Backstories > Sandbox or Module

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I had a radical idea while planting a Metasequoia, and I THINK a generally important one. It was inspired by posts here and especially on Facebook where DM's like to REALLY define the world everyone is in. Understandable as many DM's including myself probably like organizing lots of complex things. The idea.

As a DM I don't think Sandbox and Module should not define a GROUP experience game like D&D.

If you plop your players down in an open world you should make an effort for that world to involve their backstories.

If you like the big pre-made dungeons like Tales from the Yawning Portal or a world like Storm King's Thunder or Curse of Strahd, as DM, you should tie them together with your player's backstories.

In most groups there will be the guy or the newb or very casual player w/o much of a backstory past "oh yeah, I was in the army with Bob's character. Some guy will have a 10 page one that's written like a novel with a finish that will be difficult to use also. But the other three probably will have something and after 20 hours of game time you should have an idea what makes everyone tick and even tie what the players have done early on into the story.

[opaopajr]

:smallsmile: Or the GM could get to running the game already. And players could adjust their 'vision of their character' according to the emergent context of play. :smallcool: I mean, whatever floats your table. But I'll say as I have gotten older a lot of this becomes a self-indulgent luxury versus my ever diminishing precious game time. :smalltongue:

Have fun!

[firelistener]

If my players ever spent effort on their backstories, I would 100% use them for adventure hooks. The setting I use of my own creation is intentionally pretty generic "everything but the kitchen sink" fantasy similar to Forgotten Realms so that it's easy for a player to come up with whatever and it have a place in the world. Unfortunately, I really never have players that do so and stick around for more than one or two sessions. Most players, in my experience, play D&D with the expectation that the DM will deliver a "ready-to-digest" world without them having to decide how the story flows. The end result is that I start each session allowing the players to decide what they want to do, just to see if they want to involve themselves in the world or their backstories,and they always just walk up to the nearest NPC they can find and ask, "Hey, what can I kill for money?"

...and that is why I always have a pre-made dungeon ready to go regardless of what's going on in the story.

[Sigreid]

To me, backstory is not prime. I want players who bring characters that have some goals. Your past is all fine and all but I'll have a much easier time doing my bit if I don't have to create the objective and the challenges.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Think of it as backstories set up the future.

A player who does work up a decent backstory is probably into that type of thing and will be engaged in a game which involves it.

When DMing our goal is to make an enjoyable playing experience for everyone so while the backstory of 1/6th of the participants can't be 6/6th of the time it should be taken into account.

When we/they goof and close out their story keep in mind there is always that next chapter.

[Zhorn]

I like to use my players' backstories, but I don't do all the work for them. I'll throw out a small plot hook now and then, but if they don't bite, I move on with the main adventure.
Also, if a player doesn't try to use their backstory themselves, it has less chance of me making a larger deal out of it.

jump to 11:10 for the big one, but the whole video is solid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j43ukEIFUM

[Keravath]

Think of it as backstories set up the future.

A player who does work up a decent backstory is probably into that type of thing and will be engaged in a game which involves it.

When DMing our goal is to make an enjoyable playing experience for everyone so while the backstory of 1/6th of the participants can't be 6/6th of the time it should be taken into account.

When we/they goof and close out their story keep in mind there is always that next chapter.

Most of the time no :), it isn't worth tying in specific character backstories unless planned from the beginning. Keep in mind that the character stories are just single threads in a tapestry that could contain millions. What makes their backstories so much MORE significant than anyone else's?

Depending on a specific backstory element there may be opportunities for future interactions. However, it really needs to tie into the threads and plots of the game world or it will not feel natural.

For example, the third born son of a foreign noble seeking his fortune in distant lands. There is absolutely no reason for his backstory to enter into whatever the current plot line is unless the DM actually wants to create a storyline related to the backstory and whether that would be of any interest to the rest of the group or whether it would even lead to the splitting of the group.

Example: DM thinks it would be cool if third born son has a backstory connected plot element. Perhaps his family has died and he is now heir. The party is ambushed by assassins trying to kill this character. No direct information is found regarding why. Maybe a hint about something from home. The party continues with their current quest. Maybe some messenger arrives. Character needs to decide whether to return home or adventure with their new buddies. Some buddies want to go, others in character don't want to. Either the character with backstory plot decides to follow up and possibly splits the party or everyone decides to hike over to the other continent. Tying in this character's backstory really just doesn't work well for geographical reasons.

Similar issues come up with other character backstories for philosophical reasons, relationship reasons, logical reasons - plus, each character has their own backstory - fairness enters into it too in the sense that some players might be bothered by playing multiple sessions where the focus is on one particular player/character's backstory.

Yes, there are times when tying in a particular character's backstory into an ongoing plot line causing an Aha! moment can be a lot of fun but diverting the course of the adventure for player specific background sidequests can be much more iffy.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Most of the time no :), it isn't worth tying in specific character backstories unless planned from the beginning. Keep in mind that the character stories are just single threads in a tapestry that could contain millions. What makes their backstories so much MORE significant than anyone else's?

Depending on a specific backstory element there may be opportunities for future interactions. However, it really needs to tie into the threads and plots of the game world or it will not feel natural.

For example, the third born son of a foreign noble seeking his fortune in distant lands. There is absolutely no reason for his backstory to enter into whatever the current plot line is unless the DM actually wants to create a storyline related to the backstory and whether that would be of any interest to the rest of the group or whether it would even lead to the splitting of the group.

Example: DM thinks it would be cool if third born son has a backstory connected plot element. Perhaps his family has died and he is now heir. The party is ambushed by assassins trying to kill this character. No direct information is found regarding why. Maybe a hint about something from home. The party continues with their current quest. Maybe some messenger arrives. Character needs to decide whether to return home or adventure with their new buddies. Some buddies want to go, others in character don't want to. Either the character with backstory plot decides to follow up and possibly splits the party or everyone decides to hike over to the other continent. Tying in this character's backstory really just doesn't work well for geographical reasons.

Similar issues come up with other character backstories for philosophical reasons, relationship reasons, logical reasons - plus, each character has their own backstory - fairness enters into it too in the sense that some players might be bothered by playing multiple sessions where the focus is on one particular player/character's backstory.

Yes, there are times when tying in a particular character's backstory into an ongoing plot line causing an Aha! moment can be a lot of fun but diverting the course of the adventure for player specific background sidequests can be much more iffy.

I guess. To make sure we aren't talking past eachother accidentally. I'm talking about things like making the mercenary group who killed the father of a player the same group hired by a bad guy or even neutral NPC in my world.

Or having the cult one of my player's PCs escaped joining turn up in the town they seemed to make their base in and be the kidnappers who have been making villagers disappear.

Have a module with some Giants being motivated by Drow? Have a powerful Lord from a player's backstory be the one who hired the Drow.

[Tanarii]

The story you wrote up about your character's history is fine and dandy ... for you. I'm sure you had fun doing it. But the only story that matters to the group is the ones you tell after a fun session. The only character development that matters to the group is what happens in play

If you want me to use something as an adventure hook put it in your personality traits. Especially Bond. It's basically the "DM hook" trait.

[Asensur]

My players make their own backstories, but I modify them to fit the campaign hook (and also delete main character syndrome flags)

I always ensure that my players give me the OK of their final background before starting.

[Keravath]

I guess. To make sure we aren't talking past eachother accidentally. I'm talking about things like making the mercenary group who killed the father of a player the same group hired by a bad guy or even neutral NPC in my world.

Or having the cult one of my player's PCs escaped joining turn up in the town they seemed to make their base in and be the kidnappers who have been making villagers disappear.

Have a module with some Giants being motivated by Drow? Have a powerful Lord from a player's backstory be the one who hired the Drow.

I might do any of these in a game but ONLY if they made sense in the context of the game world state and story line.

This may have to do with how individual DMs go about creating their game worlds. I tend to use a top down method that sketches the geography, politics, large scale interactions and some of the events that are occurring on a large scale. i.e. what is the world like, what is going on, who are the players? There is very little detail at this level, just general aims/concepts.

Then focus on the region where the campaign starts. What role does the thread of the characters play in the world tapastry? Where do they start? Where are they going? What might they meet along the way? What events on the grand scale might provide local interactions?

Add more detail, the closer the scale gets to where the players are. Who are the local NPCs, how do they tie into the overall stories of the world (and there is always more than just one), how will they interact with the characters?

After this, depending on the decisions of the characters there may be any number of social or combat encounters they could run into depending on which direction they go, what information they uncover and what decisions they decide to make. They could interact with one or more of the already established storylines or their actions may trigger some creative ideas and result in additional storylines coming up spontaneously.

If there are elements in a character backstory that could tie into the greater happenings in the world, I might include a reference or tie in for fun, sometimes it might lead to an entire subquest/side quest/adventure. Other times it might just be a coincidental reference but it is inserted in such a way that the character feels "cool" but the rest of the party doesn't feel the other character is "special". In addition, such plot elements are only inserted if it makes logical sense without stretching the edges of the willing suspension of disbelief (unless there is a very good in game explanation for the events).

e.g. "mercenary group who killed the father of a player the same group hired by a bad guy or even neutral NPC in my world."

Are you in the same geographical area? Is the mercenary group so large and well known that they would be hired by important NPCs? If they are that well known why haven't they been wiped out by either authorities or other mercenaries? If they aren't that famous why did this NPC hire them? Mercenaries aren't usually assassins .. if they killed someone's father was it while performing their duties? Or did they do something evil/bad/wrong? Basically, does it make sense for this particular mercenary band to cross paths with the PC? Does it fall within the realm of reasonable coincidence? Are these even the same people as killed the character's father?

e.g. "Or having the cult one of my player's PCs escaped joining turn up in the town they seemed to make their base in and be the kidnappers who have been making villagers disappear."

Does this make sense geographically? Is the PC still near home or is the cult widespread? How large IS this cult? Is this town their only base or do they have one in every large town? (The latter makes it more likely to cross their path but this also makes the cult a major player and plot driver in the game world ... since they are large and well organized). Is the cult trying to remain hidden? If so, why are they "making villagers disappear"? If trying to remain hidden the cult would not leave clues and would leave alternate explanations for the disappearances. Also, once brain washed (assuming the kidnappings are for recruitment) most of the new followers might be returned to their previous places and told to just act normally (except come out to the meetings of their local cult cell ... pot luck Friday nights with their new "friends" if anyone asks). Could be a cool plot line but again it needs to make sense in the context of the world as a whole. A small cult for example is far less likely to operate in a town since they wouldn't have the implanted agents/facilities/hidden basements/infrastructure to hold new recruits while being indoctrinated. For a small group, an isolated location outside of a town would make more sense.


e.g. "Have a module with some Giants being motivated by Drow? Have a powerful Lord from a player's backstory be the one who hired the Drow."

I probably wouldn't use this one since it is too convoluted and difficult to put together. Drow being hired? Doesn't really fit with their lore for most of them though maybe some drow renegades? Giants listening or even paying any attention to anything a drow wants? Seems to me more likely the giants might thump the drow unless the giants were getting something for it. On the other hand, perhaps in your game world, drow are easily hired renegades or mercenaries while the giants have an ongoing alliance with the drow. However, tying in why a possible human/dwarf/elf lord might want to deal with drow to hire the giants to do something is a bit of a stretch and add in the fact that one of the characters is familiar with and has intereacted with this lord in the past? Also seems a bit of a stretch. This particular choice of hook could place a large number of constraints on the game world - lords, drow, giants - and how these factions interact with the world, each other and the PCs. All of this so that a lord known to one of the PCs gets their name in the plot line? As I said, I'd probably avoid this one entirely.


Anyway, I think the different attitudes and approaches to plot hooks may ultimately come down to the different approaches to world building.

[Randomthom]

In my new-ish game I told the players about the central plot (without much detail) and about some of the key players and told them that if they wanted their character backstory to be included in the future of the game then they should keep them close to the central plot. There's no mention of Demons etc. so if your backstory wants us to go running off into the abyss then it's not going to happen.

All the players have complied, some with a little back-&-forth and some extra world design I wasn't planning on but makes perfect sense.

If you're running a game where you provide the core story then do that and don't be embarrassed to tell the players to keep backstories simple as they won't be addressed, it's not wrong, it's just your game! :)

[Chugger]

I really don't like backstories much. As a DM they're very hard to use in a meaningful way in the story I'm trying to build in a cooperative way w/ the player. If you think about it, backstories and adventures are necessarily like oil and water. They don't really mix (as a quirk I suppose they rarely can).

Why do I say this? As a storyteller/DM I'm building an exciting adventure - I necessarily have to keep most of it hidden from the players. Even if individualistic and independent players wanted to limit their backstories to what I said, I'd be reluctant to give them much info. Backstories come from the players' minds with no clue what the adventure is going to be. So it really is hard to impossible to incorporate their backstories in a meaningful way into the adventure. It can be done in a less-than meaningful way, yes, but I feel that's just tossing the player a bone. I worry it's disingenuous.

I suppose if I told the players "if you want your backstories to factor into the campaign your character needs to be _____, _____, or ______ --- you're free to make any backstory you want within reason, but I can only work your backstory in if you follow this guideline." That might work. If I'm careful about what the guideline is, maybe I won't give away too much and ruin surprises.

But here's another problem with backstories. They're almost never dynamic or having that potential. They're a story - a past event - a thing that's mostly OVER - "well but I was traumatized when the orcs burned my house down - it makes me kind of emo" - yeah fine sure. I try, when I play, to create a personality for my characters - and if I make a backstory at all, I try to keep it one sentence long. I've met many players who create elaborate (and mostly useless) backstories but never create a unique and fascinating _personality_ for their chars. Backstory imho is so so SO overrated. A great personality is the name of the game, if you ask me. Character personality is role-playing gold, no platinum. And diamonds, lots of diamonds.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I really don't like backstories much. As a DM they're very hard to use in a meaningful way in the story I'm trying to build in a cooperative way w/ the player. If you think about it, backstories and adventures are necessarily like oil and water. They don't really mix (as a quirk I suppose they rarely can).

Why do I say this? As a storyteller/DM I'm building an exciting adventure - I necessarily have to keep most of it hidden from the players. Even if individualistic and independent players wanted to limit their backstories to what I said, I'd be reluctant to give them much info. Backstories come from the players' minds with no clue what the adventure is going to be. So it really is hard to impossible to incorporate their backstories in a meaningful way into the adventure. It can be done in a less-than meaningful way, yes, but I feel that's just tossing the player a bone. I worry it's disingenuous.

I suppose if I told the players "if you want your backstories to factor into the campaign your character needs to be _____, _____, or ______ --- you're free to make any backstory you want within reason, but I can only work your backstory in if you follow this guideline." That might work. If I'm careful about what the guideline is, maybe I won't give away too much and ruin surprises.

But here's another problem with backstories. They're almost never dynamic or having that potential. They're a story - a past event - a thing that's mostly OVER - "well but I was traumatized when the orcs burned my house down - it makes me kind of emo" - yeah fine sure. I try, when I play, to create a personality for my characters - and if I make a backstory at all, I try to keep it one sentence long. I've met many players who create elaborate (and mostly useless) backstories but never create a unique and fascinating _personality_ for their chars. Backstory imho is so so SO overrated. A great personality is the name of the game, if you ask me. Character personality is role-playing gold, no platinum. And diamonds, lots of diamonds.

Naturally I think my stories are the moat interesting ones also.

Next time a player has an "Orcs burnt my village" backstory when it comes time to see an Orc in your campaign have some tie in. It can be one that doesn't really change your plan either. Just a "you recognize the scar n the one who set fire to YOUR home" or "they describe an Orc scarred in a menner idential to the one who killed your beother!" and have that one try to flee or be the one holding the scroll the party needs or whatever.

Battlestar involved none of my backstory and I love it. I just love the way players sit up straighter and pay more attention when I show them I care as a DM.

[Chronos]

It's a two-way street. The DM should use hooks from the characters' backstories, but the player should try to write their backstories in a way that accommodates the DM's world.

For instance, part of my rogue's backstory was that he had found half of an ancient map, and wanted to find the other half. I expected that, if he ever succeeded, it would lead to something, but I deliberately left it wide open what it would lead to-- Maybe a dungeon (which could have led anywhere), maybe a buried treasure (which could have been anything), whatever. As it turned out, when he did find the other half, it wasn't a map at all, but a magically-disguised scroll of an ancient Macguffin ritual the DM wanted us to find.

Or, for my ranger, it's inherent to the character that he comes from a nation of gnomes, and that he's super-patriotic and rather racist. So I asked the DM if his world already had a nation of gnomes-- If it did, I would have used that. It didn't, and so I created my own gnomish nation, but even then, I made it an island nation, so it could fit in at a pretty much arbitrary location on the map, if it ever became relevant where it was.