PDA

View Full Version : Cultural Baggage- Imposing or Proper?



Neon Knight
2008-03-01, 10:31 PM
When creating a character, or more specifically, that character's background, one must examine the forces that have helped shape said individual into the being he is today.

I, however, have a guilty pleasure in this regard. I create not only a family, nor just an extended family, but an entire culture from which my characters hails. Whether it is the political makeup of an important trade town where a light-footed and keen eared rogue hails from, to the intrigues and spectacles of the court an eager Knight-Errant rides from, to the mysticism and practices of a nomadic tribe that a quiet hunter stalks from, I can't help but create entire regions and customs in the pasts of my characters.

I quite simply feel a knight of mine wouldn't have been the same character if I hadn't detailed the submissive and regimented nature of the populace's lives, and the brutal succession struggle in which both illegitimate and legitimate candidates had to have their claims backed with steel and soldiers to be taken seriously. It, in my mind, made the Knight's aggressive and controlling behavior more... reasonable? Believable? I don't know the right word, but I felt the character would have been damaged had these elements been removed or skipped over lightly.

And yet, I also feel that in doing so, and defining the flavor of entire regions and cultures, I am imposing on the DM and overextending my authority as a player. In addition, an excessive background is little more than a glorified info dump, something that has made many a reader groan when he discovers the novel he is reading has decided to spend some 7 pages in a row on nothing but past events.

So I cannot decide whether this impulse is virtue or vice, and would like to ask of the forum. Do you mind if players attempt to define or create regions/cultures for their characters?

Ponce
2008-03-01, 10:51 PM
It really depends on how much of the game world at large has actually been refined. If a DM has meticulously created an entire world for the campaign, or is running an established setting (FR, Eberron, etc) it is likely not appropriate to create entire nations for your character. In a more vaguely defined (and sufficiently large) setting, this is far more acceptable. In short, as a DM, I'm ecstatic when players go to such lengths to flesh out their characters, and am more than happy to do everything I can to include this new nation, or at least seek a compromise of some acceptable outcome. On the other hand, if this is impossible for the sake of continuity of the game world, I do expect the player to be more adapting to the world he is playing in.

Dr Bwaa
2008-03-01, 10:53 PM
I agree completely. It's harder to justify in a prebuilt world, but in any setting I've made up, there are always places open for new things to be thrown in, and the more details my PCs give me, the happier I am. It saves me from having to come up with every idea, and keeps things fresh. I love it.

LibraryOgre
2008-03-01, 10:58 PM
I agree completely. It's harder to justify in a prebuilt world, but in any setting I've made up, there are always places open for new things to be thrown in, and the more details my PCs give me, the happier I am. It saves me from having to come up with every idea, and keeps things fresh. I love it.

It can be done in a prebuilt world, depending on how much is prebuilt. For example, I had a character (http://www.editors-wastebasket.org/nexx/tsr/ghoruk.html) in an FR game where I wound up defining a substantial part of orcish culture in the Stonelands... it was a blank spot in the game that I filled in, and it let the GM have some good character hooks (before he killed me with a cuisinart rogue).

LoopyZebra
2008-03-01, 11:00 PM
Personally, I think it's cool in theory to design a culture to go along with a background. However, in practice, I find it feels imposing as a player, even if it breathes life into a background. That's mainly because the DM already has a preset definition of what the world is, and his setting may not allow for the culture/nation. It could also vary based on setting, as a DM with a less defined homebrew may seem more open to this sort of background. For example, making up a culture for a setting such as the Forgotten Realms is silly (in my opinion). Ultimately, although I like the process as a player, I feel like I'm stepping on the DM's toes, so I try to avoid it when possible.

However, as a DM, I find it useful and/or interesting when players flesh out their countries/cultures . Although I rarely (never) DM outside of my homebrew, which has relatively defined cultures already in place, it doesn't hurt when the player decides to flesh out a given region or culture. It can even help, leading to various plot hooks of their own, and spawning thought processes about the world itself. For example, the OP's knight's nation sounds interesting enough to be a permanent addition to a world, and the court intrigues could be the basis for an adventure or campaign on their own. Who knows, I may like their interpretation of a given culture better than my own.

However, I could easily see it being annoying if a player's created culture doesn't mesh well with a game, or contradicts pre-existing material. I've had the benefit of never having that particular problem. While my idea of a good DM would try and accommodate the player, it is easily imaginable to see a situation that is simply imposing. In this case, like in many others, the solution to the problem is player-DM communication. If a player wants to create a culture to build on their background, they should consult their DM to see if he's okay with it and try and work with him to incorporate it into the setting.

Isomenes
2008-03-01, 11:03 PM
I think you've got the right idea exactly. I explicitly asked my players to do some background work, and they've all come up with reasonable explanations about their places in the world. So instead of saying, "You can't do that because I've written X, Y, or Z in the campaign setting," I make room to allow them to make true statements about the world, and work my material around theirs. Now, where things go from there is another matter entirely :smallbiggrin:

horseboy
2008-03-02, 12:11 AM
In my last Rolemaster game the GM has us write up not our character backgrounds, but a 1 page summary of the town we were from. Then he took them and built a setting around them.

Alternately, even when you're working in an established setting, you can easily come up with areas that you can "write in" unique outlooks of places. There may be a size/power cap, but you can still get a unique culture in even the smallest town.

Chronos
2008-03-02, 12:22 AM
The way I see it, D&D is an exercise in collaborative storytelling. By creating a culture for your character's background, you're taking part in the telling. Nearly every world has some place where a new culture can be fit in on the map, and it expands the DM's options. If he likes the culture you built, he can incorporate it into other aspects of the game, and if he doesn't like it, he can say that that region is a neutral bystander in the events of the game, and more or less ignore it.

Kol Korran
2008-03-02, 06:17 AM
first of all- it's a blessed thing when a player goes into such depth over his character, especially when it enriches his roleplaying. however, i do get the possible conflict with the DM. in order to avoid it, here are afew suggestions:

1) the simplest thing- talk to your DM beforehand!
-try to learn as much as possbile of the campaign setting, and the campaign flavour, in order to get a feeling as to which areas and cultures are "acceptable", and which are not...
- when you allready have the core concept for your character, as well as some cultural background ideas (but before you've written the thesis "the main religiong's influence of the minorty groups, and national identity"), go to your DM, and try to work with him on possible elligable locations in the campaign setting. he might even suggest soem ideas you didn't think of, or find ways to integrate it all to the ongoing story, which will enrich the character even more. as Chronos sadi- "collaborative storytelling", it can extent to your character as well...
- if however, you're abubbling creative engine and the story and culture just pour out before you can talk with the DM, hold yourself at two points: names of major locations (countries, cities, institues), and people (king, army leader, and such)- this will faciliate placing your birthplace somewhere else.
- rigidity on scale- be prepared to scale down the scope of the region/ organzation you had your mind set on. a major city could become an importent border city. an astute university of magic could become a smaller enclave for the magically inclined and so on...
however- this could (and should), be avoided b taking to the DM before hand.

2) research the setting: this goes especailly for published worlds, but thereare some highly detailed homebrewed creations that are worht researching as well. one of my deidacted players used to skim over the Eberron book until he found some interesting reference, that wasn't throughly explored (a miltery order, a fringe group, some religion that isn't fully explained, a settlement with an interesting name and a paragraph detailing it). build up from there! rememebr - every culture has sub cultures, and every group has sub groups. thisway, most likely your character backgroudn will only expand on the "DM approved material" (which will probably delight him- you're evolving an obscure part of his campaign, not adding a whole new chunk he needs to think how to deal with).

3) the "non impactl cultural addition": this may not work for all character concept, but might work for some- the background cultural affect on your character doesn't have much chance to influence the rest of the world in a serious way (reclusive community/ monestery, traveling merchants/ nomads/ gypsies/ warriors for hire, a small criminal/ altruisitc organiation, that doesn't get much recognition, a large religious sect, that doesn'tget much respect from the genral populace). the idea is that whatever background it is, the DM doesn't need to worry how the various forces in the world must now deal with it. (or just mostly background. most DMs would use this to some extent)

4) final suggestion- if you are so bent on creating worlds, cultures, and more- why not try DMing? sure, it's not all that is needed, but it is a good start.

good luck to you

KIDS
2008-03-02, 07:13 AM
I am always in favor of people developing their own niches in regards to their background/style (as long as it doesn't give them unfair advantages such as free magic weapons or something).
But on the other hand, I dislike campaign settings and think they're mostly misused with their breadth of detail - the idea that this entire billion square kilometers continent has been all written over by cliched traderoutes and this and that nobility is distasteful to me. So obviously, like you I am going to be possibly conflicting with those who follow campaign setting books to the letter, with no room for new tribes, places or cultures.

So anyways, I would say that what you are doing is quite in-depth and enriching to the game, and as long as it is kept small scale (say, not whole nation, but one tribe, few families, one city, one place? yes!) it is very much a virtue and no one should have any complaints against it. Of course you have to watch that it does not become a "glorified info dump" as you called it, but since you are aware of it already that's not a problem.