This is why I love a simple, super short backstory that includes just enough to give an excuse for my character to be an adventurer, but without any real details that could get “screwed up.”
And this is why I do not get invested in a characters background. Or even in a character at all before quite a bit of play. I never expect a DM to actually use any backstory I write either. He has other players whos story might fit better in the game.
I do not even have any preferences for what race or class my characters are. I often walk into a game and ask the DM what he wants or doesn't want and then I ask the rest of the players what they are lacking.
More information is always helpful. Your situation reminds me of another post, a person who saw RPGing on the net and decided to go to a game at a library with her husband and encountered a series of problems and issues that were not like the net game. I have seen the same post pop up one multiple game company websites since sometime in the early 2010's so I do not know if it actually happened or was crafted to generate posts, but it did have some important points to provide people.
GM's are people too and had good days and bad days, just like players. New GM's can often think something may go one way and then they do not or think "I think this situation would be good for RPing and again it is not". So in general I recommend to try a few games with a GM unless it is blatantly clear there is an issue. Since you said the GM went on a rant, that tells me there is more going on (unless that is the persons normal personality).
GM Prep Time: When I first started I often spent 1-3 hours prepping for the game for every hour of game time. Later when I was doing more drama that jumped to 2-7 hours of prep per hour of game times with at times throwing away 10-20 hours of work because I realized it was bad. So I have often seen new GM's struggle with not knowing the rules for the encounter and the encounter should go this way and it does not go even close to what they envision(ie playing to a script) and just being overwhelmed with all the stuff a GM often has to do.
Thank you to the Op for posting a reply! With the extra information you provided, i can definitely tell that part of your frustration was ironically that you didn't feel like you or your group was getting challenged enough - almost like the DM was too eager to please, while not resolving disputes.
I generally appreciate players who take time to create backstories, and especially when there are actual living people and relationships in that backstory. In my own campaign i am bringing in quite a bit form back stories - even if it is simply the images that are beign brought up for characters when they becomes frightened from certain creatures who summon up their worst memories. But one thing I am always a little bit concerned about as a DM is the balance of things. So I will otherwise only fit in backstory elements when it makes sense rather than force it, and I do sometimes worry that players expect a certain amount of "backstory time" no matter what. That's why I as DM would expect a high degree of narrative control from the point where a backstory is "handed over" - so that it can be worked into the campaign in the best way possible.
To be fair, it sounds a bit like your backstory was shoe-horned in , almost as if to cross it off the list. So i understand your frustration, but also think it is important to recognise the challenge for DM's in managing a campaign, central story arch, side adventures, backstories, and other twists and turns! Key thing is that we are really all here to have fun - but everyone has a slight different idea of what that is!
To some extent I agree, but since I have been posting about RPG stuff since the late 90's I have also been repeatedly reminded that there are at least two sides to every story and to try and keep an open mind.
A good example was a person complaining about a organized rpg game and problems he had with the GM (and later it was found out GM's). The original post seemed to paint the GM as either having a bad day, stepping in on short notice or simply out of their depth as a GM. But after a couple of pages of posts being sympathetic to the player a better understanding of what was going on by the GM and fellow GM's and players posting about the player in question.
As I said since I have been playing a long time I prefer closer interaction with a player and Gm when creating backstories. To me this prevents any issues allows for a two way exchange of ideas (I prefer one on one) and can provide the GM with good info and possible game material.
I have also experienced a couple of players wanting to often force their background to be a focus of the game vs blending with the GM's story or in the direction the GM wants to take the game.
DM's perspective: That last part makes it hard for the DM because he has to juggle multiple player's wants and sometimes you do have players that think they should be the only focus. But, as a DM, I always try to tailor my campaigns around the players' stories. When I create a campaign I like to have a starting point and an ending point, or expected overarching plot...expected because players will go off in their own direction inevitably, but that is okay too. Everything in between is them trying to get to the end but also involves developing their character and wrapping up loose ends or tying those ends to the big bad somehow or coming to an end just before the big bad. I always try to make their story bigger than they expected, fulfilling and over many sessions with possibly tying different character backgrounds together, unknowingly to the players themselves and creating an "aha" moment. Finally, as a DM, I pay close attention to interactions PCs have with other PCs because some of the best story ideas comes from things they say to each other in character or out of character. I don't know how many times a PC has joked about a plot twist where I took the idea and ran with it.
I would say you may have lucked out that the group kind of fell apart because it gives you a chance to try that backstory again, but maybe give the next DM a bullet point outline of things with highlighting points such as your new identity and your character's attempt at recompense. You can give a full backstory as well, but attach the bullet points to it. I always ask is any of the information changeable and if so, what information is loose and what is in stone. I know as a DM I appreciate when players give me things like that because I can always refer to it. Nothing sucks more than killing someone's vision of who their hero is and trivializing their character.
Experience: I had a situation when I was playing a game called Talislanta. I normally ran the games but one of my players with a bit of experience wanted to give me a break. I ended up playing a Thrall. I had a backstory as a mercenary, not too indepth or anything, but just enough to tell him what my job was and who I was working for and where I came from. Immediately, he made me a slave who was being used in some sort of breeding program against his will. Within the first 10 minutes of the game I had my character throw himself from a cliff. That was the last game he ran.
I'm not sure I'd completely disagree with how things ended up, other than the nobleman forgave you.
Divination magic exists.
Noble families have money to hire spellcasters.
If you motivated them sufficiently, you could easily get a nobleman vengeance-bro tracking down everyone who insulted his family's honor by any means necessary.
If it was me I don't think I'd have had him successfully tracked down everyone, but certainly some of the old crew. That adds weight to the situation, you weren't there, and your old actions led to some friends dying. Oof.You now know he's deadly serious. might even have him show you his trophies. Something from a couple of the old crew The feather Jasper wore tied in his hair, still attached to a lock, the signet ring stolen from your first ever nobleman heist, that Frainky took as his cut, an d instead of selling wore it around thereafter occasionally joking that "People ought treat me like a pro'pa gent'l'man". Etc. Really twist the emotional screws.
But then you want vengeance-bro to force you into another terrible choice. He's here to kill you, one way or another. It is him, or you. He's coming to take you down, and he brings some muscle with him. Have some hired goons come with him.
That way, it's a proper fight for the whole party, and they can all weigh in on the morality of the situation. Do they stick up for you? Do they hedge bets or try to negotiate on your behalf? it could get super interesting really fast.
IDK, feels like a missed opportunity for him to suddenly reverse course and give up after tracking you down. But a rich family absolutely would have the resources to have tracked you down. Him showing up is 100% reasonable. He could know your name, what you look like now, who you've hung out with recently. A lot can be learned from divination magic. A lot.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To some extent I agree, but since I have been posting about RPG stuff since the late 90's I have also been repeatedly reminded that there are at least two sides to every story and to try and keep an open mind.
A good example was a person complaining about a organized rpg game and problems he had with the GM (and later it was found out GM's). The original post seemed to paint the GM as either having a bad day, stepping in on short notice or simply out of their depth as a GM. But after a couple of pages of posts being sympathetic to the player a better understanding of what was going on by the GM and fellow GM's and players posting about the player in question.
As I said since I have been playing a long time I prefer closer interaction with a player and Gm when creating backstories. To me this prevents any issues allows for a two way exchange of ideas (I prefer one on one) and can provide the GM with good info and possible game material.
I have also experienced a couple of players wanting to often force their background to be a focus of the game vs blending with the GM's story or in the direction the GM wants to take the game.
DM's perspective: That last part makes it hard for the DM because he has to juggle multiple player's wants and sometimes you do have players that think they should be the only focus. But, as a DM, I always try to tailor my campaigns around the players' stories. When I create a campaign I like to have a starting point and an ending point, or expected overarching plot...expected because players will go off in their own direction inevitably, but that is okay too. Everything in between is them trying to get to the end but also involves developing their character and wrapping up loose ends or tying those ends to the big bad somehow or coming to an end just before the big bad. I always try to make their story bigger than they expected, fulfilling and over many sessions with possibly tying different character backgrounds together, unknowingly to the players themselves and creating an "aha" moment. Finally, as a DM, I pay close attention to interactions PCs have with other PCs because some of the best story ideas comes from things they say to each other in character or out of character. I don't know how many times a PC has joked about a plot twist where I took the idea and ran with it.
I would say you may have lucked out that the group kind of fell apart because it gives you a chance to try that backstory again, but maybe give the next DM a bullet point outline of things with highlighting points such as your new identity and your character's attempt at recompense. You can give a full backstory as well, but attach the bullet points to it. I always ask is any of the information changeable and if so, what information is loose and what is in stone. I know as a DM I appreciate when players give me things like that because I can always refer to it. Nothing sucks more than killing someone's vision of who their hero is and trivializing their character.
Experience: I had a situation when I was playing a game called Talislanta. I normally ran the games but one of my players with a bit of experience wanted to give me a break. I ended up playing a Thrall. I had a backstory as a mercenary, not too indepth or anything, but just enough to tell him what my job was and who I was working for and where I came from. Immediately, he made me a slave who was being used in some sort of breeding program against his will. Within the first 10 minutes of the game I had my character throw himself from a cliff. That was the last game he ran.
Yes that is why I try and work hand in hand with a player on a backstory or provide guidance in my session zero info, it helps prevent issues down the line.
When GMing or playing it can be an issue if the backstory is vastly different then what the GM has asked for or needs. And GM's and groups can vary dramatically on what is expected in a backstory.
I wasn't even at the table for the session my character's backstory was over with. I just sat down at the table and the others told me, "Oh. Right. Yeah. You got exiled from your clan and they never want to see you again. Right, moving on..."
Admittedly I was a bit miffed at hearing this. But yikes, what happened on your end definitely went right up there, OP. My condolences!
tough break. I get DMs not implementing backstory because honestly its difficult and exhausting. But its way worse to do all sorts of backstory stuff and not get any of it right....
Your character is your own and I will do my very best to accommodate the backstory that you wish to have. However, that said, the world your character exists in, grew up in, learned and trained in is mine. The vast majority of beings your character meets or has ever met, those are all part of my world, fellow residents of my world. To the extent they are of your past, you can have an initial say in what they are like, to the extent that they matter to your character's story line. However, they too must also fit my world and its design.
Accordingly, based on your input, I will write a background for your character. This will be presented to you before your first session and you will get to comment on it and if there is anything about it that you feel uncomfortable with, we'll work out a better version together.
Thank you for your understanding. Now, what is your idea?
Dear DM,
Thank you for inviting me to your game. I would have been happy to work with you to come up with a backstory that fit with your world and would create the player I want to be at the start of the campaign. As everyone knows, people are the culmination of their actions, and personality is dictated by what path they have walked in life. No matter how competent a DM you might be, you are not a mind reader; you cannot perfectly tell what it is I want to play personality wise, and therefore you are not qualified to write my backstory. After all, if you cannot perfectly tell where my character is at the start of your campaign, how can I trust you to accurately draw the path that led from their birth to your beginnings? We are starting not with my character, which is what’s I have to play - because clearly you care more about your world than about your players knowing who they are and who they have to roleplay as.
So, while I appreciate the fact you want your world to make sense, the fact that, even before the campaign, you are choosing to dictate character decisions rather than work with the players to realise their desires indicates that you are going to be a mediocre DM throughout the campaign, and I’d be better off in a more collaborative group.
Thanks for your understanding, I wish you luck with your campaign.
I really wish DnDBeyond character sheets had better tools for recording backstories and then feeding that information to the DM. Players should be able to specify a quest lines they'd like to see, and the DM should be able to see them and keep track of them (along with the other player's quest lines). I'd also like to see genealogy and a space for other notable characters from the PC's backstory.
Looking at the Notes on the character sheets is just painful as a DM, especially if the player has recorded a lot of notes.
You know, I can concede this point. aha. that's why if I have a massive backstory like that, I just put a link to like, a google drive or something in there
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Writing a backstory should be a collaborative effort between the DM and the player. Cause it’s both the player’s character and the DM’s world that are affected.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they (genderfae).
Now, shall we sit down and discuss these aspects of your background that you consider necessities?
I think it is you that missed the point. The fact that you cannot tell the difference between “Player gets to write the first draft based on DM input” and “DM gets to write the first draft based on player input” would concern me greatly in a DM. To me, that indicates a DM who not only is going to micromanage players, but also one who cannot even see why that might frustrate players. I would also suspect that DM to be the kind of person who is so controlling of their world that they would get upset when players exercised agency.
Now, perhaps those clear red flags at the very beginning of a campaign might not indicate what they seem to indicate - but I doubt it. You did, after all, respond to a player venting about DM overreach in the snarky format of a “Dear Players” letter.
Now, shall we sit down and discuss these aspects of your background that you consider necessities?
I think it is you that missed the point. The fact that you cannot tell the difference between “Player gets to write the first draft based on DM input” and “DM gets to write the first draft based on player input” would concern me greatly in a DM. To me, that indicates a DM who not only is going to micromanage players, but also one who cannot even see why that might frustrate players. I would also suspect that DM to be the kind of person who is so controlling of their world that they would get upset when players exercised agency.
Now, perhaps those clear red flags at the very beginning of a campaign might not indicate what they seem to indicate - but I doubt it. You did, after all, respond to a player venting about DM overreach in the snarky format of a “Dear Players” letter.
I am curious what level of 'player agency' you would allow players to have. In your campaigns, do the players get to decide what organizations exist? Do they get to define the structure of any given local economy? Local guild? Do the players tell the DM what the plot will be?
Speaking from the perspective of someone who almost exclusively DMs, yes to all of those. Want a certain organisation in your background? Tell me what you want and I’ll tell you how I am adjusting it to my world. Want a local economy based on a certain thing? I tend to write a hundred pages of backstory for my world building, so I will either tell you “great, then you probably come from X city” or I’ll say “huh, that is an economic trait a world should have, but I overlooked—I’ll add that to Y city. Thanks for helping me make my world more complete.” Same goes for a local guild.
Player backstories are additive - not constraints. They are a way for a DM to get a second, third, fourth, etc. set of eyes helping with world building, fleshing out things that already exist in the world or giving the DM inspiration to add something they might have overlooked in their tunnel vision of being the only person creating the world.
As for the actual story, I give players incredible degrees of agency to approach the world as they want - though events will continue to unfold if they ignore them. They are welcome, for example, to jump on a pirate ship and ignore the cult summoning the big bad - they’ll just suddenly find the big bad was still summoned and they now have to contend with that world-shaping problem instead of some minor cultists.
Now, do I expect every DM to be as open? No - it takes a lot of improve skills and a lot of preparation to know your world well enough to react to that level of player agency.
Do I expect a DM will not tell me what my backstory is? Absolutely. Do I expect a DM will be flexible and be willing to adjust the world to accommodate my backstory? Generally yes, within reason. And, to bring it back to the thread, do I expect the DM to either ignore my backstory if they are not competent enough to handle it, and not “solve” my backstory for me if they do want to address it? Certainly so.
The problem with intersecting backstories with the party's campaign is that the DM might need to give more control to player agency than is comfortable. That's a problem for the DM to work out with the players in session 0 or before, keeping in mind that wild alterations without player agency (or at least player conference) is going to sit sour with the affected players. Once a backstory is accepted, the backstory is accepted.
From the OP's recounting, player agency was all but removed.
There are two DMs I follow on totally opposite sides of the RaW/RoC spectrum, but they both work with player backstories on the players' terms—had private discussions prior to the first session, have discussions if the personal story is going to be encountered in a major way (without spoiling the encounter—a tricky thing). Communication: It always comes back to communication before any session where the DM wants to encounter the backstory in a major way. Still, there are tables where the goal is the DM's story or is to strictly play strategy. This should be discussed ahead of the sessions.
I know that Gygax had an interview or whatnot ages ago about the game not being a cooperative storytelling thing. What Gygax likely intended today was not a Half-orc buying crack from an owl. (See Oxventure: Legacy of Dragons.) What D&D became is probably not what Gygax designed. It has been somewhat coopted by storytellers on both sides of the screen. If that's not the table's intent, it should be discussed from the start. Communcation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I know that Gygax had an interview or whatnot ages ago about the game not being a cooperative storytelling thing. What Gygax likely intended today was not a Half-orc buying crack from an owl. (See Oxventure: Legacy of Dragons.) What D&D became is probably not what Gygax designed. It has been somewhat coopted by storytellers on both sides of the screen. If that's not the table's intent, it should be discussed from the start. Communcation.
D&D was never intended to be what Gygax designed - largely because Gygax did not design D&D. Gygax was only half of a team that also included Dave Arneson - Gygax focused on the more wargame side of the game, the mechanics, while Arneson brought in the roleplaying element. The very first session of Porto-D&D - the moment they realised they had a hit on their hands - was Arneson DMing a combatless, roleplaying heavy session based entirely around a (bad) pun.
Now, Gygax, being a less than stellar human being, forced Arneson out of the company, tried to reshape the narrative where he was the sole creator (despite Arneson’s roleplaying element being why the game differentiated itself from other wargames and was successful), ran TSR into the ground with his draconian views of what he thought D&D should be, and eventually left the company and the game has been better off ever since.
I honestly don’t think anyone has done more damage to D&D than Gygax. Beyond the base idea of how combat works, Gygax’s main legacies are a fictional history of the game, flawed notions of the DM-player dynamic, and racism and sexism. Wizards has been trying for years to keep the good things Gygax brought to the game, while also returning a bit more of Arneson’s vision and excising the many problems they inherited from Gygax. But they’re still fighting against inertia, and Gygax’s problematic legacy is still very much present in how folks treat the game.
Writing a backstory should be a collaborative effort between the DM and the player. Cause it’s both the player’s character and the DM’s world that are affected.
I disagree. Yes, it’s important that players write backstories for their characters that fit within the DM’s world, but that doesn’t always necessitate collaboration with the DM. There are other ways to accomplish the job. I could write a number of backstories right now that any DM could fit into any world. It’s just a matter of keeping things generic enough.
Depends on what your threshold for "collaboration" is. I require all backstories to be subject to my review. However, so long as it's compatible with lore and the tone of the adventure, it WILL pass. Even if it requires changes to my world, I'm likely to work with the player so it can fit (tone is a table decision, so I'm less likely to accept it). Beyond that, I might make suggestions, but they are purely spitballing - if they ignore them, there are no consequences. The backstory primarily comes from the player, but with the understanding that it may not be pulled into the campaign, depending on how well it fits, interesting it is, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Writing a backstory should be a collaborative effort between the DM and the player. Cause it’s both the player’s character and the DM’s world that are affected.
This. And if the backstory is more than one page, it better be good. AND if I run please don't miss a session. OR give me a freaky notice. I don't care if you are lying in the ditch after getting throw from the car. The first call is to emergency services, the second call is to me......
Or some of that is joke. But some people don't listen to the DM during the pitch, or session 0. Then get upset when the DM say no. If I say no nobles at the pitch due to story reasons, I mean no nobles.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is why I love a simple, super short backstory that includes just enough to give an excuse for my character to be an adventurer, but without any real details that could get “screwed up.”
And this is why I do not get invested in a characters background. Or even in a character at all before quite a bit of play.
I never expect a DM to actually use any backstory I write either. He has other players whos story might fit better in the game.
I do not even have any preferences for what race or class my characters are. I often walk into a game and ask the DM what he wants or doesn't want and then I ask the rest of the players what they are lacking.
To the OP:
More information is always helpful. Your situation reminds me of another post, a person who saw RPGing on the net and decided to go to a game at a library with her husband and encountered a series of problems and issues that were not like the net game. I have seen the same post pop up one multiple game company websites since sometime in the early 2010's so I do not know if it actually happened or was crafted to generate posts, but it did have some important points to provide people.
GM's are people too and had good days and bad days, just like players. New GM's can often think something may go one way and then they do not or think "I think this situation would be good for RPing and again it is not". So in general I recommend to try a few games with a GM unless it is blatantly clear there is an issue. Since you said the GM went on a rant, that tells me there is more going on (unless that is the persons normal personality).
GM Prep Time: When I first started I often spent 1-3 hours prepping for the game for every hour of game time. Later when I was doing more drama that jumped to 2-7 hours of prep per hour of game times with at times throwing away 10-20 hours of work because I realized it was bad. So I have often seen new GM's struggle with not knowing the rules for the encounter and the encounter should go this way and it does not go even close to what they envision(ie playing to a script) and just being overwhelmed with all the stuff a GM often has to do.
I hope you have better luck in your next game.
Thank you to the Op for posting a reply! With the extra information you provided, i can definitely tell that part of your frustration was ironically that you didn't feel like you or your group was getting challenged enough - almost like the DM was too eager to please, while not resolving disputes.
I generally appreciate players who take time to create backstories, and especially when there are actual living people and relationships in that backstory. In my own campaign i am bringing in quite a bit form back stories - even if it is simply the images that are beign brought up for characters when they becomes frightened from certain creatures who summon up their worst memories. But one thing I am always a little bit concerned about as a DM is the balance of things. So I will otherwise only fit in backstory elements when it makes sense rather than force it, and I do sometimes worry that players expect a certain amount of "backstory time" no matter what. That's why I as DM would expect a high degree of narrative control from the point where a backstory is "handed over" - so that it can be worked into the campaign in the best way possible.
To be fair, it sounds a bit like your backstory was shoe-horned in , almost as if to cross it off the list. So i understand your frustration, but also think it is important to recognise the challenge for DM's in managing a campaign, central story arch, side adventures, backstories, and other twists and turns!
Key thing is that we are really all here to have fun - but everyone has a slight different idea of what that is!
DM's perspective: That last part makes it hard for the DM because he has to juggle multiple player's wants and sometimes you do have players that think they should be the only focus. But, as a DM, I always try to tailor my campaigns around the players' stories. When I create a campaign I like to have a starting point and an ending point, or expected overarching plot...expected because players will go off in their own direction inevitably, but that is okay too. Everything in between is them trying to get to the end but also involves developing their character and wrapping up loose ends or tying those ends to the big bad somehow or coming to an end just before the big bad. I always try to make their story bigger than they expected, fulfilling and over many sessions with possibly tying different character backgrounds together, unknowingly to the players themselves and creating an "aha" moment. Finally, as a DM, I pay close attention to interactions PCs have with other PCs because some of the best story ideas comes from things they say to each other in character or out of character. I don't know how many times a PC has joked about a plot twist where I took the idea and ran with it.
I would say you may have lucked out that the group kind of fell apart because it gives you a chance to try that backstory again, but maybe give the next DM a bullet point outline of things with highlighting points such as your new identity and your character's attempt at recompense. You can give a full backstory as well, but attach the bullet points to it. I always ask is any of the information changeable and if so, what information is loose and what is in stone. I know as a DM I appreciate when players give me things like that because I can always refer to it. Nothing sucks more than killing someone's vision of who their hero is and trivializing their character.
Experience: I had a situation when I was playing a game called Talislanta. I normally ran the games but one of my players with a bit of experience wanted to give me a break. I ended up playing a Thrall. I had a backstory as a mercenary, not too indepth or anything, but just enough to tell him what my job was and who I was working for and where I came from. Immediately, he made me a slave who was being used in some sort of breeding program against his will. Within the first 10 minutes of the game I had my character throw himself from a cliff. That was the last game he ran.
I'm not sure I'd completely disagree with how things ended up, other than the nobleman forgave you.
Divination magic exists.
Noble families have money to hire spellcasters.
If you motivated them sufficiently, you could easily get a nobleman vengeance-bro tracking down everyone who insulted his family's honor by any means necessary.
If it was me I don't think I'd have had him successfully tracked down everyone, but certainly some of the old crew. That adds weight to the situation, you weren't there, and your old actions led to some friends dying. Oof.You now know he's deadly serious. might even have him show you his trophies. Something from a couple of the old crew The feather Jasper wore tied in his hair, still attached to a lock, the signet ring stolen from your first ever nobleman heist, that Frainky took as his cut, an d instead of selling wore it around thereafter occasionally joking that "People ought treat me like a pro'pa gent'l'man". Etc. Really twist the emotional screws.
But then you want vengeance-bro to force you into another terrible choice. He's here to kill you, one way or another. It is him, or you. He's coming to take you down, and he brings some muscle with him. Have some hired goons come with him.
That way, it's a proper fight for the whole party, and they can all weigh in on the morality of the situation. Do they stick up for you? Do they hedge bets or try to negotiate on your behalf? it could get super interesting really fast.
IDK, feels like a missed opportunity for him to suddenly reverse course and give up after tracking you down. But a rich family absolutely would have the resources to have tracked you down. Him showing up is 100% reasonable. He could know your name, what you look like now, who you've hung out with recently. A lot can be learned from divination magic. A lot.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Yes that is why I try and work hand in hand with a player on a backstory or provide guidance in my session zero info, it helps prevent issues down the line.
When GMing or playing it can be an issue if the backstory is vastly different then what the GM has asked for or needs. And GM's and groups can vary dramatically on what is expected in a backstory.
I wasn't even at the table for the session my character's backstory was over with. I just sat down at the table and the others told me, "Oh. Right. Yeah. You got exiled from your clan and they never want to see you again. Right, moving on..."
Admittedly I was a bit miffed at hearing this. But yikes, what happened on your end definitely went right up there, OP. My condolences!
tough break.
I get DMs not implementing backstory because honestly its difficult and exhausting. But its way worse to do all sorts of backstory stuff and not get any of it right....
Strangely Changed- 99 new curses for 5e https://www.dmsguild.com/product/415251/Strangely-Changed?affiliate_id=2763792
Dear DM,
Thank you for inviting me to your game. I would have been happy to work with you to come up with a backstory that fit with your world and would create the player I want to be at the start of the campaign. As everyone knows, people are the culmination of their actions, and personality is dictated by what path they have walked in life. No matter how competent a DM you might be, you are not a mind reader; you cannot perfectly tell what it is I want to play personality wise, and therefore you are not qualified to write my backstory. After all, if you cannot perfectly tell where my character is at the start of your campaign, how can I trust you to accurately draw the path that led from their birth to your beginnings? We are starting not with my character, which is what’s I have to play - because clearly you care more about your world than about your players knowing who they are and who they have to roleplay as.
So, while I appreciate the fact you want your world to make sense, the fact that, even before the campaign, you are choosing to dictate character decisions rather than work with the players to realise their desires indicates that you are going to be a mediocre DM throughout the campaign, and I’d be better off in a more collaborative group.
Thanks for your understanding, I wish you luck with your campaign.
You know, I can concede this point. aha. that's why if I have a massive backstory like that, I just put a link to like, a google drive or something in there
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Writing a backstory should be a collaborative effort between the DM and the player. Cause it’s both the player’s character and the DM’s world that are affected.
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they (genderfae).
I think it is you that missed the point. The fact that you cannot tell the difference between “Player gets to write the first draft based on DM input” and “DM gets to write the first draft based on player input” would concern me greatly in a DM. To me, that indicates a DM who not only is going to micromanage players, but also one who cannot even see why that might frustrate players. I would also suspect that DM to be the kind of person who is so controlling of their world that they would get upset when players exercised agency.
Now, perhaps those clear red flags at the very beginning of a campaign might not indicate what they seem to indicate - but I doubt it. You did, after all, respond to a player venting about DM overreach in the snarky format of a “Dear Players” letter.
I'm a huge advocate of collaboratively making backstories together as a group and even I wouldn't just outright write my PC's backstories for them.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Speaking from the perspective of someone who almost exclusively DMs, yes to all of those. Want a certain organisation in your background? Tell me what you want and I’ll tell you how I am adjusting it to my world. Want a local economy based on a certain thing? I tend to write a hundred pages of backstory for my world building, so I will either tell you “great, then you probably come from X city” or I’ll say “huh, that is an economic trait a world should have, but I overlooked—I’ll add that to Y city. Thanks for helping me make my world more complete.” Same goes for a local guild.
Player backstories are additive - not constraints. They are a way for a DM to get a second, third, fourth, etc. set of eyes helping with world building, fleshing out things that already exist in the world or giving the DM inspiration to add something they might have overlooked in their tunnel vision of being the only person creating the world.
As for the actual story, I give players incredible degrees of agency to approach the world as they want - though events will continue to unfold if they ignore them. They are welcome, for example, to jump on a pirate ship and ignore the cult summoning the big bad - they’ll just suddenly find the big bad was still summoned and they now have to contend with that world-shaping problem instead of some minor cultists.
Now, do I expect every DM to be as open? No - it takes a lot of improve skills and a lot of preparation to know your world well enough to react to that level of player agency.
Do I expect a DM will not tell me what my backstory is? Absolutely. Do I expect a DM will be flexible and be willing to adjust the world to accommodate my backstory? Generally yes, within reason. And, to bring it back to the thread, do I expect the DM to either ignore my backstory if they are not competent enough to handle it, and not “solve” my backstory for me if they do want to address it? Certainly so.
The problem with intersecting backstories with the party's campaign is that the DM might need to give more control to player agency than is comfortable. That's a problem for the DM to work out with the players in session 0 or before, keeping in mind that wild alterations without player agency (or at least player conference) is going to sit sour with the affected players. Once a backstory is accepted, the backstory is accepted.
From the OP's recounting, player agency was all but removed.
There are two DMs I follow on totally opposite sides of the RaW/RoC spectrum, but they both work with player backstories on the players' terms—had private discussions prior to the first session, have discussions if the personal story is going to be encountered in a major way (without spoiling the encounter—a tricky thing). Communication: It always comes back to communication before any session where the DM wants to encounter the backstory in a major way. Still, there are tables where the goal is the DM's story or is to strictly play strategy. This should be discussed ahead of the sessions.
I know that Gygax had an interview or whatnot ages ago about the game not being a cooperative storytelling thing. What Gygax likely intended today was not a Half-orc buying crack from an owl. (See Oxventure: Legacy of Dragons.) What D&D became is probably not what Gygax designed. It has been somewhat coopted by storytellers on both sides of the screen. If that's not the table's intent, it should be discussed from the start. Communcation.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
D&D was never intended to be what Gygax designed - largely because Gygax did not design D&D. Gygax was only half of a team that also included Dave Arneson - Gygax focused on the more wargame side of the game, the mechanics, while Arneson brought in the roleplaying element. The very first session of Porto-D&D - the moment they realised they had a hit on their hands - was Arneson DMing a combatless, roleplaying heavy session based entirely around a (bad) pun.
Now, Gygax, being a less than stellar human being, forced Arneson out of the company, tried to reshape the narrative where he was the sole creator (despite Arneson’s roleplaying element being why the game differentiated itself from other wargames and was successful), ran TSR into the ground with his draconian views of what he thought D&D should be, and eventually left the company and the game has been better off ever since.
I honestly don’t think anyone has done more damage to D&D than Gygax. Beyond the base idea of how combat works, Gygax’s main legacies are a fictional history of the game, flawed notions of the DM-player dynamic, and racism and sexism. Wizards has been trying for years to keep the good things Gygax brought to the game, while also returning a bit more of Arneson’s vision and excising the many problems they inherited from Gygax. But they’re still fighting against inertia, and Gygax’s problematic legacy is still very much present in how folks treat the game.
I disagree. Yes, it’s important that players write backstories for their characters that fit within the DM’s world, but that doesn’t always necessitate collaboration with the DM. There are other ways to accomplish the job. I could write a number of backstories right now that any DM could fit into any world. It’s just a matter of keeping things generic enough.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Depends on what your threshold for "collaboration" is. I require all backstories to be subject to my review. However, so long as it's compatible with lore and the tone of the adventure, it WILL pass. Even if it requires changes to my world, I'm likely to work with the player so it can fit (tone is a table decision, so I'm less likely to accept it). Beyond that, I might make suggestions, but they are purely spitballing - if they ignore them, there are no consequences. The backstory primarily comes from the player, but with the understanding that it may not be pulled into the campaign, depending on how well it fits, interesting it is, etc.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
This. And if the backstory is more than one page, it better be good. AND if I run please don't miss a session. OR give me a freaky notice. I don't care if you are lying in the ditch after getting throw from the car. The first call is to emergency services, the second call is to me......
Or some of that is joke. But some people don't listen to the DM during the pitch, or session 0. Then get upset when the DM say no. If I say no nobles at the pitch due to story reasons, I mean no nobles.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.