraint was describing, I might even tell em to go for a different character idea or drop some class dips.

PS this DM loves reading 4-5 pgs of back story per character, the only time when I dont is when they are not rational (raised in a forest by wolves then joined the mages guild, then lived with the drow working as an noble hit man, then was tutored by a elder gold dragon etc.. and I feel like saying pick one or two of these and drop the rest.)

PPS I totally agree with John Woodford, being an adventurer is an extremely dangerous and rare thing, a character must have good reasons for doing something that most common people would think is completely nuts. (unless they ARE completely nuts.) Kobold Cleaver- if nothing of particular interest happened to the character before the beginning of the campaign... why would they become adventurers? a mostly suicidal profession?

PPPS mage4fun- that is awesome and exactly what I would want to see from every character and how I would set it up as well.

[Blue_Hill]

I also like backstories but nowadays I would love to see short backstories and focus more on events in-game that affect your characters persona and habits. Let me explain.

Me and my homies play mostly APs. There is room for customizing and stuff but mostly APs are story-based not character-based. When we played our first AP (RotRL) we had relatively short backstories which only explained why heroes we together at the start of campaign. After that backstories have become all narrative stories that try explain characters motives and reasons from level one to level sixteen. This shouldn't be the case as then story have no real effect on characters if player had established everything for the character in his/hers backstory. This simply doesn't work nicely in APs, some players write backstories that fit in to AP and some doesn't so they are in inequal position. (Also one of my player's wrote 12-20 pages long backstory which I didn't read).

We started Jade Regent AP this summer and I tried different approach. I wanted to emphasize good roleplaying over min-maxing and powergaming. So we had little chat about week before starting the game where I told what I wanted to see and what I didn't want to see. One of players had character ready for Jade Regent but other two didn't. After this chat they wrote me backstory that had only most important things: some info about characters childhood, how he came to be who he is and explanation of relationship between important npc and the character. All backstories were about one to two pages long which was nice. Also they didn't try to explain everything but left room for in-game stuff to affect their characters.

TL DR; After discussing with my players about campaign we were going to play I got nice backstories that left room for character growth. Also backstories weren't too long or all explanatory.

[Vicon]

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I said that the idea that unless otherwise stated the character was not created in a laboratory by a computer should be obvious to. . .wait! nobody. . .please don't report me to Friend Computer for Treason.

D'oh! I forgot that not everyone might know about this.

Stay Alert
Trust No One
Keep Your Laser Handy.

Trust The Computer
The Computer Is Your friend.

PARANOIA will always be the best game system I never really got to play. "Spurious Logic" was the coolest skill to ever appear in an RPG manual.

Robot: "You had committed an infraction, wasting resources valuable to the computer, and must be disintegrated. Proceed to Iris-hatch 21B for repurposing as reactor shielding."

Troubleshooter: (Uses spurious logic) That was a PENCIL I broke in half... I'm a resource representing a far greater investment of resources, and of arguably far greater value to the computer. Your wanton attempt to put me in for disintegration is a far worse waste of resources."

Robot: "If you will excuse me, I have an infraction of much greater consequence to attend to. Proceeding immediately to Iris-hatch 21B."

THE BEST was when "The computer was busy" so our debriefing was handled by a monolithic terror-tank that protected the city. It decided to take none of our actions into account, but instead award merit and punishment based on the condition of our equipment.

Used up all their ammo: Commendation. Must have hit something.
Guy who's weapon AND sidearm broke from critical malfunctions: Weapons of insignificant threat to the uber-tank, must not be valuable. Fine of 1 credit.
Guy who's suit was torn in a fight: "Your armor is damaged. My bi-phase carbon shell costs millions of credits per cubic centimeter. Conclusion: Armor must be very expensive. Termination for negligence at once."

(Sigh) Good times.

One of my best friends and I when we get together still ask each other : "Are you in the mood for 'hot fun' (Coffee) or 'cold fun' (Beers) ... which is a reference to one of the Paranoia books we had. (People eat in cafeterias and are seldom sure what it is they consume)

THE COMPUTER IS YOUR FRIEND! SERVE THE COMPUTER!!

[Vicon]

I concur with what many people have said above. You have to know where to draw the line on Volume, though...

I'd NEVER want to read 12-20 pages of backstory (even though I KNOW I am one of the more loquacious writers myself..) Providing too much, as Blue Hill said, it potentially limiting... and I hadn't thought about that.

It's GREAT to know where a character is from, and a bit about his past experiences to know what motivates him, how he found his career, and what his ultimate motivations MIGHT be. It's also great to include little idiosyncrasies of objectives of opportunity which can come up during, but not detract from, an adventure (An organization that is after them that makes an interesting encounter or two, a rival who must be placated or removed, wards or charges that need to be protected/supported or cared for, things they like to collect, etc.)

A character without a past throws me back to how my first gaming sessions went on in Grade-School... back then it didn't matter who the hell you were... "Wanna Play?" was a 20 on a Diplomacy roll. But things are more complicated with adults, or people who care to act like them. I also find backstory a GREAT way of vetting somebody... you know, in case they're a pedophile, or a complete jerk. That's hard for some people to hide, and it's an unpleasant reality that a small but very visible minority of individuals find a Cresh in the generally more "welcoming of all creeds and social complexities" atmosphere that is the TTRPG arena. I personally don't mind if in real life you're really shy, or you love hot pockets for every meal, if you're a team player and cultivate a better game... a well-written backstory is basically a "certification of a man/woman of letters" to me... A badly written one or one that makes me raise an eyebrow is the equivalent of a big "L" on one's forehead. In the middle, I don't mind so much as long as you tried.

I still think it's awesome, and vital to taking the GM's story and making it significant to EVERYONE. One character's fear of betrayal can become an awesome opportunity for another player to vow to never be false to them... for example.