Ante up, veteran DM's

[leegi0n]

Ok,

I AM, and have always been of the persuasion that if a game lacks story (and I'm talking character backstory as well as the RPG part), the game is just that......LACKING.

I actually award bonus XP for backstory, that plays out in some form in game. There have been times where a 5+year campaign will go 2 or 3 sessions without combat of any sort.....just character development within the group.

can I get an amen?

[CactusAir]

So... is there a discussion here, or are you just looking for hugs?

[leegi0n]

So... is there a discussion here, or are you just looking for hugs?

perhaps hugs....perhaps you don't understand...

[CTrees]

Okay.
:smallannoyed:

[Hiro Protagonest]

So you want to be revered and respected because you DM an RP heavy game and give XP for RP?

[JoeYounger]

I like RP and all, but I think I'd be a bit upset if we wen't 3 sessions without and combat.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Plot hooky backstories are rewards in and of themselves. Not only that, but IME players aren't really in control of whether their backstory gets used or not. I've had tomes that went untouched for huge swaths of the campaign, and I've had campaigns basically based on plot elements in my character's backstory. If you want a game that has built-in mechanics to reward plot-ful characters I'd suggest Spirit of the Century or another system with aspects.

[PirateLizard]

What um, do you want me to ante? Is there a bet? I'm confused.

[leegi0n]

just speaking the mind on a forum where minds are to be spoken.


What um, do you want me to ante? Is there a bet? I'm confused.

Ante, as in, your two-cents....

[Chained Birds]

I guess I asked my players to make detailed backstories just so I could use their tragic pasts against them. Illusions, obscured visions of loved ones, nightmares, etc. I felt a lot of glee turning everyone's backstories into fuel for my disturbing creativity. Many sad moments were made, and I almost felt sorry for them after seeing their RP reactions... almost.

...the players had fun too I guess.

[leegi0n]

I guess I asked my players to make detailed backstories just so I could use their tragic pasts against them. Illusions, obscured visions of loved ones, nightmares, etc. I felt a lot of glee turning everyone's backstories into fuel for my disturbing creativity. Many sad moments were made, and I almost felt sorry for them after seeing their RP reactions... almost.

...the players had fun too I guess.



right. In a campaign like that, especially if you plan on it lasting a year or so, back stories can be invaluable. Including, like you said, the past comes back. If ever you get dry for story ideas, pull something off the backstory. If they work for it a little, it's more rewarding for them and the DM. My downfall is I often get too attached to richly developed characters. Thus, I have to force myself to remove the safety net from beneath them.

I catch myself not being 'out to get them', but out to trip them up and haunt them. Gotta love the dark stories.

[lunar2]

I tried including basic RP into some of my campaigns. it didn't work out too well. my players' idea of "RP" is for the barbarian to kill anyone who says the word no, while the magically Chaotic Good sorcerer just happens to be looking the other way, so he doesn't see the barbarian commit evil acts. Oh, and they complain if any citizen just happens to be strong enough to do something about it. They actually quit one campaign over a trap the rogue couldn't find (the trigger was on the other side of the door, and he thought he should be able to find it anyway with a search check).

another group of players managed to derail a campaign by killing a 16th level bad guy while they were 7th level (hold person on fighter = bad for DMs). at least this group actually did roleplay some, although that mainly consisted of the halfling cleric flirting with the dwarven fighter, while the half dragon fighter was making babies (offscreen) with his wizard girlfriend.

[Anderlith]

So, can I raise? Or do I wait for my turn to deal?

[leegi0n]

I tried including basic RP into some of my campaigns. it didn't work out too well. my players' idea of "RP" is for the barbarian to kill anyone who says the word no, while the magically Chaotic Good sorcerer just happens to be looking the other way, so he doesn't see the barbarian commit evil acts. Oh, and they complain if any citizen just happens to be strong enough to do something about it. They actually quit one campaign over a trap the rogue couldn't find (the trigger was on the other side of the door, and he thought he should be able to find it anyway with a search check).

another group of players managed to derail a campaign by killing a 16th level bad guy while they were 7th level (hold person on fighter = bad for DMs). at least this group actually did roleplay some, although that mainly consisted of the halfling cleric flirting with the dwarven fighter, while the half dragon fighter was making babies (offscreen) with his wizard girlfriend.


It's hard (most of the time) to keep gamers mixing RP'ing with slack n' hash.
Everyone wants to get bloody.

[Chained Birds]

So, can I raise? Or do I wait for my turn to deal?

Well, everyone seems to have called. So you can either call or raise if you've got anything extr-*card falls from sleeve*

...woops! *picks up card and puts it back in sleeve*
<_<
>_>
-_-'

[leegi0n]

So... is there a discussion here, or are you just looking for hugs?

Thus, we have a discussion....

I s'pose it's yer deal then, Anderlith.

[Jolly]

This thread illustrates the perils of posting whilst high.

I'd like for my players to do more roleplaying, but given the real life constraints I DM under these days I don't expect too much.

[Strormer]

I'll call, I'd like to see the flop.

*.*''''''

Incidentally, I'm a very RP heavy DM as well, and with some groups its the best thing you can do, others its a s***storm.

I remember one time, one of my players left the group in the middle of their planning how to move forward and wandered off to go steal the deed to the town's master tailor's shop. He went through some legal hoops and ended up owning the store. He then said that his character would retire from adventuring since he had found a comfortable life living off the work of others with more economically applicable skills. While all this happened the party went out to buy their equip for a mid-boss fight they had learned was coming. The party fighter bought a gauntlet that would let him cast earthquake once per day when he punched the ground. The mid-boss was a bard who was mass suggestioning the entire town's young girl population from a rooftop. The fighter ran into the middle of the concert and punched the ground, instantly killing a sizable portion of the attractive young women of the town. Insanely furious fathers, lovers, and other such folk formed a lynch mob. The game died that day, but one could say that it was the first time a Bard solo TPKed a well prepared party, or any party for that matter. Woot rockstar!

[Yahzi]

TI'd like for my players to do more roleplaying
You have to integrate the players into the world.

The typical PC hardly lives up to the name "character." It's just a collection of class dips and feats. It's not so much that the character doesn't have a background as it doesn't have a foreground: it has no place in the world. It's just a murderous hobo.

One of the best games I ever ran, all of the PCs were attached to the same noble family. Two brothers, a cousin, and the court wizard. The patriarch was an NPC, so the players had room to have some rivalry (since none of them was in charge of the others). On the other hand, threats to the house were threats to all of them. They were tied to the land; when the old man died, one of them would inherit.

This is how you encourage role-playing. Not by backstories, but by enmeshing the players in the politics. Give them responsibilities. Make whole villages of NPCs dependent on them. If they don't get up and do their jobs, people die. People they know, like cousins and siblings and parents.

There are two downsides to this. First it requires the DM to turn over control of a lot of his world to the players. Second it requires the DM to have a fantastically detailed world.

[DoctorGlock]

A few players in my group are terribly roleplayers, to the extant where screaming "YARGH!" in combat constitutes character development. However, said players also happen to be my group's powergamers, so I have decided to offer free bonus feats (we are starting at 20 and increase by full levels, not XP, so XP bonus would not be very useful) For detailed character backstory, ideology and personality. I have yet to see how this develops but I am hopeful that it will give me alot of tie ins and brew a bit of attachment to the characters (one of them makes a point of shifting characters every week in every game I've ever run/played in with him)

If anyone has better ideas than free feats to grant my players, feel free to toss them out

[Killer Angel]

I actually award bonus XP for backstory, that plays out in some form in game.

While I tend, as a DM, to favor and reward RP, i can see someone say something like "this is unfair. Bob is great in inventing good stories and original backgrounds, while I'm unimaginative and even when I try, I came with stereotypes. Is this a valid reason for him to be lev. 5, and me lev. 4, after we faced the same challenges?"


Edit: i totally agree with Eldan (see post below)

[Eldan]

I try and separate rules rewards from story rewards. Good RP and backstory get you a better story ingame. You make friends, your character becomes more central to the story, future plot points will be more about you. But you get XP for getting past encounters and finishing adventures. Doing things that include the rules, basically.
What I'm saying is: your character isn't stronger just because he has another page of background. I might be a bit more lenient with allowing unusual homebrew or similar if it's explained in the backstory.

[Socratov]

While I tend, as a DM, to favor and reward RP, i can see someone say something like "this is unfair. Bob is great in inventing good stories and original backgrounds, while I'm unimaginative and even when I try, I came with stereotypes. Is this a valid reason for him to be lev. 5, and me lev. 4, after we faced the same challenges?"


Edit: i totally agree with Eldan (see post below)

so, think of it alternatively. Everyone has a crafting pool, and rp rewards are xp for your crafting pool. They will not count towards you leveling, but they will be usable when casting wish, crafting items, etc.

That way it's still a nice reward, but doesn't leave major gaps between players. Bonus wealth, feats or a focused sidequest just with you in the sporlight would also work.

[Golden Ladybug]

Oh, alright, stories...

Well, my real life group kind of missed the whole "Backstory" component in D&D. We've played about three different games together, and before each one I'll send them all an email explaining what sort of game it is going to be, any restrictions or variants that we'll be using. When there is something important in the world-building in comparison to their actions, I'll mention what it is.

And every time, I ask them to give me a little bit of backstory, length be damned, just so I can get a sense of where their characters come from. I always offer them bonus XP if they turn in their backstory, and more if I use the ideas they present as Plot Hooks later. Being DM is hardwork, and any help I can get from them is nice.

I've yet to ever get any form of backstory from my players. One of them is too busy trying to "optimise" his characters, one doesn't really know what they are doing in game and refuses to do anything to learn and another just wants to loot things and take no risks.

Hell, I need to chase them up about what their character's names are, and often they didn't think of one.

And I'll raise, by the way. That Flop was kind to me :smallcool:

[leegi0n]

I'll call, I'd like to see the flop.

*.*''''''

Incidentally, I'm a very RP heavy DM as well, and with some groups its the best thing you can do, others its a s***storm.

I remember one time, one of my players left the group in the middle of their planning how to move forward and wandered off to go steal the deed to the town's master tailor's shop. He went through some legal hoops and ended up owning the store. He then said that his character would retire from adventuring since he had found a comfortable life living off the work of others with more economically applicable skills. While all this happened the party went out to buy their equip for a mid-boss fight they had learned was coming. The party fighter bought a gauntlet that would let him cast earthquake once per day when he punched the ground. The mid-boss was a bard who was mass suggestioning the entire town's young girl population from a rooftop. The fighter ran into the middle of the concert and punched the ground, instantly killing a sizable portion of the attractive young women of the town. Insanely furious fathers, lovers, and other such folk formed a lynch mob. The game died that day, but one could say that it was the first time a Bard solo TPKed a well prepared party, or any party for that matter. Woot rockstar!


...and they say a bard can't hold his own. nice!


It's not so much that the character doesn't have a background as it doesn't have a foreground: it has no place in the world. It's just a murderous hobo.


Epic level homeless swarm!


A few players in my group are terribly roleplayers, to the extant where screaming "YARGH!" in combat constitutes character development. However, said players also happen to be my group's powergamers, so I have decided to offer free bonus feats (we are starting at 20 and increase by full levels, not XP, so XP bonus would not be very useful) For detailed character backstory, ideology and personality. I have yet to see how this develops but I am hopeful that it will give me alot of tie ins and brew a bit of attachment to the characters (one of them makes a point of shifting characters every week in every game I've ever run/played in with him)

If anyone has better ideas than free feats to grant my players, feel free to toss them out


I've found that anything that a gamer does, fundamentally, with the meat of their character, brings them that much closer to their character. It transcends that disconnect between the gamer and the character. They get attached. They don't want to DIE. It brings genuine human emotion into the game and the story becomes much richer because the character becomes an emotional extension of the gamer.

Another thing I've done is create custom prestige classes, tailored to each gamer that not only adds to the character's power, but builds on their back story. These PrC's must be earned though...just like the technical ones in the books. I think homebrew is invaluable in this aspect. I allow the characters to help in creation of the world we're gaming in by completely creating where they are "from". Then I come in at some point during the campaign and expound on their ideas.

It's amazing to see a gamers face when they've come up with a homeland idea and you put it down on a map, in reference to the rest of the game world.

[Anderlith]

Backstory is worthless when you first make a character. Most likely it's not going to be immediately implemented. I usually don't make a detailed backstory until level 2 or 3. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't or that I don't have any background, I always have some story of my class/skills/abilities & why I'm running around with a sword killing things. I just don't think the backstory is as important as the forestory. Why should all the interesting things in your character's life happen before he started adventuring?

[leegi0n]

I try and separate rules rewards from story rewards. Good RP and backstory get you a better story ingame. You make friends, your character becomes more central to the story, future plot points will be more about you. But you get XP for getting past encounters and finishing adventures. Doing things that include the rules, basically.
What I'm saying is: your character isn't stronger just because he has another page of background. I might be a bit more lenient with allowing unusual homebrew or similar if it's explained in the backstory.


However, if you do have a rich, more developed character, that plays out in game (in ADDITION to the combat/adventures), it makes that character a "leader" of sorts, by default. Leaders, as it were, ARE more experienced, no? Plus, it should give the others the initiative to push themselves in the RP aspect, I think.


Oh, alright, stories...

Well, my real life group kind of missed the whole "Backstory" component in D&D. We've played about three different games together, and before each one I'll send them all an email explaining what sort of game it is going to be, any restrictions or variants that we'll be using. When there is something important in the world-building in comparison to their actions, I'll mention what it is.

And every time, I ask them to give me a little bit of backstory, length be damned, just so I can get a sense of where their characters come from. I always offer them bonus XP if they turn in their backstory, and more if I use the ideas they present as Plot Hooks later. Being DM is hardwork, and any help I can get from them is nice.

I've yet to ever get any form of backstory from my players. One of them is too busy trying to "optimise" his characters, one doesn't really know what they are doing in game and refuses to do anything to learn and another just wants to loot things and take no risks.

Hell, I need to chase them up about what their character's names are, and often they didn't think of one.

And I'll raise, by the way. That Flop was kind to me :smallcool:


In a RP thick game:
I tell anyone in my games not to waste ridiculous amounts of time optimizing their character, initially. Absurd (story unbalancing) power characters will be targeted first. Most players adhere to that. If not, I play the taboo "I'm the DM" card and if they aren't utterly slaughtered, they die in a bowl of soup or something melodramatic like that. Maybe that's not fair, but just like any 'rule' about the game you're playing, it should be noted.

I love slack n' hash just as much as the next guy and it's the complete contrary when I run a game as such.

However, most games I've run (or played for that matter) usually last, at least, a year.


Backstory is worthless when you first make a character. Most likely it's not going to be immediately implemented. I usually don't make a detailed backstory until level 2 or 3. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't or that I don't have any background, I always have some story of my class/skills/abilities & why I'm running around with a sword killing things. I just don't think the backstory is as important as the forestory. Why should all the interesting things in your character's life happen before he started adventuring?


I agree, but a backstory helps ground the characters and make them more easy to relate to. Even if it takes until 10th level to play out or mention (in game) any backstory, it still gives method to the madness, in most cases. Most gamers are in the 'coming of age' phase at level one. Leaving the angst of their youth. I don't care who you are, childhood has a bearing on adulthood. Always.

It IS better though, if it takes until level 2 or 3 to pan out. It makes more sense. A character wouldn't reveal everything about themselves to strangers (rest of the party) right off the bat. The comfort zone, comradery must first exist for it to be realistic.

[Eldan]

Leaders, as it were, ARE more experienced, no?

No? I don't think so, personally. I see no reason why leader should be stronger, faster, better at casting spells, etc.

[leegi0n]

No? I don't think so, personally. I see no reason why leader should be stronger, faster, better at casting spells, etc.

How does one become leader then?

[Knaight]

Backstory is worthless when you first make a character. Most likely it's not going to be immediately implemented. I usually don't make a detailed backstory until level 2 or 3. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't or that I don't have any background, I always have some story of my class/skills/abilities & why I'm running around with a sword killing things. I just don't think the backstory is as important as the forestory. Why should all the interesting things in your character's life happen before he started adventuring?

I usually have a basic framework, then retroactively add in details as they are called for. Which is frequently enough to have entire sessions with no combat, though conflict of some sort is part of every session. Granted, my players frequently like giving my huge hooks and such - in my most current game, the characters are a deserter who left after accidentally enabling war crimes and an exile who has made enemies of several notable military officers.

[Mystral]

How does one become leader then?

Born in a noble family (Typical aristocratic general)
Personal Charisma
Knowledge how to lead or manage an army without extensive ability (Like a general who studied war in a library. He might be fearsome if he leads from the rear, but don't trust him to find the buisness end of a weapon)
Luck
Chosen by a diety/high religious position

[Mooncrow]

How does one become leader then?

By being good at leadership? Having the plan, the leadership skills to make people work together, etc. Past the relationship of private -> NCO, there's rarely a correlation between combat skills and leadership position, both in game and out.

[Eldan]

How does one become leader then?

When was the last time you saw someone become president through a wrestling match?

[leegi0n]

What's interesting (in my experience), is that in an RP laden game, there are generally one, maybe two characters who really stand out because of the way and extent that they are RP'd. I've seen, on numerous occasions, that the rest of the group will trend to always look to that character for guidance, in game. Does that not constitute a leader?

Additionally, I've noticed more often than not, making it known that there will be occasional rewards for solid RP'ing spurs the gamers to push that part of their game. ESPECIALLY when they see the other gamers getting rewarded for it. It's worked in the past. I currently have a group of 10 players (in a game that's been going for 11 months) and they've all developed good RP habits using this system. Half of them were first time gamers too.


When was the last time you saw someone become president through a wrestling match?



good point. Although it happens in the 3rd world, I'm sure.

[Eldan]

What's interesting (in my experience), is that in an RP laden game, there are generally one, maybe two characters who really stand out because of the way and extent that they are RP'd. I've seen, on numerous occasions, that the rest of the group will trend to always look to that character for guidance, in game. Does that not constitute a leader?

Very much, yes. As you have said, they are the leaders because of how they are played, not necessarily of how effective their build is, or how high their level.

Same with rewards: I do reward roleplay. Good roleplayers get more friends ingame, which can be very useful. They get a stronger reaction in public situations (they stand out more). They are seen as the group leader by NPCs more often (and are therefore the ones spoken to). They get more ingame resources over their friends. Not necessarily equipment, but helpers, perhaps. Passage on a ship. Tickets to a social occasion. Greased bureaucracy. Interview in the local newspaper's "Heroes of Renown" section. A teaching position at the local school.

There's so many non-XP rewards you can offer for roleplay.

[Knaight]

good point. Although it happens in the 3rd world, I'm sure.
The extent to which the third world is "primitive" is greatly exaggerated.

[Diefje]

Same with rewards: I do reward roleplay. Good roleplayers get more friends ingame, which can be very useful. They get a stronger reaction in public situations (they stand out more). They are seen as the group leader by NPCs more often (and are therefore the ones spoken to). They get more ingame resources over their friends. Not necessarily equipment, but helpers, perhaps. Passage on a ship. Tickets to a social occasion. Greased bureaucracy. Interview in the local newspaper's "Heroes of Renown" section. A teaching position at the local school.

And you get to make sweet lurvin' to the barmaid!

*roll Cha* does she want to sleep with me?
*reroll* how bout now?
*reroll* how bout now?

You gotta put some effort in. The easy ones are just gonna get preggies, and then you get hunted down by her father and he makes you marry her and get a real job.

[Eldan]

You gotta put some effort in. The easy ones are just gonna get preggies, and then you get hunted down by her father and he makes you marry her and get a real job.

Or you sell your backup sword and buy her a castle :smallwink:

[leegi0n]

Very much, yes. As you have said, they are the leaders because of how they are played, not necessarily of how effective their build is, or how high their level.

Same with rewards: I do reward roleplay. Good roleplayers get more friends ingame, which can be very useful. They get a stronger reaction in public situations (they stand out more). They are seen as the group leader by NPCs more often (and are therefore the ones spoken to). They get more ingame resources over their friends. Not necessarily equipment, but helpers, perhaps. Passage on a ship. Tickets to a social occasion. Greased bureaucracy. Interview in the local newspaper's "Heroes of Renown" section. A teaching position at the local school.

There's so many non-XP rewards you can offer for roleplay.



You're absolutely right. Awards you've exemplified above are actually more ideal than XP. I award those too...more often than XP. It makes more sense.


The extent to which the third world is "primitive" is greatly exaggerated.


Agreed. Primordial is a better word.


And you get to make sweet lurvin' to the barmaid!

*roll Cha* does she want to sleep with me?
*reroll* how bout now?
*reroll* how bout now?

You gotta put some effort in. The easy ones are just gonna get preggies, and then you get hunted down by her father and he makes you marry her and get a real job.

or you catch something funky...

[Diefje]

or you catch something funky...

Shoulda made a heal check.

[Knaight]

Agreed. Primordial is a better word.

I'm not talking about terminology - though there is that. Most of the third world has cities that are really quite modern in many ways, and has social infrastructure that is also quite modern. Its just that in addition to this modernity are areas of great technological lag, in both infrastructure, transportation and such and some concepts (often scientific or medicinal ones). The idea that one leads because they won a wrestling match is patently absurd in the vast majority of the third world. The total population of societies in which that might be the case is a rounding error compared to even a single, smallish country.

[leegi0n]

I'm not talking about terminology - though there is that. Most of the third world has cities that are really quite modern in many ways, and has social infrastructure that is also quite modern. Its just that in addition to this modernity are areas of great technological lag, in both infrastructure, transportation and such and some concepts (often scientific or medicinal ones). The idea that one leads because they won a wrestling match is patently absurd in the vast majority of the third world. The total population of societies in which that might be the case is a rounding error compared to even a single, smallish country.

I couldn't agree more. I guess the only REAL thing they wrestle is their unity, in that aspect.

[JoeYounger]

In a RP thick game:
I tell anyone in my games not to waste ridiculous amounts of time optimizing their character, initially. Absurd (story unbalancing) power characters will be targeted first. Most players adhere to that. If not, I play the taboo "I'm the DM" card and if they aren't utterly slaughtered, they die in a bowl of soup or something melodramatic like that. Maybe that's not fair, but just like any 'rule' about the game you're playing, it should be noted.

I love slack n' hash just as much as the next guy and it's the complete contrary when I run a game as such.

However, most games I've run (or played for that matter) usually last, at least, a year.

This is enough to make everyone I know never play a campaign of yours again. You can have a heavy RP campaign with optimized characters, and even beyond that, when you're DMing, it's not your game. Its the partys. You're the narrator, not the star. If everyone in the party wants beast mode characters you shouldn't say no, or kill them just because you dont.

[Killer Angel]

How does one become leader then?

Ask Roy for details.

BTW, leegi0n, can you answer using the multi-quote button? This way, you'll avoid double and triple posts (which are frowned upon around here :smallwink:)

[leegi0n]

This is enough to make everyone I know never play a campaign of yours again. You can have a heavy RP campaign with optimized characters, and even beyond that, when you're DMing, it's not your game. Its the partys. You're the narrator, not the star. If everyone in the party wants beast mode characters you shouldn't say no, or kill them just because you dont.


If it's a general consensus rule from the beginning, it should be adhered to. I ask players what type of game they want from the onset and tailor it accordingly. I never claimed (and never will claim) stardom. DMs do the most work and have the most responsibility in the game. There's nothing really glorious about all that preparation and story 'dynamic' until the party makes it dynamic by playing it out.

Beast mode is GREAT. If it's a beast mode game.


Ask Roy for details.

BTW, leegi0n, can you answer using the multi-quote button? This way, you'll avoid double and triple posts (which are frowned upon around here :smallwink:)


where is the fabled multi-quote button? I will gladly use it and apologies for repeat postings.

[Anderlith]

I usually have a basic framework, then retroactively add in details as they are called for. Which is frequently enough to have entire sessions with no combat, though conflict of some sort is part of every session. Granted, my players frequently like giving my huge hooks and such - in my most current game, the characters are a deserter who left after accidentally enabling war crimes and an exile who has made enemies of several notable military officers.

This is what I do as well. Start with something basic, "a was a carpenter that was conscripted then I became an adventurer"

Later I can add that I
a) deserted
b) was the survivor of a big battle (think Mal Reynolds)
c) dishonorably discharged (this can lead to a lot of RP as to why I was discharged)
d) left after the war & decided to use my new skills to adventure

[leegi0n]

This is what I do as well. Start with something basic, "a was a carpenter that was conscripted then I became an adventurer"

Later I can add that I
a) deserted
b) was the survivor of a big battle (think Mal Reynolds)
c) dishonorably discharged (this can lead to a lot of RP as to why I was discharged)
d) left after the war & decided to use my new skills to adventure


Mal is a great example. So is Robin Hood.

[Misery Esquire]

where is the fabled multi-quote button? I will gladly use it and apologies for repeat postings.

Hit the little "+ button next to the Quote button. And then Post Reply should bring up all of the selected quotes (even from other pages) in the text box.

[Chained Birds]

As a player, I tend to hold off from making a backstory unless the DM really wants one. I usually create something basic that eludes to why I joined a bunch of killers (adventures). And once my character is attached to the story (A canidate for rezs and not for "roll a new character") I elaborate and RP in more backstory and the occasional reveal about [blank] which is why I [blank].
This is due to the many character deaths I've experienced in early game. I would always have a rich backstory filled with plot hooks that could be used by the DM if he so pleased... Then, due to both unlucky rolls and bad decisions, he/she dies after session X<5.

[leegi0n]

As a player, I tend to hold off from making a backstory unless the DM really wants one. I usually create something basic that eludes to why I joined a bunch of killers (adventures). And once my character is attached to the story (A canidate for rezs and not for "roll a new character") I elaborate and RP in more backstory and the occasional reveal about [blank] which is why I [blank].
This is due to the many character deaths I've experienced in early game. I would always have a rich backstory filled with plot hooks that could be used by the DM if he so pleased... Then, due to both unlucky rolls and bad decisions, he/she dies after session X<5.


Hit the little "+ button next to the Quote button. And then Post Reply should bring up all of the selected quotes (even from other pages) in the text box.


Thank you thank you.

[Kol Korran]

hhhmmmm.... some ideas on this thread ia gree with, some not. here is my opinion:

On roleplay's place in a game:players come of all sorts- some like to just hack stuff, some like to roleplay, some like to build characters, and there are more kinds. most players are a combination of a few elements.

The DMs job is not to "teach" or "educate" the players to his personal favorite style, but rather try and build a game that makes it fun for all (him or her self included) to play. unless this is SPCIFICALLY twhat the players signed for, i'm deeply against either pushing players to "be more of a roleplayer" or "trying to encourage them" to do so. it may only push them away from the game, or lessen their fun.

i do not think a roleplay heavy game is better than other games, though it is my preference as well.

also, unless the players asked for this specifically, a play that leans too much to any of the "extremes" (sort to speak) of the game often comes short. a healthy mic is the key to fun for most people, in my experience. also- most "types" of encoutners can easily be made to incorporate other elements. a battle could help with character development. a social interaction might include campaign strategy and focal choices and more...the game is a mix and mash.

on the subject of back stories: they DO NOT make a good roleplay necessarily. a player who writes the back story well might not play it well, or it might poorly fit with the campaign synopsis of the DM and more. (though this last point can be bridged by the DM working with the player before hand).

more over, character development doesn't need to (and in fact i think it's cliche, unimaginative and often seen a mile away) from their background. the campaign, the adventure may (and in my opinion should) present enough opportunities for development and growth on it's own, focusing on the game at hand, the actual campaign, the present and the future instead of the past.

best opportunities novel aspects of both past, present and future...

what i'm saying is that having a paragraph as your back story, a full page, or even ten doesn't necessarily make you a better roleplayer. one of the forumists (forgot his name) wrote one time on a thread "all my characters backgrounds went something like "he grew up on a farm till he was 18 and then decided to adventure" and they had full round personalities and had roleplay potential" (not the exact words, but the spirit) and 2 of my group's best roleplayers have had a slim background as well.

personality beats background a mile a way

a little bit more about background, not directly related: fully long fleshed out background sort of "finish" the character, and often (not always) give a very firm heading towards advancement and development. they leave little room to grow in new unexpected ways, in interesting ways, and to adapt fluidly to changes. less fleshed out characters, with core concept who leave their development to reaction (and not pre planning) to the campaign prove more interesting, more "alive", and quite often more fulfilling to the player. (but all these stems just from my gaming experience. it might differ from person to person)

about rewarding roleplaying: no. just no. do you especially reward someone who built his character well? or someone who made a wise tactical decision? or the guy that draws the map, update the wiki?

roleplaying is a reward unto ITSELF. but it is just a part of the gaming experience, as there are others. some may be better at it, so you'll be playing favoritism with this and pushing towards a certain style of play, which is just bad as i mentioned above.

players might be encouraged towards a certain style of play by an example of another, and if they show interest they should receive assistance, but players who do not should not feel penalized or left behind (XP or Loot wise) because of this.

so, those are my thoughts... :smallsmile:

[Xrocks]

As a player, I tend to hold off from making a backstory unless the DM really wants one. I usually create something basic that eludes to why I joined a bunch of killers (adventures). And once my character is attached to the story (A canidate for rezs and not for "roll a new character") I elaborate and RP in more backstory and the occasional reveal about [blank] which is why I [blank].
This is due to the many character deaths I've experienced in early game. I would always have a rich backstory filled with plot hooks that could be used by the DM if he so pleased... Then, due to both unlucky rolls and bad decisions, he/she dies after session X<5.


This is what I do as well. Start with something basic, "a was a carpenter that was conscripted then I became an adventurer"

Later I can add that I
a) deserted
b) was the survivor of a big battle (think Mal Reynolds)
c) dishonorably discharged (this can lead to a lot of RP as to why I was discharged)
d) left after the war & decided to use my new skills to adventure

I like to exactly that, basic history and after surviving session X+6 , start making a great backstory, but this was a very big problem with my last DM, I don't play with him anymore.
The guy wanted a big detailed story for you LEVEL ONE character (this was for Eberron but we weren't allow to read the whole Player's Guide to Eberron, and like another 5 books, in fact he got angry because I read about things like the Order of the Emerald Claw, also books he didn't like for example Tome of Battle couldn't be used).
This was the first time any of us played in that setting.
He allowed no adding a backstory after making your char ( had 2 chars die before session number 5 and I had to create a big story for each or I wasn't allow to play and when I did, I had to wait because my chard couldn't magically appear at the start of the session, so my extra punishment for dying was playing 2 hours of a 8 hour sessions, 2 times...).
The final straw was when I wanted my char to be a member of the Order of the Emerald Claw (part of my backstory) and I just got the answer : "No because I said so", I said : " Cmon is it really that bad?" and he got angry, started yelling, threw his book at the floor, said that the Emerald Claw was the next enemy and abandoned the session, vowing to never play with me again.

Now 3 of the 4 players are making our own game without him :smalltongue: .
And we can add the backstory after our chars have survived for some time and no books forbidden to read except the Module the DM is using

[leegi0n]

Wow. That's a bit over the top, if you ask me.

A DM should ALWAYS consider the concerns of the gamers, especially if they want their campaign to run well for the duration.

A lot of people might disagree with me on this, but I always give my gamers a 'freebie', in that, the first time the character dies, we scratch it. The next time they would need wish, miracle, resurrection, or a necromancer to void death.

A game is most enjoyable when all involved enjoy it, equally.

[Jolly]

You have to integrate the players into the world.

The typical PC hardly lives up to the name "character." It's just a collection of class dips and feats. It's not so much that the character doesn't have a background as it doesn't have a foreground: it has no place in the world. It's just a murderous hobo.

One of the best games I ever ran, all of the PCs were attached to the same noble family. Two brothers, a cousin, and the court wizard. The patriarch was an NPC, so the players had room to have some rivalry (since none of them was in charge of the others). On the other hand, threats to the house were threats to all of them. They were tied to the land; when the old man died, one of them would inherit.

This is how you encourage role-playing. Not by backstories, but by enmeshing the players in the politics. Give them responsibilities. Make whole villages of NPCs dependent on them. If they don't get up and do their jobs, people die. People they know, like cousins and siblings and parents.

There are two downsides to this. First it requires the DM to turn over control of a lot of his world to the players. Second it requires the DM to have a fantastically detailed world.

We play maybe once every month or two, with half the folks playing via skype and spending most of their time wrangling a little kid.

And you know what, some people just don't like the heavy non-combat personnal interaction part of DnD. Nothing wrong with that, and I'm not goiung to try to force people who really just want to slaughter monsters into spending hours having lengthy discussions with each other about morality or politics.

[leegi0n]

We play maybe once every month or two, with half the folks playing via skype and spending most of their time wrangling a little kid.

I can see how that would be an issue. I don't think that RP'ing would be as much fun via skype. It's one of those "look 'em in the eye", in person kinda things.

[Jolly]

I can see how that would be an issue. I don't think that RP'ing would be as much fun via skype. It's one of those "look 'em in the eye", in person kinda things.

Yeah, I've come to regard it as running a series of one shots with the same characters. And even when we all used to play together, there was a lot more group interest in just killing things than in sitting around talking to each other developing characters. And that's ok. I think on forums hack n' slash tends to get looked down on and the assumption is made that RP heavy is somehow superior. Just different preferrences.

[leegi0n]

Hack n' Slash should never be slighted. It is, at the end of the day, what ultimately empowers gamers. There's a lot to be said for the adrenaline and stress of a hard fight on the psyche of a gamer.

[Chained Birds]

The guy wanted a big detailed story for you LEVEL ONE character (this was for Eberron but we weren't allow to read the whole Player's Guide to Eberron, and like another 5 books, in fact he got angry because I read about things like the Order of the Emerald Claw, also books he didn't like for example Tome of Battle couldn't be used).
This was the first time any of us played in that setting.
He allowed no adding a backstory after making your char ( had 2 chars die before session number 5 and I had to create a big story for each or I wasn't allow to play and when I did, I had to wait because my chard couldn't magically appear at the start of the session, so my extra punishment for dying was playing 2 hours of a 8 hour sessions, 2 times...).
The final straw was when I wanted my char to be a member of the Order of the Emerald Claw (part of my backstory) and I just got the answer : "No because I said so", I said : " Cmon is it really that bad?" and he got angry, started yelling, threw his book at the floor, said that the Emerald Claw was the next enemy and abandoned the session, vowing to never play with me again.

So your DM was mad because your background was going to come into play in the upcoming story? Whaaaaaattt?

I'm not the best at thinking on the spot (Okay I'm decent at it) but I believe most every DM/player on this site could see the massive amount of RP potential in a PC being somehow linked to the enemy.

What an obtuse man/woman/***** your DM was.

[Mooncrow]

So your DM was mad because your background was going to come into play in the upcoming story? Whaaaaaattt?

I'm not the best at thinking on the spot (Okay I'm decent at it) but I believe most every DM/player on this site could see the massive amount of RP potential in a PC being somehow linked to the enemy.

What an obtuse man/woman/***** your DM was.

No kidding; as that DM, the hard part would have been stopping my evil laugh from getting out before stamping an enthusiastic "OK" on the backstory.

[Anderlith]

Our group always will work in at least one combat per session. Combat is fun.

[Hazzardevil]

good point. Although it happens in the 3rd world, I'm sure.

Not Third world! Not Developing, (We have finally realized that they aren't making developments.)
Lesser Economically Developed!

Anyway, I find writing original backstories difficult, and often my character will either be sympathetic to villains or not care about the commoners, seeming very strange to everyone.

[leegi0n]

So your DM was mad because your background was going to come into play in the upcoming story? Whaaaaaattt?

I'm not the best at thinking on the spot (Okay I'm decent at it) but I believe most every DM/player on this site could see the massive amount of RP potential in a PC being somehow linked to the enemy.

What an obtuse man/woman/***** your DM was.



Yeah...***** being the operative word.

[Xrocks]

Well ya there's a reason why we don't speak anymore.