Why is it, that in a roleplaying game, there appear to be so many interesting characters that lack equally interesting stories?
My friends and I are creating new characters in preparation for the Fists of the Ruby Phoenix adventure path. Like many other adventuring parties, we've ended up with quite the eclectic bunch. However in this group, and in many other groups I've seen, the most interesting characters tend to have the least interesting backgrounds whereas the characters consisting of the more traditional fantasy combinations tend to have far more detailed and interesting backgrounds.
For example, a friend has opted to make a fleshwarp dhampir fighter dedicated into sorcerer. He has described his character as being a Mana Waste mutant with near-invisible amorphous flesh and organs. Outwardly, he looks like a skeleton warrior clad in scale mail with shield and sword. He fought his way out of the Wastes and--possessing an interest in people and society--became a bartender (somehow). Once out of the null-magic of the Wastes his latent undead bloodline abilities emerged, netting him some minor sorcerer abilities. While tending bar, he heard rumors of the coming tournament, and decided to travel far to the east to continue his personal education of people and societies.
A very cool character concept to say the least! However, the whole concept was literally conveyed in little more than one breath.
Another player made a dwarf barbarian. Simple enough. But unlike the above, this character has a rich background full of detail, history, and nuance. She has gone on numerous adventures already, fought for and ruled over her clan, defeated terrible foes, and raised a large family. Now retired, the dwarf is so old (about 419 years) few still living remember any of her accomplishments (including herself) and she desires little more than to relive those long lost glory days one last time before she passes away. The coming tournament seemed like a grand opportunity to do just that. Should she fail, she will die knowing that she strived to live a full life. Should she somehow win by some miracle, then perhaps there is a youth potion within the great vault that will allow her a second life of adventure?
Though I've truncated it here, the latter character's bio is about two pages long and goes into quite a bit of detail about the character's motivations and goals, past accomplishments, and associates. It links to several campaign elements such as Holtaksen and their glory ribbons, the Ulfan people and their culture, the Wild Warriors of Kalsgard, and the Ice Miners of Undercroft. Though the character is a frog animal instinct barbarian, the instinct has been reflavored to "mammoth" and rather than morphing into an elephantine monstrosity, she is empowered by the spirits of the mammoth, in much the same way that Vixen from DC comics is empowered by the Red.
Now, to be absolutely clear: There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with either of these approaches. I am not creating this thread to imply that one is necessarily any better or more fun than the other, or to otherwise denigrate anyone's playstyle. Not everyone has the creativity, time, inclination, or writing talent to provide that level of depth; and that's totally fine. Our differences all contribute to making this game a great joy to play!
The above is simply an observation that I have made over the last few years with several groups (online and off) and was wondering if anyone else had made similar observations during their years of roleplaying. Do you also think that there is general a trend for those with (for lack of a better word) ostentatious characters to lack in-depth backgrounds, and for those with classical combinations to possess noticeably more nuanced histories?
I apologies if any of my chosen adjectives seem snobbish or insensitive. I did my best to describe my observations as inoffensively as I could reasonably manage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen both. For me, it all depends on how much the character is molded by their backstory. That's a whole discussion on nature vs nurture though. The more nurture there is informing a character's behavior, the more it needs to be fleshed out for context. Nature, not so much. The most important place for detailed origins is when used for complex villains, at least those are the ones that interest me the most. The players have a whole campaign to inform their character, the past is less relevant. The BBEG has much less time in the spotlight.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO the only difference that really matters between these characters is that the dwarf reads as being made for the Ruby Phoenix AP specifically while the dhampir could show up to any adventure. The dwarf might not be doing anything at all if this opportunity had not arisen; her backstory and motivations tie specifically into what the Tournament means, the glory and fame and wealth. The dhampir, on the other hand, kinda just shows up because he's in the area. I think if the dhampir has something specific he wants out of the vault (perhaps some treatment for the fleshwarping he has endured?) then the gap in interest between these two characters closes quickly.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've definitely had both of these kinds of characters (and played both kinds). However, I've found that where the player wants their character to go usually ends up being way more important than where they came from, which is what allows both of these types of characters to do well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think there is any rules mechanics preventing a character from having both a complex backstory and an interesting current character concept. So I don't think that is what is causing the trend that you are seeing.
I have two thoughts that I am leaning towards on explaining that trend.
One is that maybe people have a complexity cap. If they spend their creativity creating an interesting backstory, there isn't much left for piecing together interesting stuff for the character mechanics itself. Alternatively, if the person spends their time and energy on the mechanics and story of the current and future character, they might not have much left for backstory.
The other option is the difficulty of tying together the character story before the campaign with the character story of the campaign itself and ending up with a cohesive, believable character story as a result. It is easier to come up with a background and 'see where it goes from here', or to have good solid reasons for why this character would be in this campaign, and leave the backstory vague.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of the "Ten things" approach for this reason. Just list me 10 facts about your character, and call it done. That encourages the people that write short stories to truncate, and the people that barely want to name their character to elaborate.
As I have been both of these people at different times, I see the value in pushing both towards a middle. For instance, in one of the latter characters, I came up with a brother that my character got killed when they were children, and the DM practically salivated when he saw that. The entire existence of the brother was due to me needing a 10th thing to write down; never would have happened had I been left to my own devices.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think part of it is a matter of perspective/mind trick. You hear that someone has an intricate character build, you listen to hear how they've justified it and have it make sense. It's new, its different, and thus you dont know what to expect, so your expectations arent tuned towards anything.
When you hear of someone with a simpler build, you listen to the story to see what makes them unique. You listen to see how your expectations are hoing to be subverted, to see what makes them special, and since you have a frame of reference for the kind of character they are/arent playing, their story seems more interesting.
Now this isnt always the case. A lot of it also comes down to, as someone said, a complexity cap. You could also write a long complex backstory for the complex character, but then it comes across overly complicated. You could make a smasher who smashes, but then what?
It's basically two different approaches to seeing what makes a character special as well as making sure their characters are well received
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Many folks believe that the backstory is about to begin when they start a campaign. Though some folks assume interesting character story means done lot of things that a level 1 character was not capable of doing. Obviously, thats different if you start higher level, but I think thats rare for most groups.
My latest PF2 group;
Player 1 "im playing a half-orc ranger who tracks stuff"
Player 2 "im playing a human paladin that uses a reach weapon"
Player 3 "Im playing a wizard..."
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I used to write long bios, but after years of having it mostly never/rarely brought up (save a couple hooks the dm liked), I started just writing really short 1 paragraph blurbs, followed by sections outlining their goals, primary moral values, families & friends, and some likes/dislikes/personality quirks, and just reveal more specifics of my backstory in game during rp. If I ever want to put more ideas to paper, I write a flash fiction for myself and maybe share it with my tablemates.
I get a lot more satisfaction this way, and it makes it easier to rp, tbh. By leaving it more open, I can kinda improv a little of I need a reason for my character to join a mission they otherwise wouldn't; maybe my law abiding, by the books investigator is willing to help the heist mission because the target betrayed me in the past and I want justice, maybe theres a reason to believe that if I don't help, my lover/family/childhood friend is at risk, or maybe the friendship I have in my backstory with the rogue is so strong that I'm willing to compromise my morals a little to make sure they don't get caught.
It also saves on frustration. It's easier for a dm to find the important stuff when you highlight it, and it's not hidden under paragraphs of prose. This means it's easier for them to write stuff for me, and I am more likely to get the stuff I want.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the backstory conundrum is particularly different for an AP starting at 10th level. You really need a character backstory that says this person is already a legend, and has probably saved a bustling metropolis from some kind of regional disaster.
One problem I have with the backgrounds in the Player's guide is that, in their desire to leave you free to make any kind of character you want, they do not guide you at all to put together a 10th level character that feels like they have earned their way to 10th level. Personally, I think that would have been fine if instead the backgrounds just blew old backgrounds out of the water in replacing your wealth by level and possibly even combine into some flexible herritages/ancestry feats to allow you to make a relatively new to the world character who is just brimming with power, something that PF2 doesn't currently do very well yet. It might be a good idea to consider for a future high level AP though:
Backgrounds for Higher level characters that fold in some developmental choice into something more unique for a character starting at 10th level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of the "Ten things" approach for this reason. Just list me 10 facts about your character, and call it done. That encourages the people that write short stories to truncate, and the people that barely want to name their character to elaborate.
As I have been both of these people at different times, I see the value in pushing both towards a middle. For instance, in one of the latter characters, I came up with a brother that my character got killed when they were children, and the DM practically salivated when he saw that. The entire existence of the brother was due to me needing a 10th thing to write down; never would have happened had I been left to my own devices.
I usually try 3 paragraphs for backstories... but that 10 facts might be better...
Let me try, Half-Orc Ranger on a Lastwall campaign.
1) Mother is an Half-Orc in a high position in the LastWall, father was just a human soldier.
2) Was raised by his human uncle on a small agricultural settlement close to Fangwood, the uncle is a barkeep and is married.
3) That uncle have an adoptive daughter, she and the PC are like siblings and she have interest on running the tavern on the future.
4) Worked together with hunters to keep dangerous creatures of Fangwood at bay.
5) Knows how to make alcohol and distilled drinks as it liked to help in the tavern.
6) Have a very sweet tooth, giving preference to sweet drinks and love desserts, lost a tusk because of that, but if someone asks he will say that it was in a fight, the story of the fight changes every time.
7) Consider both of his uncles as his true parents.
8) Inherited the nocturnal habits of Orcs, making him extremely grump at the morning when trying to follow a human sleeping schedule.
9) After Lastwall fell, he enlisted himself to fight in the Gravelands.
10) Hate to be compared to his mother, that is still in the active fighting on the gravelands.
Good lord that was hard, 6 of them was really easy but 4 of them was so hard (5, 6, 8 and 10).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of the "Ten things" approach
Tbh, I've asked for questionnaires for d&d, but I might just take this for my players. It feels less like "homework" and still gets the job done. It also lets people lock in to the parts that interest them, and it highlights to me the things they want me to pay attention to the most
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I used to write long bios, but after years of having it mostly never/rarely brought up (save a couple hooks the dm liked), I started just writing really short 1 paragraph blurbs
I think that, much like pitching an idea, you've got three levels of explanation you need.
One is the 15-second "elevator pitch" (where you have to be able to hook someone that you met in an elevator before they get off). One is the 1-5 minute longer explanation, and the last one is the 15-60 minute "full pitch" that you'd make in a more formal context.
Most of the time you're going to use the elevator pitch, but it's nice to have the longer ones "on tap" because you generally won't know when you're going to need them.
Backgrounds for Higher level characters that fold in some developmental choice into something more unique for a character starting at 10th level.
Totally agree. By 10th level, really, Levels 1-9 are your background, and your Background is a distant memory.
But I think a lot of the same thinking goes into the backstory - why did a character take X dedication? Why did they take Y feat? And the answer is sometimes, "in-game mechanical benefit", but even then, it's useful to string it together to make a coherent story.
I haven't started a character level as high as 10, but if/when I do, the backstory will mostly involve lower-level adventures.
Loving the "10 things" approach. Might just steal that for use as a primer for my own character writing! :D
One thing I've noticed about making a higher level character for an adventure path, is that it's apparently really easy to end up with things that won't matter in the adventure due to your character's history/concept.
Take the aforementioned dwarf barbarian, for example. She had Terrain Stalker (snow) and Terrain Expertise (arctic) as two of her skill feats. Those make total sense for her character, as she hailed from the Lands of the Linnorm Kings and would have needed to hunt and survive in a harsh arctic environment. However, the adventure path appears to occur in a temperate climate, so I encouraged the swapping of these feats for something else (she ultimately ended up with Improvise Tool and Natural Medicine). These still represent her ability to survive in a harsh environment, but might actually have an impact in the coming adventure path.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of the "Ten things" approachTbh, I've asked for questionnaires for d&d, but I might just take this for my players. It feels less like "homework" and still gets the job done. It also lets people lock in to the parts that interest them, and it highlights to me the things they want me to pay attention to the most
I forgot to mention that part, but yes that’s the primary benefit for when you have a novelist on your hands. Getting them (or you) to focus is a way to tell the DM exactly what is most important.
Also if you’re going through a PBP group, it really cuts down on what you have to read.
I think the answer is simple, one player is looking at how to make a interesting build out of the myriad of options available to the game while another is thinking about what character he wants to make.
"Standard" characters often gives the player more time to develop their character as more than what their ancestry and class is, both because it's easier to relate themselves to and because there isn't a lot of moving parts to take into account (Fleshwarp that somehow is also a dhampir that dedicated himself to fighting but also developed magical powers is hard to juggle).
I do like some unique combinations, but most of the time I like to incorporate my mechanical choices into their backstory, which is one of the reasons why my two favorite races are Tieflings and Aasimar. They offer interesting frameworks for me to tinker, from Aasimars with perfect childhoods that are adventuring from a sense of duty and wonder (boring stuff) to one that was mistreated in life because of envy and ignorance.
I've made characters with different approaches before, from pure mechanics first to story and ideas first. My takeaway was that a balance is far more interesting, and easier to create, for me because I use the mechanics to create constraints and give me some backbone to work with.
These unique characters are fun, but I would never create or play one that doesn't justify their own existence and place in the world properly. It's sufficient to say that the novelty wears kinda fast and mechanics only doesn't not make a good character to have for the long haul.
I've enjoyed using the Knives, Spoons and Forks thing that was on Reddit a bit ago. Give the GM some things to stab you with, give yourself some info about the character.
Um, could you please elaborate a bit more? Perhaps provide a source link to the Reddit?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I, too, had characters matching more or less both examples (and even simpler ones).
Usually I have some idea about the backstory and the goals of my character, but I don't write down all of that. Sometimes I do, for various reasons - good ideas, free time, I was asked about it...
With my old group we had a forum where we wrote to coordinate about sessions and to handle downtime. It was a good place to also share stories about our characters, and that often happened as the adventure was going on, rather than before the start, as the in-game events gave us some input about what may had happened in our character's past.
I've enjoyed using the Knives, Spoons and Forks thing that was on Reddit a bit ago. Give the GM some things to stab you with, give yourself some info about the character.Um, could you please elaborate a bit more? Perhaps provide a source link to the Reddit?
It's a pretty solid system, though I think the call to choose seven knives minimum is a bit overkill, and 21 spoons is definitely so. That's so many individual bits and bobs that even the creator is going to forget about most of them, and let's not even talk about the GM who will have something like 100 factoids across four characters to try to keep vaguely aware of. Better that you have a few strong drivers than two dozen that you don't care much about.
IMO, a good solid backstory is fun to write and can help get you in the mindset of your character, but writing out a chapter of a novel is generally overkill. You'll be using this character to play a game, and it is exceptionally rare that the particular game will produce the elements necessary for your character to have a compelling narrative arc. What matters most is how your backstory shapes your character's future actions, and for that purpose, a bulleted list of "interesting things that drive your character or haunt your character", no more than half a dozen long, is usually more than enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I used to write long bios, but after years of having it mostly never/rarely brought up (save a couple hooks the dm liked), I started just writing really short 1 paragraph blurbs, followed by sections outlining their goals, primary moral values, families & friends, and some likes/dislikes/personality quirks, and just reveal more specifics of my backstory in game during rp.
Pretty much this for me. I have a few paragraphs and that's about it anymore. Now I have plenty more ideas in my head, but like you said, I've found it's easier to flesh those things out in RP and leaves things open to switch things up if something different from what you expected comes up. I've found it's much easier to work yourself into everyone's story that way, for yourself, the DM and the other players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I used to write long bios, but after years of having it mostly never/rarely brought up (save a couple hooks the dm liked), I started just writing really short 1 paragraph blurbs, followed by sections outlining their goals, primary moral values, families & friends, and some likes/dislikes/personality quirks, and just reveal more specifics of my backstory in game during rp.Pretty much this for me. I have a few paragraphs and that's about it anymore. Now I have plenty more ideas in my head, but like you said, I've found it's easier to flesh those things out in RP and leaves things open to switch things up if something different from what you expected comes up. I've found it's much easier to work yourself into everyone's story that way, for yourself, the DM and the other players.
To be frank, some of the most uninspired characters I've played with were played by people with lengthy multi-page backstories. More effort does not necessarily equate to higher quality.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be frank, some of the most uninspired characters I've played with were played by people with lengthy multi-page backstories. More effort does not necessarily equate to higher quality.I used to write long bios, but after years of having it mostly never/rarely brought up (save a couple hooks the dm liked), I started just writing really short 1 paragraph blurbs, followed by sections outlining their goals, primary moral values, families & friends, and some likes/dislikes/personality quirks, and just reveal more specifics of my backstory in game during rp.Pretty much this for me. I have a few paragraphs and that's about it anymore. Now I have plenty more ideas in my head, but like you said, I've found it's easier to flesh those things out in RP and leaves things open to switch things up if something different from what you expected comes up. I've found it's much easier to work yourself into everyone's story that way, for yourself, the DM and the other players.
I agree. Longer is not necessarily better.
Mine are typically range between half a page to two pages. More than that is excessive I think (unless you happen to be chronicling the ongoing adventures of your character and their party).
What about simple characters that also don't have interesting backstories? Those are my favorite.
The only advice I can give is to ultimatively make a character for the campaign, not a character that simply happens to play in the campaign. Most of the time this would probably require a pre session zero discussion with the GM, especially if a lot of new players are involved (as in new to Golarion) in order to establish strong and lasting character motivation. We tried to do this for our current AoA campaign using all the info available, e.g. the player handouts, but the combination of missing long-time character motivation and (in our opinion) not very coherent and compelling story left us a little disillusioned to the point of "Why are we doing all this again?".
What about simple characters that also don't have interesting backstories? Those are my favorite.
Indeed. Sometimes all you need is a big orc lady
My name, is Phy Tar. I fight. It is what I do. It is what I am.What about simple characters that also don't have interesting backstories? Those are my favorite.Indeed. Sometimes all you need is a big orc lady
LOL I literally played with someone who's character was named Magic Using Guy who came from the long line of the noble Magic Using Guys family. ;)
I often write my characters with a far more interesting now and a less important and vaguely defined then. This leaves room for the DM or another player to come to me and ask if such and such a detail can be made to work and for me to have the room to say yes and describe my part in that other character's story. I might then do that for another character and slide in a line or two about a past event our two characters have in common.
When I've made very detailed backstories it's often felt like an imposition when somebody wants to add just such a detail. That or I turn up to the table and find that nobody else has written more than a line or two.
I have a few paragraphs and that's about it anymore. Now I have plenty more ideas in my head, but like you said, I've found it's easier to flesh those things out in RP and leaves things open to switch things up if something different from what you expected comes up.
That is fine, but assumes you have everything in your head.
I often end up doing research for characters: medieval glass staining, Swahili grammar, pole dancing moves, knots used on ships, katana/wakizashi cross-sections, etc. I write them down because I don't expect to memorize it all right away.
If I only work off of what I already know, my characters end up way too similar to me as a player.
It's definitely easier to improvise, but you miss the opportunity to bring something out of the ordinary to the table. Yes, you can select "baker," flesh it out later, and have plenty of fun with that; but you can also teach everyone how to make a super flaky Kouign-Amann (for real).
I have a few paragraphs and that's about it anymore. Now I have plenty more ideas in my head, but like you said, I've found it's easier to flesh those things out in RP and leaves things open to switch things up if something different from what you expected comes up.That is fine, but assumes you have everything in your head.
I often end up doing research for characters: medieval glass staining, Swahili grammar, pole dancing moves, knots used on ships, katana/wakizashi cross-sections, etc. I write them down because I don't expect to memorize it all right away.
If I only work off of what I already know, my characters end up way too similar to me as a player.
It's definitely easier to improvise, but you miss the opportunity to bring something out of the ordinary to the table. Yes, you can select "baker," flesh it out later, and have plenty of fun with that; but you can also teach everyone how to make a super flaky Kouign-Amann (for real).
Myself, I already have far too much 'useless' RP stuff floating around in my head. Sumerian cuneiform and and Egyptian hieroglyphics. Check. Ancient dye creation and use for fabrics, tattoos and other uses. Check. Kami of the Shinto religion? Sure. The Ayie of Tanzania? Sure, I can explain the ceremony.
I find it harder to NOT add in all the 'useless' info know. ;)
|
I usually (in 1E) wrote about half a page to a full page (sometimes more) of background for my character.
BUT to be honest, I rarely have had a GM in any way whatsoever use the background I provided.
Now I tend to write only a couple of short paragraphs, mainly because that's all the space provided in the character sheet I'm using for 2E and I just no longer see the point of a detailed background. Also, I'm pretty sure most of the other PCs in my group either do not write a background or only provide a sentence or two, if even that.
Whether you write a full background or not is really a function of many things -
perhaps it simply pleases you to do so
you find it useful as an aid to guide your own roleplaying
your GM finds it useful
your GM uses background information in their game
specific to 2E's rarity system, you may need a background to explain access
So, no "right" answer unless your GM makes you do it!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey man, don't knock it too hard. I personally HATE IT when, as a GM, someone comes up to me with a character planned with more than a few hundred words pre-written for their background.
If you can't express your character concept and background in an elevator pitch then you either are bad at communication or you're trying to wrestle the GM into making the PC into the "Main Character" without giving a damn about the rest of the party or thinking about how much you're expecting to get BACK from your backstory during gameplay and the work that involves with the GM.
Myself, I would NEVER put it on a GM to read more than one or two paragraphs for a PC I'm introducing to a game no matter what level the game starts at, it's just self-centered and having the expectation that the GM can or wants to use an excess of background info is EXTREME time-vampire behavior. What actually makes the character is what happens during the actual game or you PERSONALLY work out with the GM before you ever roll your first check at the table/session.
Hey man, don't knock it too hard. I personally HATE IT when, as a GM, someone comes up to me with a character planned with more than a few hundred words pre-written for their background.
If you can't express your character concept and background in an elevator pitch then you either are bad at communication or you're trying to wrestle the GM into making the PC into the "Main Character" without giving a damn about the rest of the party or thinking about how much you're expecting to get BACK from your backstory during gameplay and the work that involves with the GM.
Myself, I would NEVER put it on a GM to read more than one or two paragraphs for a PC I'm introducing to a game no matter what level the game starts at, it's just self-centered and having the expectation that the GM can or wants to use an excess of background info is EXTREME time-vampire behavior. What actually makes the character is what happens during the actual game or you PERSONALLY work out with the GM before you ever roll your first check at the table/session.
This!
Lead with a few strong character traits, a reason why they're where they are at the start of the campaign, and let the interaction between the party and the PCs take off from there.
|
|
Hey man, don't knock it too hard. I personally HATE IT when, as a GM, someone comes up to me with a character planned with more than a few hundred words pre-written for their background.
If you can't express your character concept and background in an elevator pitch then you either are bad at communication or you're trying to wrestle the GM into making the PC into the "Main Character" without giving a damn about the rest of the party or thinking about how much you're expecting to get BACK from your backstory during gameplay and the work that involves with the GM.
Myself, I would NEVER put it on a GM to read more than one or two paragraphs for a PC I'm introducing to a game no matter what level the game starts at, it's just self-centered and having the expectation that the GM can or wants to use an excess of background info is EXTREME time-vampire behavior. What actually makes the character is what happens during the actual game or you PERSONALLY work out with the GM before you ever roll your first check at the table/session.
Not sure if you are responding to my post, but I NEVER said anything about forcing or even expecting any GM to read what I write, or forcing or expecting them to incorporate what I write into their game.
AND NO, I am not a bad communicator as I am literally a professional communicator, and NO, I most definitely do NOT want to be the main character. I usually play a support character in my groups and the others do most of the killing and get most of the satisfaction that comes (to some) from successful combat.
What I wrote is that GMs I have played with do not appear to use the background I've written, and the point being, that I now no longer bother writing a full background. In truth, it saves ME a great deal of time not to have to write a long background.
And I think I made it explicitly clear that whether you write a detailed background depends on a variety of factors. I did not advocate that you must, should or are expected to write a long detailed background, or that GMS must, should or are expected to so much as read these backgrounds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of the "Ten things" approach for this reason. Just list me 10 facts about your character, and call it done. That encourages the people that write short stories to truncate, and the people that barely want to name their character to elaborate.
As I have been both of these people at different times, I see the value in pushing both towards a middle. For instance, in one of the latter characters, I came up with a brother that my character got killed when they were children, and the DM practically salivated when he saw that. The entire existence of the brother was due to me needing a 10th thing to write down; never would have happened had I been left to my own devices.
I usually try 3 paragraphs for backstories... but that 10 facts might be better...
Let me try, Half-Orc Ranger on a Lastwall campaign.
** spoiler omitted **
Good lord that was hard, 6 of them was...
This is a great example of the process yes. And without even putting together the ABCD yet, you have a suggested class, possibly a new idea for a background, a potential hobby that can turn into skill feats or RP opportunities down the line, and so on. Like I could turn the mom into an NPC at some point, or the sister-cousin could show up with as an NPC alchemist. I'd be sure to have at least a few NPCs ask you about your tusk to try and turn it into a running gag.
As an example of my own, I'll do the playtest character I came up with that I don't have a solid bead on.1. Like most Shoony, Starbuck hails from Kortos island, not terribly far from Absalom in his case.
2. Starbuck is not his actual name, but is a close enough approximation in common that he adopted it.
3. He earned the title of "Reeve" in his early adulthood, being a generally intelligent and levelheaded sort, with a good ability to remember the law. Given the proximity to a major settlement, that was more important for his community than is normal for Shoonys.
4. However, he also had the Shoony flair for tinkering and repurposing junk. His talents were a little better than most, again given his fairly high intelligence.
5. One experiment resulted in an actual robot, which he dubbed "Hildurra". She is shaped vaguely like a wolf.
6. Starbuck also had a talent for primal sorcery, and enjoys melding nature magic and natural sciences.
7. Some of the tools that Avernus created made their way to him, inspiring him to spend a year in Viridian studying their creations.
8. He was not a fan of the heat.
9. Afterwards, he returned to Kortos by way of Absalom, intending to report on both Viridian's new council, but found Absalom's council to be...untidy.
10. Starbuck has a set of perfectly maintained judicial robes that he has never had occasion to actually wear, Shoony law courts not overly concerned with ceremony.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But I'm biased. It ruins the experience for me playing in a setting where 95% of the intelligent beings are the core races yet somehow only 10% of adventurers are. If there's so many ratfolk aasimar heritage amnesiac witches around, where are they hiding?
I never really got this one. Adventurers, particularly the protagonists of an AP or something, are already a 1% of a 1% to begin with.
But I'm biased. It ruins the experience for me playing in a setting where 95% of the intelligent beings are the core races yet somehow only 10% of adventurers are. If there's so many ratfolk aasimar heritage amnesiac witches around, where are they hiding?
They aren't, even in PFS there are only, at most, a few hundred adventures for any given instance of Golarion. In your home game, there are likely just the players at your table and a few key NPCs working as active adventures. This is unless you or your GM actively take the time to have other NPC groups that you'll never interact with changing parts of the world you'll never visit, but I suspect that this isn't happening at the vast majority of tables.
Under this assumption, it makes sense why the freaks and misfits might find a living away from society to be more appealing than continuing to work within a system that views them as other.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always used to write extensive backstories in a more traditionally narrative format, but in the last few years have come around on the issue. That isn't to say that there shouldn't be a backstory, but I think I benefited from a re-evaluation of why I was writing them in the first place - they're supposed to make an interesting character in play. Detailing the name and lives of family and friends in the town I grew up in is only really helpful to that goal if we visit that town in the game, but it's the type of information one naturally spends a lot of time in when writing a typical type of backstory. Replacing a narrative backstory with a few questions to be answered has helped me make more interesting characters, because those questions are actually related to what you see of the character in play. The questions don't have to be the same for every character, but something like:
- Why are you [insert premise of the campaign - connected to the town, on the boat, joining the army, etc]? (characters are more compelling if they have an interesting connection to the story)
- What key event(s) have shaped your perspective, and how do they continue to effect how you react to the world? (It's so easy to have a character with an interesting backstory that doesn't come out in play! This sort of question really helps me think about how to actually make the character's personality visible)
- What motivates you to adventure, and what events could force you to overcome this standard motivation and act differently? (More than anything, I find this sort of question is a helpful way to ensure your character isn't one-note; even the paladin crusading against evil should have someone important enough to them to stop, or a weakness they could be tempted by, or a rival they'd be willing to go out of their way to combat)
- Name something that the character is either concealing from the world, or something related to their story that they're unaware of. (Not for every character, but basically just a way to give your GM a hook to play off of, if they wish to)
I find answering 3 to 5 of those sorts of questions (on a character-by-character basis) plus maybe a paragraph of more biographical information leads me to make characters that are far more interesting to play than how I used to do things :)
I'm often a bit more freeform in how I do everything in an RPG. I might have an idea of what I want a character to be, but when I start playing them, it might be fairly different.
For backstories, I will always prefer a few strong details. If you like writing something more substantial, that is fine, but you'll need to provide some bullet points in addition.
I never really got this one. Adventurers, particularly the protagonists of an AP or something, are already a 1% of a 1% to begin with.
But I'm biased. It ruins the experience for me playing in a setting where 95% of the intelligent beings are the core races yet somehow only 10% of adventurers are. If there's so many ratfolk aasimar heritage amnesiac witches around, where are they hiding?
This discussion would be better served for another thread I think.
So, wait. Was their name Magic Using Guy Magic Using Guy, then? Since Magic Using Guy was their patronymic.LOL I literally played with someone who's character was named Magic Using Guy who came from the long line of the noble Magic Using Guys family. ;)My name, is Phy Tar. I fight. It is what I do. It is what I am.What about simple characters that also don't have interesting backstories? Those are my favorite.Indeed. Sometimes all you need is a big orc lady
He was technically Magic Using Guy the 16th [kind of like how all George Foreman's 5 sons are named George Foreman]. His sister was Magic Using Girl the 21st. ;)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about simple characters that also don't have interesting backstories? Those are my favorite.
One of my most common go-to character backgrounds is "village magical crafter/alchemist who somehow got in the middle of an adventure" so I can get behind this.
That said, a background doesn't have to be traditionally "interesting" to actually be interesting. A lot of people I know seems to find my admittedly mundane childhood interesting because it was different from theirs; most people aren't the children of a soldier and move around from state to state every few years. I often ask people about the adventures they've had with lifelong childhood friends because I've never had a friend I knew since grade school and just grew into an adult with.