| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Naturally, I designed the characters for most of the players (except a couple who wanted to handle it solo). Among these characters was the character of a guy we'll call Joe.
A little while ago, I posted asking how to handle a player who claimed to roll two eighteens, some sixteens and fourteens, and no negatives. I chose to apologetically reroll the abilities, since I couldn't be sure he was cheating but didn't want the extreme stats to outshine everybody else.
I think I made the right call, because Joe is a bit of a braggart. He's a friend, and I get along well with him, but he's very fond of his ranger's stats. I gave his PC a 19 Strength, making the ranger the most deadly melee-ator in the party.
Joe also had a trained mule, and tended to go on about the mule's contributing more in a fight than actual PCs. A couple of the PCs responded by quietly murdering the mule to bribe a worg.
Joe has since found out about that, and he's okay with it. Joe is generally the voice of reason among the players, for the record.
Now, let's move on to the issue. Recently, the PCs were being asked at a city gate if they knew anyone in the city who could vouch for them.
Joe began bringing up characters, saying they were from his 'backstory'.
Now, I already have his backstory. It's a sparse creation about how his parents were killed by gnolls. He comes from the northern wilderness, which has more a goblin problem than a gnoll problem, but he chose Favored Enemy (gnoll) because the campaign was starting in the desert and he wanted to gain the bonus against gnolls.
He has since made his second Favored Enemy choice, again choosing an enemy he expects to fight very soon. Hey, that's cool, whatever, I understand powergaming isn't evil anymore, I'm an open-minded GM. ;P
Anyway, I have his backstory. But I guess it can use some more specifics.
His new backstory appears to be (conveniently) that a portion of his family lives in the city. Most notably, an uncle who raised him and helps run a mint and a cousin who owns "the biggest magic shop in the city".
Did I mention this city is the only proper city in the nation?
I'm okay with the uncle. But the cousin could be kind of big.
Joe said he hasn't seen his cousin in years, to back up this statement: "He hasn't given me a birthday present in six years."
In case you can't tell, he's fixin' to get some Swag.
While I'm having the cousin give a discount, my current plan is that the cousin was the owner of the biggest magic shop--six years ago. Since then, a chain of stores (which I'd already planned to include in the lore) has opened up, and driven him nearly out of business.
The cousin also isn't going to be as close to Joe's PC after six years of total absence.
What I'm asking is, is what I'm doing alright? I'm kind of meddling with his backstory. I'm also planning on incorporating the cousin in the plot--desperate to stay in business, he's now working with a thieves guild that shares the chain as an enemy.
I really want to avoid giving them big magic items early on. I still don't even have Joe's backstory--though he claims he's had it written all along, he says "something is wrong with his computer" and he can't send it.
I'm dubious. It's been nineteen sessions. I got "Backstory 1.0" around the second or third session.
Currently, my policy is that once I get a backstory, the player has relinquished control of NPCs involved and it's up to me to work out how to handle them. What are your thoughts on that?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm generally with you. If a player wants to come to me and work on expanding their story, I'm also okay with that. I'm not so okay with the player submitting the story, then changing/expanding on it without talking to me about it, especially mid-session.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like players adding backstory as the campaign evolves, that part doesn't bother me. It's less work for me as a GM to come up with new NPCs or add elements to the story, the players are doing it for me.
On the other hand, unless you are invoking a mechanic that does provide a benefit (ex: Shadowruns contact rules), there is no mechanical benefit to doing so. Gaining cheaper or more powerful magic items is a mechanical benefit.
I would be upfront with the player, he can't invent backstory that gives them benefits. They still have to work for everything they get, like helping the cousin reestablish his magic shop. That's going to require time, effort and involve some danger. The cool part is that you got an adventure idea out of his new details about his backstory and if you're playing mostly homebrew, that kind of thing is really useful IMO.
|
Back story is something to give a character flavor not advantages. My first question would be weather he has any traits linked to this or if his actual back story mentions all of this or not. I use traits because they give a reason to have advantages. The DM also has to have some modicum of control over the PC's back stories as they need to fit the world the PCs are in. I would take him aside and make it clear that you need to know his complete back story and that he can't simply claim things later as a way out of a situation. I would also let players know this is not how you would like to game, it's a world that belongs to all of you. To maintain this everyone needs to have their chance to add their pieces in, but not detract from others or change things whenever they feel like to gain an advantage. Some of this may not apply but if he really didn't have the cousin thing in his back story I would simply tell him 'no'. It wasn't there originally so it isn't there now. If it was then anything you decide to change or do with it should be ok as long as it is a natural progression for events and not a strict rewrite. I would also stress that to make sure a back story has a place in the world you should be able to ask him to change it or give him reasons why it can't be how it is if it doesn't fit the world. It just leads to more problems later if the world is to morphic to the player and no one else has the same benefit.
Level with the player that you're smelling cheese. IF he grins, you're golden, and you can talk it out. If he doesn't...
I would be so tempted to give the cousin a stepmom (these past five years) who takes no truck with adventurers. (there goes your discount) And have her gently remind the PC that the cousin's birthday is coming up. (Six back-dated-gifts, if you please, and setting the precedent with stepmom for fair gifts)
Every blade has two edges. Do please print or email or USB or hand-copy your bio to me ASAP, and I'll try to work with it, mister player. Until I see it, I've got to fill in the blanks.
Oh goodness. Thanks, Thornborn, for the idea of the birthday being a double-edged sword. Not sure I'll use the stepmom, but just the birthday could be a great way to turn this back on the player in a relatively non-confrontational manner. :D
** spoiler omitted **
Now, let's move on to the issue. Recently, the PCs were being asked at a city gate if they knew anyone in the city who could vouch for them.
Joe began bringing up characters, saying they were from his 'backstory'.
Now, I already have his backstory. It's a sparse creation about how his parents were killed by gnolls. He comes from the northern wilderness, which has more a goblin problem than a gnoll problem, but he chose Favored Enemy (gnoll) because the campaign was starting in the desert and he wanted to gain the bonus against gnolls.
He has since made his second Favored Enemy choice, again choosing an enemy he expects to fight very soon. Hey, that's cool, whatever, I understand powergaming isn't evil anymore, I'm an open-minded GM. ;P
Anyway, I have his backstory. But I guess it can...
I think you've made reasonable modifications, using the background to insure relevance to the world in the plot of things while (hopefully) stirring motivation for involvement linked to restoring the potential of some really abusive power...
No, I wouldn't let him have all that, particularly not what -- 18? -- sessions in, did you say? Not RIGHT NOW. And I'd probably make it kind of onerous for him to get to it, too. In the form of (hopefully) diverting adventures rooted in his backstory.
I hope he appreciates your efforts.
I think that his ambition would be well-served by spending some time impressing his cousin by making himself useful to the business. Go kill some rare critters and bring back raw materials to help make making magic cheaper, so they can undercut the competition and gain back their market share.
EDIT: Damn Thread Clan Ninja... anticipated in every point.
|
Oh goodness. Thanks, Thornborn, for the idea of the birthday being a double-edged sword. Not sure I'll use the stepmom, but just the birthday could be a great way to turn this back on the player in a relatively non-confrontational manner. :D
Yeah, as a rule I am rather cool with players expanding their background on the spot to tie them into situations that come up in play. I think it gives better dramatic value to the story and gives the chararcters more of a reason to get involved.
However it is looking like your player Joe is digging to make the new invented background as a resource. That's ok for a certain extent - for example, I would certainly allow him to have a family within the city that could vauoch for him thus granting him passage - that is an elegent way to solve that encounter and it adds to the story.
However, you get some say on things as well. The player can't just say, "oh and also my father is the right hand of God so I get divine powers". You can easily just tone down what your player is asking for, making his uncle and cousin reach but not all that much. Also, don't be afraid to surprise him - after all, it has been years since he's seen hi relatives. What if instead of showering him with gifts they try to use him as a pawn in a local power game, what if they grew corrupt since he's last seen them and are not very friendly?
Encourage your players to expand background in ways relevant to the story (and that also make sense obviously), it makes it more fun. A player of mine once even decided that he was wanted in a city the PCs were going to visit (he was playing a thief), so instead of just strolling the streets we got some police evasion action as a nice side quest. Enreach the story.
|
While I'm having the cousin give a discount, my current plan is that the cousin was the owner of the biggest magic shop--six years ago. Since then, a chain of stores (which I'd already planned to include in the lore) has opened up, and driven him nearly out of business.
The cousin also isn't going to be as close to Joe's PC after six years of total absence.
What I'm asking is, is what I'm doing alright? I'm kind of meddling with his backstory. I'm also planning on incorporating the cousin in the plot--desperate to stay in business, he's now working with a thieves guild that shares the chain as an enemy.
I really want to avoid giving them big magic items early on. I still don't even have Joe's backstory--though he claims he's had it written all along, he says "something is wrong with his computer" and he can't send it.
I'm dubious. It's been nineteen sessions. I got "Backstory 1.0" around the second or third session.
Currently, my policy is that once I get a backstory, the player has relinquished control of NPCs involved and it's up to me to work out how to handle them. What are your thoughts on that?
I dont necessarily have a problem with it. But I'm not your player. You know how he's going to react. But writing one for an game advantage doesnt really fly well with me.
However, what you have is perfect, as it gives them something to do. Sounds like you are prepared for Joe going off on a tangent to help his cousin. That be my biggest concern.
Although I do have to add I dont like your title of teh thread. It implies screwing around withthe players, which is a no no generally. What your doing is something rather different once you read your post- your incorporating his ideas into the game from his backstory.
I'm not seeing a problem here, unless the player gets ticked, though I doubt he'd do that unles he was planning to be a bit cheesy.
Also wanted to ask, do you guys use traits in your campaign? Those would technically tie in with this topic a bit. Don't know how much it helps, though.
Yeah, the title seemed iffy to me, too.
Also wanted to ask, do you guys use traits in your campaign? Those would technically tie in with this topic a bit. Don't know how much it helps, though.
We don't use traits, simply because they're an added complication and force me to get out different rulebooks. :P
Currently, I'm planning on giving the PC half price on the two purchases he's making. If he tries to bring up the birthday present again, the cousin will mention his birthday is in ten days and that he has something in mind.
If the PC tries to get uber loots, the cousin will request something in return--a highly hazardous but fairly short dungeon crawl which could quite possibly cost more than it's worth in resurrections. And if they can't afford the resurrections, they have a friend in the nobility who would be willing to pay--but he also needs help with something.
Always nice to be able to tie things into the story arc. :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Borrowing from Burning Wheel, I'd say invoke the "enmity clause."
He has a cousin, who owns a big fancy magic shop, sure.
The cousin is also furious at him because of a "stolen" item or a romantic rivalry or some such thing that the PC is hitherto completely unaware of. "That's *why* I didn't get you a present lo these past six years, Joe. I thought you'd take the hint!"
This cousin is more than willing to sell him out to the bad guys for revenge, or to prove to his sweetheart that Johnny PC isn't so dreamy after all.
Tell the player OOC that he *can* have this sweet magic mart contact, but he's got to roleplay into it fair and square.
EDIT: ToZ is right, of course, about GM approval. A heart to heart directly with the player is almost always the best course of action. But just because your PC knows somebody doesn't mean that person likes them! He should be glad if such an NPC dislikes him *openly*, because it can be much worse if they dislike you secretly.
|
I wouldn't say designing most of the characters is natural.
I use point buy so I don't have to worry about stat rolling cheats and uneven powered parties.
I am not sure what the point of the mule story was.
As GM if the players choose to give me backstories they are turning those NPCs over to me. With that said, my players turn it over to me because they trust I wont screw them over. I hate to say it but your friend sounds like one headache after the next. I like your way of thinking but I don't think it will help. Your pal will just try and come up with other ways to be a PITA. If its not that disruptive roll with it. If the other players are not enjoying this exchange think about asking him to join a pros game instead.
I wouldn't say designing most of the characters is natural.
In a group of new players, I believe it's fairly common to design the PCs with input from the players. Maybe it's not standard practice, but it's pretty common. We can't see each other more than about once or twice a week, so it just made sense that I handle it. They told me what they wanted to play, and I designed it.
I use point buy so I don't have to worry about stat rolling cheats and uneven powered parties.
Yeah, yeah. I heard all about that from Paizo nineteen sessions ago.
I am not sure what the point of the mule story was.
There wasn't a huge point, save that Joe has a tendency to boast. Are you here to give advice, or critique my writing? :P
That being said, thanks for your feedback, and for the feedback of everyone here. Advice seems to have been largely positive, so I'm going to stay on course. Joe's a decent player in a lot of ways, and he said he'd cut back on the bragging. I'm hopeful.
** spoiler omitted **
Now, let's move on to the issue. Recently, the PCs were being asked at a city gate if they knew anyone in the city who could vouch for them.
Joe began bringing up characters, saying they were from his 'backstory'.
Now, I already have his backstory. It's a sparse creation about how his parents were killed by gnolls. He comes from the northern wilderness, which has more a goblin problem than a gnoll problem, but he chose Favored Enemy (gnoll) because the campaign was starting in the desert and he wanted to gain the bonus against gnolls.
He has since made his second Favored Enemy choice, again choosing an enemy he expects to fight very soon. Hey, that's cool, whatever, I understand powergaming isn't evil anymore, I'm an open-minded GM. ;P
Anyway, I have his backstory. But I guess it can...
Got it. Make it a lie. The character has pretty much fooled himself into believing it, but its a lie and the char is somewhat being a rogue. Perhaps he knew the real person this story is true for, but they died in the gnoll raid that got his folks. A man walking around pretending to be a few different people to escape the pain of losing his family and village.
Could be good! Get him to make bluff checks, have matters of confused identities, the truth really come out. It'll be great.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like you've got some good feedback about what to do in the particular situation.
I'd still sit down with Joe, ask for a copy of his backstory, and work out any unclear details with him so he doesn't blindside you with, "And also, I'm secretly the son of Zeus." Not that that couldn't be easily kiboshed, but hopefully you understand what I'm getting at.
If he refuses to give you his backstory, then make it clear he is not allowed to bring into play something he pulls out of his ass just because he labels "backstory" on it. Maybe if this were a Spirit of the Century game where you're all supposed to make stuff up as you go and add to the scene, but this is different. This conversation does not have to be full of serious business--I like another poster's comment about "smelling cheese"--but it may need to be had.
To the broader issue of GM and Player Agency over backstories, I've got some firm opinions on what is and isn't kosher. To me, the player always writes the backstory, never the GM. But the player shares the backstory with the GM, and the GM gets to okay it. The GM may make suggestions as to additions and subtractions. Stuff that simply doesn't fit in with the setting should be removed. Stuff that may change or alter the PC's situation or personality or whathaveyou, the player gets the final okay as to whether he's okay with it.
But then most importantly, when it's decided, it's decided. If players want to fill something in later, again they need to okay it with the GM, and likewise the GM needs to fill the player in if they think something needs to be added. Simple stuff like, "Hey, do I have any family here?" "Uh... *roll dice* Sure, your cousin Frank is here. He's a bartender" should be easy and painless enough.
I as a GM usually try to be clear about what I want to use as plot fodder (not spoiling anything, but making sure it's okay with the player I use something), and as a player I try to be clear about what I want to remain solid and what the GM is free to toy with. For example, if I write, "Sally's mother and father were murdered in their bed mysteriously; to this day, no one knows who or why they were killed. But after that Sally and her sister grew very close, determined to protect one another; her sister trained in witchcraft and was a kindly soul who tended to the ill in their village with their magics." Then I'll also add an OOC commentary that says, "It's up to you who killed the parents, and whether it'll come into play or not--but don't make it Sally's sister please, I really do want her to be just a kind lady with a little magic." And talk about it more with the GM as needed.
I've had GMs who've really screwed around with my backstory to the point that I really felt burned and used and manipulated, and I admit to adopting a "never again" stratagem when negotiating agency over backstory. It's something I probably take more seriously than I should, but I think I've also had some seriously creepy GMs who've tried to do weird crap to my PCs at times. Playing my early RPG years in WoD games probably didn't help.
BUT.... I am totally rambling off on a tangent here. For the specifics of Kobold Cleaver's game, the important thing is just to get the specifics of the backstory determined and be done with. And OTOH if the player is content to make stuff up as he goes along, then say, "Then I have liberty to make stuff up as I go along too, okay?"
I admit up front that I did not read all responses...
I'm okay with a player amending backstory as we go along in the game, to a point, because it gives them more opportunity to become more involved in writing the story of the game. If he wants to know somebody in a city they're about to enter then that's perfectly fine.
BUT I would feel perfectly justified in making changes like the one you have made. You've taken his story and run with it. IMO, that's what a GM should do. You've turned his little I-want-an-advantage backstory edit into a nice little roleplaying opportunity. I highly approve.
M
The made up story doesn't have to be real!
The pc may have made it up based on scraps he has heard. It gets so lonely when gnolls kill your parents. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yar.
As a few others have eluded to and stated already, my first thought when I read "He comes from the northern wilderness..." and "... his new backstory appears to be (conveniently) that a portion of his family lives in the city." was the following:
*GM-Pirate hears this in game*
GM-Pirate: okay. Make a Bluff check.
Seriously, you already have his backstory. It may be sparse, but his character is now making stuff up. That's a lie. A bluff. His character is pretending that he has family in the city to sneak one past the guards.
Of course, I am also all for expanding on the details of one's backstory... so long as it makes sense. It should be about fleshing out the character, not gaining skewed advantages or for throwing curve-balls at the GM/other players.
~P
Pirate can recognise a bluff. Yarr.
To be fair, he's a half-elf, so having a split family makes some sense. He also decided to go with my suggestion and quietly move his background village (which was, incidentally, destroyed in his background) to the south, where gnolls are more prevalent.
I'm kind of trying to avoid conflict here--we recently made it out of a very uncomfortable bit of drama involving the aforementioned PFS player--so I'm not going to call him out directly. Nor am I going to tell him his character is lying or mistaken.
But I'm going to take the backstory he sends me and, if it works, tell him that that's it. I claim total control over these NPCs. And any major additions throughout the campaign have to be run by me, preferably between sessions.
Is that harsh?
Yar!
Is that harsh?
No. Not only is that not harsh in the least, but it is also, in my opinion, perfectly reasonable (and with my group, expected without saying).
~P
When I GM, I always ask for backstory. It allows my players to help me in the world building. Like others have said, when a NPC are in the backstory, they are mine, and I have the right to pull surprises. My players usually enjoy the changes, because it leads to good roleplaying, and it is fun for the players and me.
|
Rereading the original post:
I think there is a concurrence that as a GM you have to have some control of the NPCs around the table, that the players can't try to pull a fast one through on-the-spot-backstory, and that you're not Doing It Wrong.
That being said...I did have a character lie to the other party members about her background once. Since we weren't required at the time to give the GM our backgrounds (with two new-to-tabletop RPers, that would have been a bit difficult) my character stated she had a specific but fairly generic background. As the story advanced, she revealed that she had lied about her background because of the circumstances of her upbringing. Of course, now that she's an infamous but successful adventurer, all sorts of family are coming out of the woodwork, lured by thoughts of a "loan" or a "favor".
As a GM, if you have something set, it can stay set and still incorporate player background. There's a difference between, "Yep, cows and cabbages are two of the things I know a lot about, unfortunately," after a decent skill check and "I'm rediscovered nobility! Give me STUFF!"
My questions: is the uncle who runs the mint alive? If so, is it possible that said uncle is in prison for embezzlement? Or is too busy rubbing elbows with nobles to be around? If the uncle died, is it possible the cousin's upset because Brave Adventurer missed the funeral, partly due to the inability to be found during adventuring?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was considering having the uncle be in prison, framed for treason and murder. I may stick him in prison during game-time. I'm not sure yet.
But until Joe asks, it can be Schrodinger's Uncle. I should have plenty of time--Joe doesn't roleplay much, so he'll probably ask next time he needs a favor. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
KC,
The next part requires a little bit of GM poise.
It would be great if he asks after the contact in his moment of need, and you pull the rug out from under him. But how this is received by the player is largely a factor of your delivery as a GM. It is very hard to explain this in text, as it relies mostly on body language, tone of voice, and levity.
It's too easy for an inexperienced GM to telegraph that he is taking retribution against the player's actions by denying him something. In fact, that IS what you're doing, that's what we've been discussing all thread.
Instead, you need to sell this as though you are on his side. You're not denying him access to the NPC, you're as shocked an inconvenienced as he is. Be especially careful to frame this as a scripted call to adventure, NOT a speed bump placed by the GM merely to inconvenience him.
In fact, you can generalize this to all aspects of GMing. A great GM pretends at opposition to the players well enough for them to savor the defeat of NPCs, but also feigns pity for the players when the time is right. Groan when you must giveth, and whimper when you must taketh away!
|
|
To be fair, he's a half-elf, so having a split family makes some sense. He also decided to go with my suggestion and quietly move his background village (which was, incidentally, destroyed in his background) to the south, where gnolls are more prevalent.
I'm kind of trying to avoid conflict here--we recently made it out of a very uncomfortable bit of drama involving the aforementioned PFS player--so I'm not going to call him out directly. Nor am I going to tell him his character is lying or mistaken.
But I'm going to take the backstory he sends me and, if it works, tell him that that's it. I claim total control over these NPCs. And any major additions throughout the campaign have to be run by me, preferably between sessions.
Is that harsh?
Not at all because player's aren't supposed to control NPC's, via non Leadership feat.
I was considering having the uncle be in prison, framed for treason and murder. I may stick him in prison during game-time. I'm not sure yet.
But until Joe asks, it can be Schrodinger's Uncle. I should have plenty of time--Joe doesn't roleplay much, so he'll probably ask next time he needs a favor. ;)
Use it as a plot hook. Let the uncle get in trouble and managing to get word to the player that he needs help. Let the player work for that favour before he even needs it.
That could give the impression that these NPCs exist in the world even when the PCs don't need them for something.