Is it normal to hate writing background stories?

[gooddragon1]

I wanted to join a pbp on the forums here (mainly to test my Exterminator Class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?391696-Exterminator-%283-5-Class%29%28Exceedingly-Simple%29)), but it required a background story. I started using the 10 minute background but got disgusted (like a little sick in the stomach). When I was in the university D&D club I never wrote a background story. I just made my characters and that was that. Is it normal to just hate writing background stories so much? :/ Just had to vent.

EDIT: I take that back, I did once write a background story on the back of my cleric's character sheet...
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/6/S/W/2/g/t/transparent-red-no-circle.svg

Doubled as his holy symbol. Yes, I seriously drew a circle with a line through it.

[(Un)Inspired]

What do you mean by normal?

Typical?

I'm not sure. I've never heard of someone getting physically I'll from writing before but there's a lot I haven't seen out there.

EDIT: are you still feeling kind of sick? How long did it last ?

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I don't know if it's the typical experience of an RPGer, but it's definitely not an uncommon feeling! Evidence: lots of modern RPGs that focus on getting players into the game. I personally agree with the mindset that you need just enough background to get an idea of who a character is, but that most times the majority of background is never relevant to the game to begin with.

Hit the ground running, I say. Pick some ideas, and if you need to work out more backstory on a character, figure it out as the game goes on.

[endur]

I wanted to join a pbp on the forums here, but it required a background story.

pbp games require lots of writing. If a player is uncomfortable writing, I'd be uncomfortable being the GM/DM.

For an in-person game, you don't need to write as much, but you do need to be imaginative and communicative in person.

That said, backgrounds don't have to be 100% on the player. You can talk to the GM and create your background as a collaborative experience ... i.e. you write a first draft and ask the GM to expand on it. Then after you get draft 2 back from the GM, you can create draft 3.

[gooddragon1]

What do you mean by normal?

Typical?

I'm not sure. I've never heard of someone getting physically I'll from writing before but there's a lot I haven't seen out there.

EDIT: are you still feeling kind of sick? How long did it last ?

Slightly nauseous and it passed quickly. As for the in person games I've played... not really. I had a bubble pipe for those situations. I just like simplicity, and backstories are annoyingly complex. Reactive writing however isn't difficult for me for some reason.

[(Un)Inspired]

I'm not a huge fan of overly wrought back stories for character because I want the most important part of my character life to happen on his adventurers.

I wouldn't say I hate writing them(I have a hard time mustering up hate these days) but I like to keep them fairly simple.

Name, race, social class, where there training is from, why they're adventuring.

That's give or take what I come up with before hand.

[Solaris]

I'd say a lot of players really hate writing backgrounds for their characters. Me, I'll whip up some page-long essay on the subject, but that's actually the weird and unusual one; I'm the only D&D player I play with who'll do it without a prompt from the DM.

Getting physically ill from it, on the other hand... that one's unusual. Anxiety attack, maybe?

[Snowbluff]

Eh, I can get into a backstory every once in a while.

My big thing is I like being able to flesh our my character in game. A backstory comes off as violating "show, don't tell" for no good reason sometimes.

[gooddragon1]

Name, race, social class, where there training is from, why they're adventuring.

The way I feel about that is... character sheet, character sheet, guard turned sellsword, guard duty then mentorship, to gain power. But I know that wouldn't float for any DM that wants a backstory.

EDIT: hee hee... so, what happened was "I used to be a guard like you, then my arrow wound on my knee got healed by a cleric."

[goto124]

Slightly nauseous and it passed quickly. As for the in person games I've played... not really. I had a bubble pipe for those situations. I just like simplicity, and backstories are annoyingly complex. Reactive writing however isn't difficult for me for some reason.

I feel the same way you do. I know the personality of my characters, I can get them to react to situations in an RP way. I can come up with stuff on the fly- heck, I like that much better than having to write a backstory even before the character 'exists'. After she's gone through a campaign or 5, I can add a bit of the events into her backstory, and in my opinion, that's far more meaningful since the events actually happened, instead of something I came up with in only my mind.

[dantiesilva]

I personally have to delve down into the characters I am making mindset to actually write a background. Why I mostly play Clerics, Barbarians, or a summoner.

For my clerics I play them either as the super religious character who is not always a stick in the mud, but will go and point out his logic in things, then their is the leecher priest.....While his ideals are noble wanting to unite all the churches together once again...he has a hard time staying away from the ladies.

My barbarians are always from small tribes, normally monstrous humanoids who are either exiled or on a sort of proving right to earn their place in their camp. I am actually playing a spirit lion totem barbarian at the moment and personally asked my DM to allow me to fight a dire lion as a test of my worthiness to my tribe, and if I one to turn the pelt into an armor of some sort that allowed me to basically go lycan a few times a day.

And well you may have meet Ryl already as you applied in the same game I did. The main thing is looking for something that catches your eye and run with it. For Ryl I latched onto the fourth layer of hell like Lady Feirane was his mother and ran with it. Hope this helps some.

[Coidzor]

It's certainly not my forte or favorite thing in the world. I don't actively hate it, I just don't really do much more than come up with something barebones and then let actually playing the character give me a feel for them. If a DM or group wants characters with a lot of background, then they're going to have to deal with conversating enough to have something to generate something for that world that meshes appropriately with other people's convoluted backgrounds.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I hate it though, just that I don't find it particularly enjoyable and sometimes it's actively unpleasant if I just get stuck.

[Curmudgeon]

Background stories aren't part of the D&D rules; from a RAW perspective, they don't exist. Try asking your DM what part of the rules you can look at to find out what's supposed to be in your background story. :smallbiggrin:

[Necroticplague]

I share the sentiment. When I play DnD, I come to play a game, not write a freaking novel. Writing a backstory is like grinding in WoW: it's not fun, and not why you played this game, but its something you unfortunately have to put up with to get to the good parts.

[Coidzor]

I share the sentiment. When I play DnD, I come to play a game, not write a freaking novel. Writing a backstory is like grinding in WoW: it's not fun, and not why you played this game, but its something you unfortunately have to put up with to get to the good parts.

I mean, it should largely just be an explanation of where the character came from, what ties they have to the setting and others, and their starting personality, all of which can be useful things to have a better idea of sooner in the game rather than later, especially depending upon how roleplay/social-heavy a game is.

It's getting into the unimportant minutia or expanding the scope to the point where it's actual fine detail or biography rather than pseudo-biographical snippet that you really run into problems, I think.

[Toilet Cobra]

OP, I've DM'd for a lot of folks, and they almost all feel the same as you: just get 'em in the game and they're happy. Even when asked, they usually only come up with a couple sentences. Your reaction was particularly strong but pretty much everybody I've played with feels like you do.

And I think most DM's are like your DM: we would love it when players supply detailed backstory. It makes the game a lot better for us, both for entertainment purposes and for writing a better adventure for the party.

But generally I don't hold my breath. If anybody writes a backstory it's generally a joke or some crazy Mary Sue thing.

[mvpmack]

I totally can't understand this mindset.

Your backstory is the single thing other than your character's actions that you have any control over. A detailed and well-crafted backstory are important for opening channels to resources later in the game.

I'm only half joking. I will say that in the vast majority of circumstances, players I have run with who did not write backstories tended to be far less invested in the game. It's true that some people who did write backstories still wallflowered and some people who didn't were more involved, but the majority of the time the people who wrote longer backstories tended to be more involved in the game. People who write backstories tend to ask more questions about the game setting, complain more about stupid applications of RAW, and overall assist the GM/DM a lot more.

As a GM/DM, players who write backstories literally do work for me. I have more plot hooks right out of the gate and more player motivations. I know my current DM feels this way about me (I do a lot of downtime setting work, mostly to concrete-ify the DM's work on things like political and economic systems).

[Necroticplague]

I totally can't understand this mindset.

Yes, those of us who don't particularly like writing backstories understand the benefits. That doesn't make the act of doing them any more pleasant. Yes, I understand that reading the setting material and seeing where I fit in, and showing the Dm that means plot hooks down the line (heck, I usually try to have every backstory have a hook or two dangling in the open if he feels like adding line). That doesn't change that reading setting material is monotonous (seriously, almost all this crap reads like a history textbooks, and is about as interesting), thinking of how someone who doesn't yet exist would act is annoying, and its altogether not what I want when I sign up to play a game.

Similar analogy time: Yes, I understand I have to do my taxes, that sure as heck doesn't make them less annoying to do.

Honestly, I kinda prefer to write backstories after the character has been in the game for a while. I find you get better results when you can look at how the character has acted, then think backwards to "what would have made them this way", instead of determining what made them first, then trying to keep your playing of them consistent.

[goto124]

"I will say that in the vast majority of circumstances, players I have run with who did not write backstories tended to be far less invested in the game."

But people who were forced to write lengthy backstories won't be any more invested than if they didn't write the story, and those who are really interested will give the long backstory anyway.

And I actually want the DM to not touch my backstory. I have my own ideas for it, and if the DM decides to interpret it her own way, chances are I won't be happy.

[Knaight]

Personally I dislike writing out longer, more established back stories. I'm all for having some background to the character, but I can generally get the important parts across in a few sentences, and that leaves that entire period open for later definition. The backstory can be filled in piecemeal while the character is actually being played, which gives time for the character as played to really gel and sets up a better idea of the present to build from.

[CosmicOccurence]

I share the sentiment. When I play DnD, I come to play a game, not write a freaking novel. Writing a backstory is like grinding in WoW: it's not fun, and not why you played this game, but its something you unfortunately have to put up with to get to the good parts.

Ah, to me it is exactly the opposite, and it seems as though I'm in the minority here. Perhaps this comes from the PTA/PTU community on these boards (I don't play 3.5), but for me the backstory is more important than the crunch, both as a player and a gm. If I wanted to just create a character with no background and go beat up some bad guys to a generalized story, I'll pull out my copy of Dragon Age and spend a few hours on it.

To me, playing a tabletop game is all about creating a compelling story and really getting invested on what's going on inside the combat. The combat is wonderful and exhilarating, but it loses all meaning without a good story to go with it. While this is in a large part the DM's responsibility, it also falls on the players to truly make the story their own. I should note that, to me, a backstory involves all those important moments in a person's life up to the adventure's start, but it also conveys who this character is effectively. This involves personality, motivations, and description, but it most importantly relies on characterization. Here are three facets of why I consider backstories to be of vital importance.

Backstories on a PbP Forum: Here's the thing about play by post - they generally aren't as exciting in a straight combat game as a RL game will be. Combats generally take too long, clarifications and questions take more time to receive a response, and all that jazz. This makes the authentically of the story (and the characters acting through it) all the more important. Backstories are one of the ways to provide this framework, and it generally makes it easier to tell a cohesive story will well developed character concepts before the game starts rather than throwing them together as you go. Better backstory = better story IG.

Backstories as a Player: Personally, I love getting invested in a character before the game even starts, and a backstory is one way to do that effectively. It also gives me context to make decisions and write narrative for my character when the game begins, as I have a framework to base my reactions and writing on. It also allows me to measure up the GM. If a GM doesn't request a backstory, I usually try to stay away from the game simply because that has been the number 1 indicator of whether or not a game will die out within a week or so of starting. It also allows me to more thoroughly explore whatever setting that the GM has created or is using.

Backstories as a GM: I always ask for backstories as a GM. For starters, it provides me with the most effective way for me to weed through all of the applicants and pick the ones that I want in my game. I look for competent storytelling abilities, and a clear grasp of the character. Additionally, I can usually measure a player's investment in a game by their backstory. Better written backstories (note that better written =/= longer. Quantity never equals quality, but both are nice) indicate that a player is committed to the idea and excited to play it. I would much rather GM for players that are excited to play my game and who are willing to put in the effort necessary to sustain a good game. Additionally, a good backstory will give me plenty to work off of for my plans in the future, and they give me the option to really hit the characters where it hurts on the emotional level when I need to. For new players applying to my games, I will often tell them to do their best with crunch but spend most effort on a backstory. I can teach somebody the rules of a game, but I can't teach somebody how to tell a good story.

All this being said, I understand that there are multiple ways to play the game, and I'm happy that you've discovered which style works for you. This is going to be a great help in finding games that will work for you.

[ILM]

I love doing it, I'm just not very good at it :smallbiggrin:.

[Necroticplague]

Ah, to me it is exactly the opposite, and it seems as though I'm in the minority here. Perhaps this comes from the PTA/PTU community on these boards (I don't play 3.5), but for me the backstory is more important than the crunch, both as a player and a gm. If I wanted to just create a character with no background and go beat up some bad guys to a generalized story, I'll pull out my copy of Dragon Age and spend a few hours on it. I said nothing about the crunch, nor about level of campaign detail. I agree, that a background is important. I simply don't think you should write it ahead of time, instead doing it after actual play has characterized the character so that you have something to build off of.

And this misses the larger point I've been making: While backstories may be necessary, that doesn't make them any more interesting to write. Its work, plain and simple, that one does because it lets them play later. No amount of being useful (something which, in and of itself, is arguable) makes the act any more pleasent.

[Ryuuk]

In a PBP setting where there are multiple people trying to get into a game, the backstory is kind of important (at least from my experience). PBP are mostly all text, so its another metric by which you can judge the applications if there is a large pool to choose from. You can also sort of 'play' the character through it, and sometimes may be more then you get to play it in game do to the slow pace.

In a real life group no one is going to get excluded do to too many applications, you already know who is going to be playing. Backstory is pretty much a personal choice there that can help out the DM and Players.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Eh, I can get into a backstory every once in a while.

My big thing is I like being able to flesh our my character in game. A backstory comes off as violating "show, don't tell" for no good reason sometimes.

This mirrors my feelings pretty closely. I'll actually go a step further than snowbluff and say that more often than not I find the backstory afficianado's "tell, don't showing" obnoxious. Every in character statement they make seems to be punctuated by an ingraved invitation to ask about their backstory. Before long I begin picture them in my head as an emo-kid following me around and crying while begging me to read their journal.

[Psyren]

I come up with a skeleton of one - maybe something like "orphan, grew up in a monastery, fondness for fish" and then flesh it out depending on my playstyle. Maybe my character will end up taking Vow of Truth for extra ki and has a middling-/low Charisma, so I add to my backstory how he was a tattletale among the other young boys fostered there and didn't get along with them.

You can easily come up with a character first and then devise their backstory later. (Redcloak is a great example of this.) So long as the new details do not (a) conflict with anything your character has done or said so far, and (b) you're not writing in mechanics that you would have logically had at first level, you should be fine.

[Sian]

I'm probably a bit off in this regard, in that i have no problem working out the background story, or vocalize it for that matter, but I hit a brick wall on writing it down, which is actually quite annoying since i keep getting interesting ideas as of who/where/how, not just in terms of background stories but even plot ideas for novels or fanfiction or the like, but the second i sit in front of a empty document, my brain completely blanks out.

[Solaris]

I'm probably a bit off in this regard, in that i have no problem working out the background story, or vocalize it for that matter, but I hit a brick wall on writing it down, which is actually quite annoying since i keep getting interesting ideas as of who/where/how, not just in terms of background stories but even plot ideas for novels or fanfiction or the like, but the second i sit in front of a empty document, my brain completely blanks out.

I've had a player or two like this. In that situation, I generally talk to them about their backstory and take notes myself.

Have you tried having a DM or other player do that with you?

[lsfreak]

Eh, I can get into a backstory every once in a while.

My big thing is I like being able to flesh our my character in game. A backstory comes off as violating "show, don't tell" for no good reason sometimes.

I agree with this, and add that too often backstories seem to be a chance for someone to try and be special-snowflaky. It becomes an exercise in creating... well, a backstory, and not a character. I'd much rather have a quick psychological sketch.

If backstories are involved, I'd want to be heavily involved with the players (as the DM) or the DM (as a player) to integrate them well into the world. Come up with specific details about location, family, religion, training, and what those might mean, rather than the more generic stories that the DM can integrate into the story later on his own terms. Instead of "noble," have details of where they live, and ensure the player and DM are on the same page as to what "noble" means (feudal lord gifted land by a king, or semi-hereditary rulership elected by a council?)

[DeadMech]

I quite enjoy writing backstory. As others have said it allows me to insert something into the gameworld and offer out plothooks.

I find it interesting that people who prefer to wing it use the characters actions and try to figure out what kind of background would have made a person like that. Which is entirely backwards to my own method where I use the backstory to help me get into the headspace of a character during play.

[DigoDragon]

I love using PC backgrounds as plot hooks for adventures. Makes it easier for me to write and it rewards the player with some spotlight time relative to their character. Now, I don't require all my players to write a background. However little quest and exp rewards tends to act as positive reinforcement for putting the effort in.

As a player I love writing backgrounds. My trouble is I can go overboard and get too elaborate with several pages of material. Oops.
Yeah, I understand when my GM asks me to cut back in those cases. XD

[Zaq]

I used to write backstories that were at least a few pages long, but I haven't done that in a few years. I've discovered that it doesn't really make me have more fun at the table, so I stopped doing it. Now I think up enough background information to come up with a good idea of the character's personality and how they might react in some common situations, but that's it. The fun part of the game is what happens at the table, not whatever I dreamed up to happen beforehand.

There's always exceptions, of course. Sometimes I'll come up with a character concept that lends itself really strongly to having a specific background story, and then I'll flesh that out as much as I feel is necessary. But that's the exception rather than the rule. For the most part, I try to come to the game with a good personality, but I don't care much about coming to the game with a good backstory.

[endur]

In a PBP setting where there are multiple people trying to get into a game, the backstory is kind of important (at least from my experience). PBP are mostly all text, so its another metric by which you can judge the applications if there is a large pool to choose from. You can also sort of 'play' the character through it, and sometimes may be more then you get to play it in game do to the slow pace.

From a GM's perspective, a well-written background story may also give you ideas of how invested the player is going to be in the campaign.

A character who has a one liner for a background story may also be using one liners for posts during the campaign.
A character who has a long background that has nothing in common with the game campaign may not be connected to the campaign when it is going on.
A player who knows the game world may make that evident through their background (i.e. my character grew up in the Shire and moved to Bree when I became an adult to take a job as a bar tender in the Prancing Pony-- a one sentence background that displays some knowledge of Middle Earth by mentioning several specific references).

[LoyalPaladin]

I have a few players at my table who hate writing backgrounds. But from what I have noticed, the ones who end up more involved in the game are the ones who wrote a halfway decent backstory.

[BWR]

I generally don't bother with backstories. At most they're a couple of lines. Like my character's personality, history is often revealed during play. Having a detailed setting you know about makes writing a background easier than in a setting you don't know well: if you know it there's more stuff to be inspired by and if you don't know it too many pitfalls and ideas you have that you later find out don't work in the that setting.

[Coidzor]

Your backstory is the single thing other than your character's actions that you have any control over. A detailed and well-crafted backstory are important for opening channels to resources later in the game.

Yeah, as amused as I am by Milo's antics in Sir Poley's Harry Potter and the Natural 20 series of fanfics, I hate the idea of gaming the system by putting in as many potential hooks and contacts as possible that are constructed to solely benefit me, and that sort of hoop-jumping and gamist behavior does not appeal to me in the slightest.

Nor does a DM who'd require something written in backstory to develop channels to resources and relationships that are going to be needed to play the game.

[Susano-wo]

just for my two cents: I almost never write formal backstories for my characters (and have never, short of PBP, had a DM ask for one). I do, however, have a backstory, even if its basic, and will give the DM a rundown on it. I think you should play a character, and part of that is where they came from, though I think writing a novel is unnecessary, and often ill advised.

It also, with a good DM, creates investment, because the DM can then draw upon those background details to create hooks that tie into the characters past, tie the characters past into the plot, and understand which hooks will motivate the character.

In PBP, I can understand wanting a basic backstory written, because that's how the DM is talking to you. So they cannot simply talk to you about who your character is, where they come from, and what motivates them, they have to rely on you telling them through prose.

EDIT: also, I think coming up with new background details on the fly, so long as its not used as an excuse to solve problems or get freebies is fine and dandy. A lot of times, as I start to play the character, and I get used to/develop their personality, I figure out new things from their past that make sense given their current attitudes(and may even have cause their current attitudes), and deepen the character

[Hobosub]

In my experiences it really depends on the game you play.

At first I was optimistic and made some complex backgrounds.
Of course, as it turns out in the (un)real world, death is around every corner and some of the characters that had elaborate backgrounds died within 5 sessions without any chance of coming back.
In such cases, it's only natural to after a while simply stop trying.
Of course, this leaves the characters that actually do survive seem a bit on the boring and/or psychotic side.

The games I play tend to start around level 3 and rarely go higher than 14 (leveling at DMs discretion); mostly consist of core-only (for the PCs) with lots of enemy activity (4 encounters / day for extended periods is not uncommon). Of course encounters only get enhanced, not nerfed and magic items are quite restricted to what the DM feels like handing out.

Especially at the lower levels, this can be very lethal.
(Also, my dice try kill me at every turn)

Character deaths can be a powerful story hook, but when the group goes "we need another Timmy" every other week (because there's no chance of getting the body back and/or the doomclock keeps ticking at an ever increasing rate) it becomes simply demoralizing.

[goto124]

I simply don't think you should write it ahead of time, instead doing it after actual play has characterized the character so that you have something to build off of.

I'm kinda Chaotic, I can't plan well :smalltongue: Also, I try to cooperate with other players, and adjust my backstory/characterization to fit. I use the campaign to grow my PC into something I can actually play.

If you look at my characters in my sig, they have barely any backstory. Their origins are 'lived in another world then got teleported here'. I have a sketchy idea of their personalities. If I was told to come up with a backstory that actually fits with the DM's setting, I'm going to be really stuck.

Okay, I need some serious help on how to fit my characters, taken out of an Anachronism Stew MMO world, into a medieval one.

[Corsair]

I have been playing in PBP games for a long time and despite being quite good at writing them I have come to hate it almost as much as I hate describing my character's physical appearance. I can do it, I can do it -easily-, but it's a drag. I'm so tired of writing "X was born in the village of Y to a Blacksmith and an Apprentice Yodeler..." "A was a foundling, left on the steps of the Temple of Bongo Pete in Tell Hell..." Who -gives a crap-?

I enjoy writing a backstory when I can do stuff with it - if I'm writing a character who has already had adventures, who is a decently high level, I can just gloss over the tedious "Born and raised, playground is where she spent most of her days" segment of the bio and go straight to just outlining a fantasy novel. But a level one starting character? You're boned sideways trying to write a backstory that isn't an absolute snoozer, unless you want to just pretend that Level One doesn't mean "Greener than grass". I suppose you can write about the goings-on of their adolescence, but if we were the kind of people who gave a crap about that I'm pretty sure we'd be trying to kludge together a Teen Wolf game using a scalpel and a copy of Werewolf: The Apocalypse.

[Jermz]

I quite enjoy writing backstory. As others have said it allows me to insert something into the gameworld and offer out plothooks.

I find it interesting that people who prefer to wing it use the characters actions and try to figure out what kind of background would have made a person like that. Which is entirely backwards to my own method where I use the backstory to help me get into the headspace of a character during play.

This is very similar to me. I don't write a whole long backstory for my characters, but definitely at least a page. Without a backstory I get far less invested in the character, because I draw my motivation, reasoning, quirks and everything else from my character's history. I need to get in his head, based on what he's experienced, in order to play him efficiently and multi-dimensionally. Just rolling up stats and jumping into the game doesn't work for me.

In addition, there's the oft-mentioned issue of plot hooks, which are crucial for any GM who wants to get his players more involved.

[Milo v3]

I like writing backstories and reflavouring stuff, and got used to it quick so that I could actually get accepted into some PBP's, but I really hate writing appearance stuff. My brain's just not good at imagining visuals so it's always a giant chore to describe my characters appearance on the sheet.

[Knaight]

Ah, to me it is exactly the opposite, and it seems as though I'm in the minority here. Perhaps this comes from the PTA/PTU community on these boards (I don't play 3.5), but for me the backstory is more important than the crunch, both as a player and a gm. If I wanted to just create a character with no background and go beat up some bad guys to a generalized story, I'll pull out my copy of Dragon Age and spend a few hours on it.

Nobody is saying that they just want to "create a character with no background and go beat up some bad guys to a generalized story". I generally favor pretty combat light games in which the personalities of the characters involved drive things forward. That's not a matter of backstory though, it's a matter of who they are now. A brief outline of their prior life that is more concept than backstory can usually cover things, leaving the backstory open to be tied into the setting as you go, when it's relevant.

[mvpmack]

Yeah, as amused as I am by Milo's antics in Sir Poley's Harry Potter and the Natural 20 series of fanfics, I hate the idea of gaming the system by putting in as many potential hooks and contacts as possible that are constructed to solely benefit me, and that sort of hoop-jumping and gamist behavior does not appeal to me in the slightest.

Nor does a DM who'd require something written in backstory to develop channels to resources and relationships that are going to be needed to play the game.

Actually it was more of an Old Man Henderson reference but same difference really.

[Doctor Awkward]

I wanted to join a pbp on the forums here (mainly to test my Exterminator Class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?391696-Exterminator-%283-5-Class%29%28Exceedingly-Simple%29)), but it required a background story. I started using the 10 minute background but got disgusted (like a little sick in the stomach). When I was in the university D&D club I never wrote a background story. I just made my characters and that was that. Is it normal to just hate writing background stories so much? :/ Just had to vent.

EDIT: I take that back, I did once write a background story on the back of my cleric's character sheet...
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/6/S/W/2/g/t/transparent-red-no-circle.svg

Doubled as his holy symbol. Yes, I seriously drew a circle with a line through it.

Whoever did that forgot to remove the wisp of smoke from your holy symbol. :smalltongue:

While I'd say admitting the prospect of a character background making you physically ill is a bit... over the top, I don't think there's anything wrong with not enjoying having to come up with a character background.

Just as long as you hate the process of creating a background, and not character backgrounds themselves.
Most people who do table-top roleplaying games do them because they like being part of a story. Often in games I run my players will say to me, "I've got this character", and I'll say, "Ok tell me about him", and they'll start listing off his abilities, and at the end I'll say, "Alright, but what's he like as a person and what does he want to do with his life", and they'll say, "I don't know", and then I'll say, "Ok, how about this..." and with their own tweaks added, they nearly always walk away happy.

I'm almost always the first person to say that there is no wrong way to play D&D, but suffering actual discomfort at the prospect of taking part in a story seems... yeah, weird.

[M Placeholder]

In my current Dark Sun group, every one of the characters has a backstory, and it is really important, as one is a wizard on a world where magic has laid the planet to waste and practicing it can get you lynched, another is an elf who was living the high life before the revolution in Tyr, two of them had to fight every day of their lives, the thri-kreen had his former clutch destroyed, and the water cleric (the leader) has a past tainted by the Gray...literally.

I asked all of them to come up with backstories, and helped to flesh out them. For me, making a character is something I enjoy, and a good backstory is something that is important. Ive already incorporated backstories into the forthcoming adventures, and I love making backstories. For me, they are as important as the class of the character.

[Aegis013]

Disliking back story creation is entirely reasonable. Especially if you're accustomed to playing with DMs who aren't likely to draw on the characters' back stories or make them integral to the game. DMs for 3.5 tend to lean that way in my experience; a long backstory with lots of detail is wasted effort as it won't be utilized by the DM and will have no tangible impact on game play.

With a DM who will utilize such things making those things integral parts of the game direction, pulling recurring characters straight from back story, or the like, it can be a bit more rewarding, you feel like you impacted the setting/world immediately, the game feels more collaborative and it helps you get immersed. An example of this was when I played a superhero game run by a friend of mine, and of the three players one had absolutely no back story, one had a brief explanation of origin, and I created a pretty cheesy origin story populated with several named characters for my super. All the characters in my back story made an appearance - my rival appeared as a recurring villain who had obtained powers but still held a grudge against me, my pre-super love interest showed up as a damsel in distress and it significantly improved my experience.

Now, I didn't write an extensive essay or anything, I just threw down how my character got his powers (training or the like) and the most important NPCs to him and what roles they filled in his life.

I will agree though that creating the details of the backstory as you progress in the game seems like a perfectly good approach assuming it makes reasonable sense.

[endur]

With a DM who will utilize such things making those things integral parts of the game direction, pulling recurring characters straight from back story, or the like, it can be a bit more rewarding, you feel like you impacted the setting/world immediately, the game feels more collaborative and it helps you get immersed. An example of this was when I played a superhero game run by a friend of mine, and of the three players one had absolutely no back story, one had a brief explanation of origin, and I created a pretty cheesy origin story populated with several named characters for my super. All the characters in my back story made an appearance - my rival appeared as a recurring villain who had obtained powers but still held a grudge against me, my pre-super love interest showed up as a damsel in distress and it significantly improved my experience.

great example.

[goto124]

I'm curious about something. Why did you not get angry at the DM for using your backstory, especially since her way of imagining things is very different from how you imagine it? For example, I could've easily gotten mad at the DM turning my love interest into a damsel in distress. I won't want anyone touching my backstory (if I had any) until I've talked it through VERY thoroughly with everyone at the table.

[Madhava]

If people don't like making origin stories, then I don't see what's wrong with starting tabula rasa/minimalist style:

Character X had a relatively normal childhood. In his/her teenage years, he/she completed his/her training/studies, at which Character X excelled at. (For more specialized classes)his/her performance was noticed by Retired Adventurer Y, who offered to indoctrinate Character X as his newest apprentice.

End of prologue. Your adventure begins now.

For those who don't start characters at level 1, and don't enjoy a little creative writing, I can see your issue.

Another just-as-easy idea: Talk to that player at the table who enjoys writing all those epic prologues. Create a character who is that's player's character's sibling. Now you have a (shared) backstory and incentive to function as a cooperative member in your team.

[killem2]

As far as it physically affecting you, that's on you. I would not take it so seriously that I get that worried about it.

If I were a DM of a pbp or in person I don't I am not that hard up about background stories. Just pick a different medium or find one of many places on the internet to get help with writing up a new one.

[goto124]

PC from Some City went to Fighter School (or Wizard School), graduated but couldn't find a job, so she went adventuring.

Or she worked as a guard/librarian/teacher/blah, and realised her life was boring, so she decided to spice up a bit.

...does that work?

(This kinda reminds me of Celie from OotS, who took a job in the dungeon because she couldn't get anywhere else. And might reasonate with some people IRL...)

[atemu1234]

I like it when my players do, at any rate.

If not, I may just go for a "remember this new guy" to have a plothook.

[goto124]

Why does no one seem to be concerned about the DM stepping on your toes by using your backstory as plot hooks?

[georgie_leech]

Why does no one seem to be concerned about the DM stepping on your toes by using your backstory as plot hooks?

Trust in the DM, for the most part. In particular, I trust the DM will make an honest effort at using my backstory tastefully. If he doesn't, it probably comes with other flaws I generally don't enjoy anyway. And on the rare cases where everything is great except my backstory is misused, oh well, I can always use it for a different game.

[almightycoma]

goto124
Why does no one seem to be concerned about the DM stepping on your toes by using your backstory as plot hooks?

You aren't the only one. the first time a wrote a decent backstory that wasn't just " my character is an X from Y and wants to do Z" The DM twisted the fudge out of it.(in an no fun jerkwad way.) So i definitely get where you are coming from. now i just make him characters in a vacuum to be safe.

[Coidzor]

Why does no one seem to be concerned about the DM stepping on your toes by using your backstory as plot hooks?

Some level of using your backstory as plothooks is expected, which is why if one doesn't want one's parents held hostage, one is typically an orphan.

But, really, there's some that's kosher and some that aren't and some where it's a matter of luck of the draw on the GM and whether they've got any trust in 'em.

[goto124]

My characters don't come from anywhere that exists in the setting the campaign is in. That keeps the plot seperate from my backstory.

If I wanted the DM to use my backatory, I would first do an intense discussion with her, about what lines should not be crossed. Don't make the bad guy turn out to be good, don't kidnap my sister because that's essentially railroading, etc.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I'm curious about something. Why did you not get angry at the DM for using your backstory, especially since her way of imagining things is very different from how you imagine it? For example, I could've easily gotten mad at the DM turning my love interest into a damsel in distress. I won't want anyone touching my backstory (if I had any) until I've talked it through VERY thoroughly with everyone at the table.

I'd have no problem with it. Honestly, I'd consider it a victory if my mundane girlfriend survived the entire campaign unless it had a light tone.

At some point though, there would probably be cybernetics, power armor, or at least a gun given to her. >_>

[almightycoma]

My characters don't come from anywhere that exists in the setting the campaign is in. That keeps the plot seperate from my backstory.

I wish i could get away with that. Anytime I've tried something like that I've gotten a big NOPE. To keep characters safe from unwarranted/over the top meddling I go with a they don't have any of (insert thing trying to be messed with).

[Necroticplague]

Some level of using your backstory as plothooks is expected, which is why if one doesn't want one's parents held hostage, one is typically a self-made orphan.

You forgot an important detail, fixed that for you.

[dextercorvia]

I like writing a short background. Usually those are things that have already formed in my mind as I designed the character. However, a long backstory that is intended to also serve as a 'writing sample' for PBP irritates me. This is mostly because most times it turns out that between my character sheet and background, I end up putting thrice the effort into the campaign than the vaporware DM that never tosses out an encounter. Since I almost never reuse a character, I'd rather leave a set of numbers and feats behind, rather than a fully formed person.

[Twilightwyrm]

Depending on your GM, forgoing a background (or at least a back story plot hook) is forsaking the advantage of being able to choose at least some of your battles. Fact of the matter is, the GM is going to be throwing conflicts your way regardless of what you pick/do. If you're just an orphan turned whatever, with no significant connections in your life, and only the goal of gaining power, gets very little choice in what conflicts they are likely to face on their road to power, and therefore cannot prepare for them until they present themselves. Assuming your GM actually makes use of potential hooks in your background, an player whose character has parents, a bounty on their head, a grudge against a certain kingdom or group of creatures, a stolen family heirloom, etc. knows the nature of some of the conflicts/challenges they are likely to face, since such conflicts/challenges are already framed in their back story. This makes (YMMV) for a GM engaged with your character, and makes for a player that is engaged with crafting the narrative. Both (generally) positive thing in my book.

[goto124]

It gets complicated. When the DM has the BBEG kidnap your parents, do you think 'awesome, she's using my backstory'? Or 'come on, why is she using my backstory to railroad me, since I can't possibly NOT rescue my parents'?

To be fair, perhaps 'using backstory' is just a refluff of things you were going to do anyway. Instead of going down the dungeon for loot, your PC does it to save his family. I could see the point here.

At least, I'm currently developing both my characters' backstories, not purely by my imagination, but by playing it out in the FFRP section of these forums.

[atemu1234]

It gets complicated. When the DM has the BBEG kidnap your parents, do you think 'awesome, she's using my backstory'? Or 'come on, why is she using my backstory to railroad me, since I can't possibly NOT rescue my parents'?

In general, it depends on the player.

Some like it, some don't. I try to figure out beforehand which category they fall into.

[Doctor Awkward]

If I wanted the DM to use my backatory, I would first do an intense discussion with her, about what lines should not be crossed. Don't make the bad guy turn out to be good, don't kidnap my sister because that's essentially railroading, etc.

What's the point of even having one then?

I once played a character in a 7th Sea game that had a Sidhe lover as part of his background (it was randomly rolled, so I found a way to work it in). The idea I pitched to the DM was that she was terrified of what the Sidhe Queen would do to her (and him) if she ever found out, and part of the driving focus of the character became finding a way to convince (or threaten) the Queen into leaving them alone. The DM liked it, and that's how we started the game.

At no point did I insist that we had to end up happily ever after, or that the Queen wasn't allowed to make the her a mortal, or really anything else. I wanted to see what kind of story would come out of this. Having "lines" would have made that pointless, because I'd always know exactly how things would end up.

Characters should be treated like tools, not like your children. Having a character who has a sister that gets kidnapped isn't "railroading", it's drama as a result of conflict. It's a personal stake that gets you invested in the story.

[gooddragon1]

I wish i could get away with that. Anytime I've tried something like that I've gotten a big NOPE. To keep characters safe from unwarranted/over the top meddling I go with a they don't have any of (insert thing trying to be messed with).

Shoot, that probably makes my: I'm a guard turned sellsword after mentorship idea very risky. Wouldn't care. I just want an easy backstory if at all.

[goto124]

"What's the point of even having one then?"

That... explains a lot.

Anyway, random idea: PC has an annoying niece that he has to constantly rescue a la Mario and Princess Peach, because otherwise 1) the family blessing/curse will strip him of his powers, and 2) not saving your own family is Evil, and he does not want to be labelled Evil, whether by the cosmos or by other people.

...what was I thinking...

[atemu1234]

"What's the point of even having one then?"

That... explains a lot.

Anyway, random idea: PC has an annoying niece that he has to constantly rescue a la Mario and Princess Peach, because otherwise 1) the family blessing/curse will strip him of his powers, and 2) not saving your own family is Evil, and he does not want to be labelled Evil, whether by the cosmos or by other people.

...what was I thinking...

That's the DM being bad, not the backstory.

[Aegis013]

I'm curious about something. Why did you not get angry at the DM for using your backstory, especially since her way of imagining things is very different from how you imagine it? For example, I could've easily gotten mad at the DM turning my love interest into a damsel in distress. I won't want anyone touching my backstory (if I had any) until I've talked it through VERY thoroughly with everyone at the table.

It was a corny supers game; how many times does Spiderman save Mary Jane from danger? The whole point of having the love interest was to be used a damsel in distress.

But, aside from that, I had a high level of trust in the DM in question, as I stated, he is my friend. If he's going to use the backstory, I can count on him to make it even more enjoyable than it would've been had he not done so.

[goto124]

I just had another thought. If you wrote your backstory to be used by the DM, doesn't that mean you don't have emotional attachment to said backstory? Which would defeat the purpose of a backstory?

[georgie_leech]

I just had another thought. If you wrote your backstory to be used by the DM, doesn't that mean you don't have emotional attachment to said backstory? Which would defeat the purpose of a backstory?

Not really. Part of a DM using the backstory is giving plot hooks that your character can be emotionally invested in, as oppose to doing something because that's what the Party wants to do or because it's the current Quest.(tm) For instance, one of my players once had a Wizard that had a rivalry with another student that ended extremely poorly and was never fully resolved. This gave me the opportunity to have a mini-boss-style enemy that could appear a few times before being defeated, giving a sense of progression as their battles become more complex and impressive, while he in turn got an enemy that he could hate for reasons beyond "I really don't like fighting monsters with miss chances" or "I hate how Undead are immune to Sneak Attack" or the like.

[goto124]

Aka versimilutide (spelling). The emotional response is by the characters. Makes sense I guess?

I've always placed versimicantspellthisword at the bottom of gaming priorities, which is really wierd for RPGs with actual RP. It'll take a while.

[Aegis013]

georgie_leech's answer is spot on.

I also don't see why I wouldn't have emotional attachment to the backstory (I liked my corny origin story full of drama), but that doesn't mean the DM can't utilize it well in a game. Once the NPCs exist in the world, the DM can use them.

I'm not sure how that has to do with verisimilitude. Verisimilitude means the game world/setting makes sense and is internally consistent or makes sense.

[goto124]

I'm not sure how that has to do with verisimilitude. Verisimilitude means the game world/setting makes sense and is internally consistent or makes sense.


Part of a DM using the backstory is giving plot hooks that your character can be emotionally invested in, as oppose to doing something because that's what the Party wants to do or because it's the current Quest.(tm)

Backstory gives an in-universe reason for the character to do something. That's what I gather.

It's probably more important in PbPs, where story takes a lot of precedence, though I don't see how it won't devolve to 'okay DM, PC has a sister, have the BBEG kidnap her'.

I myself find that if I'm not emotionally attached to the story, there's no point having it, and if I am, I don't want people running with it. This dichomety(spelling again) doesn't apply to most people, according to this thread. Why am I so wierd?

If I hate writing backstories so much, maybe I shouldn't even join the game...

[georgie_leech]

Backstory gives an in-universe reason for the character to do something. That's what I gather.

It's probably more important in PbPs, where story takes a lot of precedence, though I don't see how it won't devolve to 'okay DM, PC has a sister, have the BBEG kidnap her'.

Because there are also "PC has a sister, maybe she can be helpful in some way, perhaps a messenger for the king when she gets older," or "PC has a sister, maybe they can roleplay family interactions to give a more emotional connection than a vague 'save the world' thing, because it's more personal," or pretty much anything else. Backstories don't have to be grab-bags of goodies for the DM to take away for motivation.


If I hate writing backstories so much, maybe I shouldn't even join the game...

Uh... I don't think anyone is saying that you need to have back stories to play the game. Just that they can be useful tools. But much like the rules for Truenaming or Psionics, you don't need to use all the potential tools. In this particularly tortured metaphor, I wouldn't use a jackhammer to build a birdhouse, nor a screwdriver to pave a road.

[Knaight]

Because there are also "PC has a sister, maybe she can be helpful in some way, perhaps a messenger for the king when she gets older," or "PC has a sister, maybe they can roleplay family interactions to give a more emotional connection than a vague 'save the world' thing, because it's more personal," or pretty much anything else. Backstories don't have to be grab-bags of goodies for the DM to take away for motivation.

To use a recent example, a PC had parents in another city, and contacted them to see if the weird stuff going on in their city was more widespread (it was). However, it also influenced the way that scene was conveyed, because coming from the PC's parents I got to bring in a lot of material that wouldn't work very well with much of anyone else, including using the scene for a bit of comedic lightening of a generally darker setting (the parents hassled the PC about not calling more often, not getting married yet, and how they still didn't have any grandchildren in the course of the conversation, and it was completely hilarious because of it).

However, this wasn't established in a pre-written back story. The establishment there was pretty much that the character wasn't an offworlder, because that particular detail was deemed important enough to be mandatory. The PC having parents was effectively a declaration made by the player mid-game, and it worked completely fine that way.

[Seharvepernfan]

I think it's funny that most in most games where a DM wants you to make a backstory, the game never gets off the ground because the DM quits before it ever really starts.

[goto124]

Probably because it's PbPs and other online mediums involving strangers where DMs demand backstories. Such mediums are far more likely to have absent DMs than groups that have RL friends.

[Dimers]

And this misses the larger point I've been making: While backstories may be necessary, that doesn't make them any more interesting to write. Its work, plain and simple, that one does because it lets them play later.

Interesting. For me, backstory tends to just happen in the process of making a build. It's not work for me, it's just a side effect of thinking about how feats and abilities and class fit together. Sometimes it "happens" more than others, so some of my backstories are pretty detailed while others are sparse, but it's almost never something I need to actively work on.

[Solaris]

Backstory gives an in-universe reason for the character to do something. That's what I gather.

It's probably more important in PbPs, where story takes a lot of precedence, though I don't see how it won't devolve to 'okay DM, PC has a sister, have the BBEG kidnap her'.

I myself find that if I'm not emotionally attached to the story, there's no point having it, and if I am, I don't want people running with it. This dichomety(spelling again) doesn't apply to most people, according to this thread. Why am I so wierd?

If I hate writing backstories so much, maybe I shouldn't even join the game...

You know, I'm okay with a simple backstory as a DM - Character was born and raised in Country X, trained in Class Y, and is adventuring for Reason Z is plenty enough for my purposes, most of the time. I like more, and often genuinely enjoy reading what the player's written - even the noobiest backstory can invoke a sense of nostalgia for when I, myself, was a total noober. However, I don't need a character to have plot hooks built into their backstory, especially if they have goals and suchlike I can work with. If they don't, though... well, not everyone needs to be the one the whole plotline is about. Just because your buddy is on a quest to defeat a lich and avenge his father's death doesn't mean your character can't be fun and entertaining to play with.
But then again, I don't like jerking players around by their backgrounds.

While you're the first player I've encountered who gets angry at background use, I follow the general rule of discussing what is and is not off limits in their background before I employ it. I try to avoid any twists in a character's background unless they write them in - I tend to treat that, like the rest of their character, as sacrosanct. It's no more my purview as the DM than the character's height or choice of combat actions. I tend to mine backgrounds for quest ideas, not ideas for coercion - if you're out to get revenge on the lich, for example, I'm going to work the lich into the campaign. If you want to resurrect the Lost City of Abooga-Gooba, then by gum I'm gonna write in the Lost City of Abooga-Gooba. If you have living parents, they're no more at risk than any other people in the campaign setting (but then again, I hate the orphan PC trope almost as much as I hate the hackneyed SO/loved one in distress trope).
... Dead parents, on the other hand, are just asking for me to do something malevolently evil with them. See above about tropes I hate.

(As an aside, it's spelled "verisimilitude" and "dichotomy". I remember verisimilitude by "Veri similar tu d Earth".)

One thing I do hate as a DM, though, is secrets in the background. It's okay to keep it a secret from the rest of the party, but not so much from me. If I don't know about it, it doesn't exist.

[Aegis013]

One thing I do hate as a DM, though, is secrets in the background. It's okay to keep it a secret from the rest of the party, but not so much from me. If I don't know about it, it doesn't exist.

Strongly agreed.
Though, that's certainly not the same as potentially adding more/fleshing out the background further during the game. Since that's more development of the character, whereas what you are referring to, I believe, is effectively trying to pull the wool over the DM's eyes, so-to-speak.

[atemu1234]

Strongly agreed.
Though, that's certainly not the same as potentially adding more/fleshing out the background further during the game. Since that's more development of the character, whereas what you are referring to, I believe, is effectively trying to pull the wool over the DM's eyes, so-to-speak.

Yeah, I couldn't deal with that either.

[Solaris]

Strongly agreed.
Though, that's certainly not the same as potentially adding more/fleshing out the background further during the game. Since that's more development of the character, whereas what you are referring to, I believe, is effectively trying to pull the wool over the DM's eyes, so-to-speak.

Yeah. Deciding your mercenary fought in the Third Man-Goblin War when he didn't have much background beforehand is fine (especially if it's not mid-session, though I'm alright with minor detail alterations), suddenly announcing that he's the firstborn son of the king and he's the crown prince in disguise with a great wyrm gold dragon lover is not.

[Knaight]

Yeah. Deciding your mercenary fought in the Third Man-Goblin War when he didn't have much background beforehand is fine (especially if it's not mid-session, though I'm alright with minor detail alterations), suddenly announcing that he's the firstborn son of the king and he's the crown prince in disguise with a great wyrm gold dragon lover is not.

A lot of the time it comes up in dialog, and has to be mid session. For instance, I'm playing a character in a fantasy game now, that has basically been established as a somewhat dumb itinerant adventurer originally from some outland tribes - I decided to have fun with the dumb brawler trope, so the character is illiterate, innumerate, generally not too bright, but very personable and generally a good companion to have as long as she doesn't need to use anything resembling guile. Comparisons have been made between her and Lenny from Of Mice and Men.

This involves casual mention of back story elements for humor purposes all the time. I never specified in the back story that she's not particularly welcome on a few boats because she accidentally threw a donkey overboard while trying to arm wrestle it, but it fit the character in the moment and I decided to go with it. Similarly, I never specified that her work thus far had taken her up against pirates before, but again, it fit the situation and I went with it (plus, years of mercenary work around an inland sea tends to cause that sort of thing).

The game was better for it, and neither of these would even have occurred to me if I hadn't been playing the character for long enough to establish a pattern of play which properly contextualizes the backstory. I knew I was aiming for not too bright, the actual level that came from was determined through the emergence of character dynamics with the other PCs. I knew I was deliberately subverting certain fantasy tropes (e.g. the whole "amazonian" concept, along with some deliberate juxtaposition between pretentious fantasy names, chosen nicknames, and the character style), I wasn't sure until playing how exactly that was going to pan out.

In short, there's a case to be made for not making backstories ahead of time producing both better characters and better backstories.