Is 750 word too long for a backstory?

[Warder]

The simple truth is that no backstory is too long. You can get into your third cousin's favorite ice cream flavor in your backstory if you like and that is perfectly fine - don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

That having been said, what you have to remember if you write a long backstory is that you're doing it for yourself, no one else, and the love and care and thoughtful planning you pour into your 10 page masterpiece most likely will not evoke the same reactions in other people; they don't have your connection to your character, simple as that. So a core part of writing long backstories is making a TL;DR for your GM - a list of bullet points or a 1-2 paragraph summary of important points, and that is what you give to them to read. If they want to read your whole story, fantastic, but don't expect them to. Instead, treat your long version as inspiration for yourself when it comes to actually roleplaying your character.

[Batcathat]

Give your GM the Sparknotes version, because they probably won't have time to read a mini-essay for every character before the first session.

Even if the GM isn't a very fast reader, reading 750 words is like two minutes. So even if the entire party have those, it's not really that time consuming.

[Rynjin]

Even if the GM isn't a very fast reader, reading 750 words is like two minutes. So even if the entire party have those, it's not really that time consuming.

Being brutally honest, the issue is not really the length, but the fact that most players are not actually very good writers, and tend to bury the relevant information in irrelevant details and painful prose such that your eyes glaze over when word counts get this bloated.

I tell my players to give me like 100 words, or format it such that it reads less like a "story" and more like a list of details broken up into different brackets...if they want to write one at all.

When I hear "750 word backstory" what that actually reads to me is "wall of text that in the grand scheme doesn't contain anything of value". We've all written them; my first character backstory was just shy of 2000 words (1983 to be exact). Do you know how many words were actually relevant?

Just about 200; 100 for the basics of the backstory (born to a merchant family, traumatic event ensues), and another 100 for the personality section (proud, ruthless, honorable).

As you can see, I was able to distill it down to just 11 words and you probably get the shape of who this character is regardless.

[Mastikator]

Even if the GM isn't a very fast reader, reading 750 words is like two minutes. So even if the entire party have those, it's not really that time consuming.

I think the issue is be that it might be boring. A long backstory should be packed with hooks and dynamite that the DM can easily use. Most backstories I've seen have been written in a vacuum, my instinct as a DM is to put the backstory into the context of the campaign setting, your character didn't just grow up in some village but a village the party can visit, your characters childhood friends should be NPCs that the other players can interact with. And to get to that part I have to change stuff about a PCs backstory, and that makes me unhappy.

Don't just write it by yourself and then dump it on me, tell me the idea, receive feedback from the DM and then write it.

[Rynjin]

I think the issue is be that it might be boring. A long backstory should be packed with hooks and dynamite that the DM can easily use. Most backstories I've seen have been written in a vacuum, my instinct as a DM is to put the backstory into the context of the campaign setting, your character didn't just grow up in some village but a village the party can visit, your characters childhood friends should be NPCs that the other players can interact with. And to get to that part I have to change stuff about a PCs backstory, and that makes me unhappy.

Don't just write it by yourself and then dump it on me, tell me the idea, receive feedback from the DM and then write it.

Now, see, THIS I like. Especially when I'm making a whole setting from scratch, or semi-scratch.

I encourage players to create their own towns and villages, even cities and counties depending on how incomplete the setting is. Helps them feel more invested.

[Batcathat]

Being brutally honest, the issue is not really the length, but the fact that most players are not actually very good writers, and tend to bury the relevant information in irrelevant details and painful prose such that your eyes glaze over when word counts get this bloated.

Sure, that's probably pretty likely, not everyone is a good and/or imaginative writer. But if I have to read 750 words (per player) of boring prose with maybe the occasional nugget of gold, that's still not really that big of an investment. I certainly wouldn't demand that length, but I fail to see how it'd be much of a problem either.

[Silly Name]

Word-count, by itself, usually isn't a problem with me unless you're submitting a novella. 750 words is a pretty quick read overall, and I would never penalise anyone for being a little bit more prosaic than others. And as long as you've used proper punctuation and grammar (and paragraph breaks), I don't really care about the quality of the prose.

What I care about is the information contained within the backstory, and word count has nothing to do with that. Maybe you wanted your character to have a big family and you spent a couple paragraph describing your siblings -that's ok! That's more NPCs and potential plot hooks, stuff that ties your character to the world and gives you reason to care!

Did you write about an important experience in your character's life that shaped how they think and act? That's cool! It gives me insight on how the character thinks and what their values are, and, again, usually leads to having at least one "link" between the character and the world, whether it's an old mentor, a personal enemy or a philosophical stance.

The few things that could really get me upset are "main character syndrome" (it's ok if your character has a very important personal mission, but it shouldn't be framed in a way that makes it the main mover of the story), and having to read through information-less slogs: have you ever met someone who talked a lot without really saying anything of substance? That gets me annoyed. Like, if your 1000-words backstory spends more time describing minute, pointless details than actual events and characters in your PC's past, yeah, that's annoying to read through.

I would also go against the idea that "novice"/level 1 characters shouldn't have anything important in their background. While obviously you shouldn't write about how your level 1 fighter slew a dozen dragons, that doesn't mean his life has had to be boring and uninteresting before the start of the game. What's important is that the stuff the character has dealt with is commensurate to their starting level, that's all. And, hey, maybe you did met with something big and bad... and you ran away from it!

[MoiMagnus]

Well, look at that. the other day I was writing about writers-block and today I had a surge of inspiration and wrote 750 words of backstory. Before I hit my poor DM with that: Is that too much? What is your preferred backstory-length? I know that this will vary from group to group, but I would like to know!

also, thanks to all the people who gave me tips about writer-block in the other thread :)

First, let's make it clear: When you have a surge of inspiration, use it. At worse, it's training for being better at writing. But there is some good change that even if you don't give it to your GM, it helps you to play your character in a more interesting way.

Then, do you "hit your poor DM" with it? Well, at the very list please do some editing on it so that it's not a big paragraph of 750 words totally unreadable. But IMO:
+ That's might be too much for before the first "real session". In general, I prefer characters that are not "written in stone" an can adapt a little their past for the group dynamics to be better.
+ That's absolutely great past that for me.

[Cheesegear]

Give your GM the Sparknotes version, because they probably won't have time to read a mini-essay for every character before the first session.

There is a world of difference between;

'*Record Scratch* I bet you're wondering how I got here? The Duke sent his men to kill my mother and father, who were spies for a different ruler, I swore vengeance. However there may be political complexities in their deaths that I don't fully know about nor understand - they were spies, after all. I just know that they were my parents. However, I can't just go storming the Keep. I need allies and funds. Maybe a magic item or two. If I can, I might even try raising a militia. So here I am. Let's adventure!'

Perfect! I count at least three adventure hooks in those few sentences - I might even use one of them!

And...

'...It was a dark and spooky night, spooky men dressed in spooky clothes approached the house. At the time, my mother was reading me a bedtime story - Jack the Giant Slayer. Her name was Barbara - Babs, to her friends. She was a seamstress by trade, and my father was a Baker....
[700. Words. Later.]
...And that's when I swore I vengeance on the Duke.'

[Mastikator]

Now, see, THIS I like. Especially when I'm making a whole setting from scratch, or semi-scratch.

I encourage players to create their own towns and villages, even cities and counties depending on how incomplete the setting is. Helps them feel more invested.

Indeed, but it takes DM collaboration for that. Without the DM's help the PC's backstory will feel out of place. Which is why short backstories are so much more robust, a small enough peg can fit in any hole. And then you expand it during play

[Grod_The_Giant]

For whatever it's worth, I think my favorite approach to backstories was the Dresden Files RPG. In addition to the usual prompts, it asked everyone to come up with a full "first book in the series" adventure--and then turn to the players next to them. The person on your right played a role in your adventure, while you did the same for the player on the left. It let you start the game with a whole series of organic connections between characters, and helped make it feel like a *party* from minute one.

Backstories are for the player who writes them.

This is also an important point. You can figure out a lot about a character's personality and values in the process.

[False God]

Indeed, but it takes DM collaboration for that. Without the DM's help the PC's backstory will feel out of place. Which is why short backstories are so much more robust, a small enough peg can fit in any hole. And then you expand it during play

I think this depends a lot on the campaign world. If your whole world is filled in already, then yeah, a player bringing unexpected details is going to be troublesome. But by the same token, if your world has open space, players can bring ideas you would never have thought of.

[Tanarii]

Sure, that's probably pretty likely, not everyone is a good and/or imaginative writer. But if I have to read 750 words (per player) of boring prose with maybe the occasional nugget of gold, that's still not really that big of an investment. I certainly wouldn't demand that length, but I fail to see how it'd be much of a problem either.

It's the mindset. A player that thinks a backstory is useful is very likely one that doesn't understand what is necessary key information to develop for a new character they bring to the table, and also likely fails to understand that only what is established at the table has actually occurred for sure. One that understands motivations for what they're going to do and establish at the table is the useful character development is a player that is headed in the right direction.

Backstories are an outmoded concept, and one that modern game system have quite rightly moved away from. The Mutant Year Zero engine and D&D 5e (the PHB, not Xanathar's) are both good examples of properly establishing motivations. I haven't seen it in PF2 yet but I'm still wading through the bajillion pages of feats.

[KorvinStarmast]

1. Who are you? Where do you come from?
2. Why are you here? What are you looking for?
3. Where are you going? What are your goals?

That can take a paragraph or a page to describe.

If a player can answer these three questions, in the first 10 minutes of session 1, in-narrative or OOC, then their backstory is irrelevant.

Not really; but doing that helps both the DM and the player to make sure the character is a good fit for the world that all of the players are in.

Very, very, very rarely have I even seen a player integrate their backstory into the narrative.

I do it all the time. I work with my DMs/GMs. They have final editorial blue pencil, as the world builders.

If your backstory is longer than a single page, though...I'm almost definitely not even going to read it. That's too much detail for something that didn't even happen at the table.

A single page is usually enough space if the person writing it can write well. Heck, it's often more than enough.

Don't just write it by yourself and then dump it on me, tell me the idea, receive feedback from the DM and then write it.

This is what I do, and I ask my players to do the same for me as a DM. Some players do, which is great, and some can't be bothered, which is a disappointment. Our Salt Marsh campaign has 4 of 6 who bothered to, and I really appreciated that. One has had to drop out due to real life, so I now have 3 of 5 who worked with me to make the back story fit into the world and how (and why) they arrived in some place to start their adventures.

Now, see, THIS I like. Especially when I'm making a whole setting from scratch, or semi-scratch. I encourage players to create their own towns and villages, even cities and counties depending on how incomplete the setting is. Helps them feel more invested.

As long as the GM has the latitude to fold that into the world and, if needed, do a bit of polish that ensures that the town/village fits the player background and the world itself.

First, let's make it clear: When you have a surge of inspiration, use it.

Yes, and it never hurts to, after putting a page and a half together, take a look at it a day or two later and maybe tighten it up a bit. Depends on the writing quality.

Indeed, but it takes DM collaboration for that. Without the DM's help the PC's backstory will feel out of place. Which is why short backstories are so much more robust, a small enough peg can fit in any hole. And then you expand it during play

That's pretty good advice.

I think this depends a lot on the campaign world. If your whole world is filled in already, then yeah, a player bringing unexpected details is going to be troublesome. But by the same token, if your world has open space, players can bring ideas you would never have thought of.

Seen both ends of that spectrum.

For the OP: three to five sentences to describe who the PC is and why they are adventuring is a good framework. If you want to grow that into to 2 to 4 paragraphs to flesh that out (to make the character a bit more three dimensional) probably doesn't hurt but as you get to page length I'd make sure to check with the GM/DM to ensure that it fits 'the world as it is' before going further.

But most importantly: why are you asking the strangers on the internet? You should be asking your DM/GM this very question. "How much backstory do you want?" Then, if you have written a lot more than that, trim it to meet the GM's needs/desires.

[Batcathat]

It's the mindset. A player that thinks a backstory is useful is very likely one that doesn't understand what is necessary key information to develop for a new character they bring to the table, and also likely fails to understand that only what is established at the table has actually occurred for sure. One that understands motivations for what they're going to do and establish at the table is the useful character development is a player that is headed in the right direction.

Backstories are an outmoded concept, and one that modern game system have quite rightly moved away from. The Mutant Year Zero engine and D&D 5e (the PHB, not Xanathar's) are both good examples of properly establishing motivations. I haven't seen it in PF2 yet but I'm still wading through the bajillion pages of feats.

Why treat backstories and motivations as separate (or even opposed to each other?) when they're usually anything but? Yes, motivations are what impacts the game in the present, but a backstory can explain and expand upon those motivations. You seem to argue that a player interested in exploring where their character has been can't also look where they're going, but that's never been my experience.

Take Spider-Man, for example (man, I'm sure using him a lot in discussions lately, what's up with that? ). His motivation can be conveniently summed up with his "With great power comes great responsibility" catchphrase, but I'd argue that he's a more interesting character (whether to read about or to play) if we know why he feels like that.

[Tanarii]

Why treat backstories and motivations as separate (or even opposed to each other?) when they're usually anything but? Yes, motivations are what impacts the game in the present, but a backstory can explain and expand upon those motivations. You seem to argue that a player interested in exploring where their character has been can't also look where they're going, but that's never been my experience.

Because my experience shows me that they're far more interested in establishing history and/or writing a mini-story than they are are clearly delineating the motivations. An itemized list of one sentence motivations (which may include embedded personality traits and/or history) is both far more easily reviewable before a session as a reminder, and demonstrates they get it.

Take Spider-Man, for example (man, I'm sure using him a lot in discussions lately, what's up with that? ). His motivation can be conveniently summed up with his "With great power comes great responsibility" catchphrase, but I'd argue that he's a more interesting character (whether to read about or to play) if we know why he feels like that.

Spiderman and any other book or comic book character is a great example of what I'm talking about. If you need to write a comic book's books worth of panels in prose to establish your character, something has gone wrong and you're focused on the wrong thing. Give me no more than 5-6 bullet points of single sentence motivations.

Let's do it with Spider Man in 5e format:

Personality: I'm bookish and unassuming, and generally don't stand up for myself
Ideal: With great power comes great responsibility (Good)
Bond: After my uncle died due to a mistake I made, I will do anything to protect my aunt May
Flaw: A threat to Mary Jane will distract me from a task or mission

(looked it up, 750 words translates to about 8 pages of comic book)

[Batcathat]

Because my experience shows me that they're far more interested in establishing history and/or writing a mini-story than they are are clearly delineating the motivations. An itemized list of one sentence motivations (which may include embedded personality traits and/or history) is both far more easily reviewable before a session as a reminder, and demonstrates they get it.

I can't exactly argue against your experiences, but my own is more or less the opposite. The people who write a backstory tend to have an actual thought-out character, beyond just some self-insert or Generic Hero Personality.

That said, a list of motivations does sound like a good idea, I just don't think it should be used instead of a backstory.

[JNAProductions]

I can't exactly argue against your experiences, but my own is more or less the opposite. The people who write a backstory tend to have an actual thought-out character, beyond just some self-insert or Generic Hero Personality.

That said, a list of motivations does sound like a good idea, I just don't think it should be used instead of a backstory.

Yee.

I will say, I used to be big on writing backstories and asking players for them, but after some experiences with my friend who could roleplay the ever-loving hell out of maybe two sentences written beforehand... It seemed less important to have that backstory.

I still write my own, but I keep 'em not too long. Couple paragraphs.

[Batcathat]

If you need to write a comic book's books worth of panels in prose to establish your character, something has gone wrong and you're focused on the wrong thing.

Again, if that's your experience, I can't exactly say you're wrong, but it's certainly not some objective reality. Yes, the 5e list does give a decent idea about Spider-Man's motivations (and would be good to have as a quick reminder) but I don't think it'd give me the same feel for the character as an actually written out backstory and I certainly don't think it's somehow worse to have one.

[Cheesegear]

I've also been burned several times by 'cool' backstories that the players simply can't deliver on.

Yeah, when there are no other players, no DM, and definitely no dice involved, you can write the coolest character ever who can do the coolest things.

But when push comes to shove, when the DM tells you 'Uhhh...Maybe not?' when other players want to do things that you're not good at, when the dice say that you simply fail...Suddenly you're not so cool anymore. You - the player - don't have the real world Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma to pull off playing the character that you have in your head. I know you've seen a movie, I know you've watched an animoo. But you - the player - don't have the...Personality...To be able to do that. To be that guy - not even pretend.

Keep your personality simple - for your sake.

I will say, I used to be big on writing backstories and asking players for them, but after some experiences with my friend who could roleplay the ever-loving hell out of maybe two sentences written beforehand... It seemed less important to have that backstory.

Right. I don't care if you write a backstory. I want you to have a clear idea of how you're going to play your character. If it takes a few sentences, that's okay. If it takes a page...I might read it. Is it good? If it's over a page, just to get an idea of who you want to be? ...I don't need to read that. Whatever plot hooks you have, just tell them to me. Whatever personality you have, play that. If your backstory is over a page long, I guarantee that about 90% of it doesn't need to be there.

I don't care if you write it, for yourself. But that's not something I want to read. I have four or five other players who all want their stories read and they're all going to have to mesh in some way, shape or form. The more specific you get, the harder that job is going to be. Keep it general. Keep it simple.

I don't know why anyone needs to write more than a paragraph or two to understand their own character. Besides, almost anything about your character could change in the very first session, the second you find out that your funny meme joke is only funny exactly once. And, as I said, sometimes you simply can't deliver on the character you want to be.

[Tanarii]

Again, if that's your experience, I can't exactly say you're wrong, but it's certainly not some objective reality. Yes, the 5e list does give a decent idea about Spider-Man's motivations (and would be good to have as a quick reminder) but I don't think it'd give me the same feel for the character as an actually written out backstory and I certainly don't think it's somehow worse to have one.

It's worse because it's usually a replacement for motivation list, a focus on the wrong thing (backwards history instead of forwards play sessions; protagonist syndrome), and usually key campaign-touching points developed without DM input (who doesn't want to have to read this barely readable prose) are considered canon in the players head.

If a player has character history they want to make canon, I want a bullet point list to approve or disapprove. Not a self-imagined writer's torturing of the language. I also don't want to see the beginnings of that book they've inevitably got tucked away to finish some day and publish.

Edit: it's slightly possible I may have been marred by TSR-era "roleplaying" elitists and their backstories hahahaha

[Grod_The_Giant]

But when push comes to shove, when the DM tells you 'Uhhh...Maybe not?' when other players want to do things that you're not good at, when the dice say that you simply fail...Suddenly you're not so cool anymore. You - the player - don't have the real world Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma to pull off playing the character that you have in your head. I know you've seen a movie, I know you've watched an animoo. But you - the player - don't have the...Personality...To be able to do that. To be that guy - not even pretend.

That's not a failure of backstory, though-- that's a failure of GMing. Either they didn't communicate the style of game they wanted and your character concept doesn't match the tone (by, say, trying to bring Conan to a game of commoners thrust into the spotlight), or they're failing at delivering the promised experience (by, say, having your badass super-spy trip over their own feet and faceplant when they fail to catch a fleeing foe).

[Vahnavoi]

Let me try to bring some order into this chaos:

A backstory is a textual play resource. For any such resource, answer following questions:

1) What is its gameplay function?
2) When are you going to write it?
3) Who is going to read it?
3.1) Who needs to read it?
4) When are they going to read it?

Some commentary on each:

For 1), form follows function. The two common functions are to entertain and to communicate information. These two aren't necessarily congruent, so remember: you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Efficient communication isn't necessarily entertaining, and entertaining communication is rarely efficient, so know which is more important. More directly relating to the thread title, for every piece of information, there's hard minimum of words you need based on natural language you're using. So pick what's important.

For 2), the big distinction is between before coming to the table and after you're at the table. Obviously, the more time you have before coming to the table, the longer you can go without spending playtime.

For 3), the options are yourself, your game master, and some or all of the other players. 3.1) is direct follow-up: figure out who is the most vital recipient and format your resource to their needs.

For 4), the big distinction is between before a game starts and during a game. Again, obviously, the more time other recipients have to read your text before the game starts, the longer and fancier you can go. If the text is instead meant to be read during the game, you have to fit it to the rhythm of gameplay. For slow-paced play-by-post, you can go longer, for fast-paced in-person games, shorter is better.

[Tawmis]

The thing I think is interesting is the GM's who don't really care about a character's backstory...

Because it won't impact the game they're about to GM.

These are players that are going to be literally spending endless hours, listening to you, the GM, weave a tale... and interact with that tale...

And yet as a GM, you won't give the same courtesy back, to read a back story, and see how you might fit it somewhere along the way.

[Tanarii]

These are players that are going to be literally spending endless hours, listening to you, the GM, weave a tale... and interact with that tale...

Hopefully not. That sounds painful. As a DM I'd rather provide necessary details of the situation, keep it the minimum needed to communicate that necessary information. And spend as little time as possible resolving their interactions with that situation. The game should be about their decisions and how they impact the adventure (and campaign), not them having to listen to me spending endless hours weaving a tale.

And yet as a GM, you won't give the same courtesy back, to read a back story, and see how you might fit it somewhere along the way.

As a courtesy for not inflicting endless hours of my weaving a tale, I expect them to make decisions and impact the adventure (and campaign) with them, at the table. Not give me homework. I've already got enough of that building a campaign for many players to bring any number of different characters they want to use.

[Kraynic]

The thing I think is interesting is the GM's who don't really care about a character's backstory...

Because it won't impact the game they're about to GM.

These are players that are going to be literally spending endless hours, listening to you, the GM, weave a tale... and interact with that tale...

And yet as a GM, you won't give the same courtesy back, to read a back story, and see how you might fit it somewhere along the way.

Hmm, I think it depends a lot on your experience with backstories.

As a GM:
I once ran a game that was going to mostly happen in a frontier setting. This was told to the players upfront, they were shown where on the map world map it would be set.

• One player made a backstory that I tried to weave in, but they complained about it. Why? Well, that would be due to them changing their backstory after giving it to me to read... without telling me...
• Another player in the same game wrote a backstory that included missing parents, and they told me at one point that they were upset that I didn't include that in the game. Their missing parents happened a decade and over a 1000 miles away in a sea port. Remember this game is set in a frontier setting. Without something horribly and obviously contrived, there is really zero chance of that bit of backstory having any relevance in the game setting.
• One player made a backstory that didn't contain anything that needed to be addressed by me. Pretty simple, so that character just got to grow and change from a basic beginning during play.
• One player got my assistance to create a backstory that would possibly come up in game. Pretty simple again, and after some time there was something from the background that came up in game.

As a player among other players:
I have played with people that have to have CONFLICT in their backstory because "conflict breeds drama". What it really does is cripple the party in social interactions because everyone the party meets already knows that one character that has somehow manage to piss off everyone. You know, I really wish the GM just hadn't read that one. Actually make that 2 or 3. One particular player I know seems to do this sort of thing about 50% of the time.


I am not obligated to read anything a player writes while running a game. If I do read something written by a player, I am not obligated to make it a part of the world/setting in which the characters operate. If I have been upfront with the setting of the game, then players should have an idea on how to start constructing one (and can ask if they want or need help). If a player writes a backstory and it really doesn't fit where the game is happening, I would honestly prefer to not see it at all.

I really don't care a lot about backstories either way (GM or player), because what is done going forward is most important to me. As a player entering a game, I am certainly hoping for a game that is much more interesting than any backstory I might come up with, and write up with character backstories mostly for me to have a frame of reference from which they will change and grow over the course of a game. As a GM, if I haven't created a game that is more interesting setting to explore than a character's backstory, then perhaps that player should seek out a better GM/game.

[Tawmis]

I should have been more clear - for myself, as a DM - I don't understand.
That is clearly not to say, my way is the right way. It's just the right way for me - and how I process stuff in my head.

Hopefully not. That sounds painful. As a DM I'd rather provide necessary details of the situation, keep it the minimum needed to communicate that necessary information. And spend as little time as possible resolving their interactions with that situation. The game should be about their decisions and how they impact the adventure (and campaign), not them having to listen to me spending endless hours weaving a tale.

Well, I am not sure how long your sessions are - but for example, in a 3 hour game (depending on the amount of players you have also) - you may, at the very least have talked 1.5 hours. With the other 1.5 hours being the players reacting. It's typically (again, varies on the group) - the DM weaving the tale, and the players reacting. So the DM describes a situation, "As you approach the castle, the sun setting behind it, you can see several guards posted along the wall." The players then react with the rogue saying, "Is there anything I can use for cover to stealth closer?" And you replying. Or players saying, "I attack with my flame blade, and rolled 17." And you replying if that hits or not, and flavoring it if that's your thing. As a DM, you're mostly doing the talking - whether it's describing the situation or replying to characters actions or questions or roleplaying the local smith NPC, etc.

As a courtesy for not inflicting endless hours of my weaving a tale, I expect them to make decisions and impact the adventure (and campaign) with them, at the table. Not give me homework. I've already got enough of that building a campaign for many players to bring any number of different characters they want to use.

Which is fine. Not saying your way is wrong.
I myself usually try to make some aspect of their background weave into the adventure somewhere down the line.
Even if it's just mentioning a friend that they mentioned in their background being somehow involved and renaming an NPC I had in mind to this friend.
Small tweaks that I think will spice up the adventure and make it more personal.
Again, this is just my thinking.

Hmm, I think it depends a lot on your experience with backstories.

101% true. It doesn't always work. It does truly depend on how the person writes their backstory.
Clearly if they write their backstory that they're this important chosen destiny person to be the sole person to slay Taimat... Yeah, that's not going to work.
But if they write about how they grew up, some friends they made along the way, how they became a (Fighter/Sorcerer/Wizard/etc) and some interesting characters in their background, I personally would try to inject their background stuff somewhere along the adventure.

[Batcathat]

101% true. It doesn't always work. It does truly depend on how the person writes their backstory.
Clearly if they write their backstory that they're this important chosen destiny person to be the sole person to slay Taimat... Yeah, that's not going to work.
But if they write about how they grew up, some friends they made along the way, how they became a (Fighter/Sorcerer/Wizard/etc) and some interesting characters in their background, I personally would try to inject their background stuff somewhere along the adventure.

In addition to this, I doubt players who write a somehow problematic backstory will be ideal players otherwise. I think it's a pretty good guess that the player who writes ten pages about how awesome their character is and all the cool things they've done won't suddenly be a humble team player when the game starts. Or that the player who writes two thousand words about how their character has suffered and how misunderstood (but cool!) they are won't suddenly develop an appropriate sense of drama in the actual game. And so on and so forth.

[False God]

To address the subject...

I always tell my players that I need "the basics", which is: all those goals and bonds and flaws lines filled out at a bare minimum. In many other systems, this information is mandatory, D&D is still a relatively low-RP system, requiring 90% of the RP to be done as a bonus fluff piece on the part of the players. For other systems, most of the character sheets include mandatory RP elements to be filled out, or the mechanics themselves determine the RP, or the RP determines the mechanics. "Fill out your character sheet fully." is not an optional rule. Unfortunately D&D does not make these elements mandatory. I do.

I encourage my players to write backstories. Your character is 18? 20? 45? Clearly They've led some kind of life up until this point. They've got 1 level of something. How did that happen? Was there a defining moment in their life, a time when they stood up to a local bully? It doesn't need to be exciting, maybe it was the time they realized they loved gardening. Heck, I don't even need to read it. I encourage them to do it for themselves to get a better feel for their character when it hits the table. These characters do not magically pop into existence on Session 1. They have lived lives in this world, maybe interesting ones, maybe mundane ones, and the player should know what kind of life that was.

If they do choose to write a backstory and they want me to read it, I'll tell them not to expect me to read any more than 4 pages. I expect it to be clearly written, using proper grammar and spelling, preferably typed, no less than 12-point Times New Roman (or comparable) font, with appropriate paragraph breaks. If they write more, they've been warned. If they write less, no biggie! And I always discuss with them if they're OK with me integrating what they wrote into the game, with the understanding I may take some liberties with the provided material. If they say "NO", that's fine! The backstory can still give me insight into them and their character.

I do tell them to keep the concept of the game in mind. I rarely need to work with people to ensure their backstory "fits". I find few people write anything that is so totally out of line with the game I am running as to require DM intervention. Though it happens from time to time, but I often find these folks will turn out to be troublesome players and I've had to remove a few folks who simply cannot be worked with.

[ciopo]

Is it for a homebrew/sandboxy campaign, or is it for playing some published module/adventure/whatchamacallit?

For playing in published adventures, backstories are irrelevant, they have 0% impact on the plot except for maybe being integrated as a reskin of this or that event that would have happened anyway.

For sandbox, I suppose it gives hooks. Even on the campaigns I played that weren't published material the past of the characters never really had as much importance than what happens at the table.

Sure, the quest giver for this or that errand might be Bob's uncle instead of random local noble #234 but there will still be errands be they randomly generated or hooked . To me it matters not it's what happens at the table that makes the character, not off screen information