An interesting topic that came up in another thread and I thought I would throw out a quick poll to see how the community see's the importance of written backgrounds for their games.
My prediction is that most modern D&D players and DM's would consider it pretty important leaning more towards required if not mandatory, but it's been suggested that the opposite is true that written backgrounds are strictly optional and if you don't want to write one, you don't need to. Curious to see where the community consensus might be.
So, I had to click "optional, because it isn't precisely a set up where folks have to write anything out (and I love being a contributor to the three sentence backstory thread). But, um, at the same time...
the core premise for my group of players is really "character growth". So, options, choices, and more are really important to us. And creating a character is one of the most important steps in our games -- we always do it together, as a group. Even virtually. No one creates a PC off on their own.
When we create those PCs, each of the DMs in our group has a basic, key points type of set up that is slightly different according tot he DM's whim and the setting they use, but follows the same basic principles I will now list below:
Backgrounds
Family Status
Age 5
Age 10
Age 15
Starting Age
Species
Family
Extended family stuff
Family Values (Vices & Virtues)
Homeland
Cultural stuff
Place of birth (option of circumstances of birth)
Homeland Values
Personality
Twenty Questions
Values (personal)
Fears
Revist: 2nd Level
Revisit: 5th Level
Class
Class stuff
Mentors/Teachers
And that's all a normal part of character creation. The Personality stuff is pretty much optional, but the questions are mostly about odds and ends that are silly and useful in getting around to the ideas about how that person will behave.
So, in a lot of ways, it is essentially required, but a one word answer is often possible. You don't even have to answer the 20 questions, or you can do it in part, or you can do it later, and answers can be changed at 2nd and 5th level.
But no one has to write anything up that explains it all. And there's a lot more involved in the above, as well -- a whole things on appearance, alignment, picking a deity if you want, blah blah.
I don't require anyone to even give me something to use as a hook for a PC side story. As far as I am concerned, that's my job, and part of the reason for a lot of this is so that I can pull n threads of potential.
I have a small questionnaire for my purposes if someone wants a romance side story, and my structure for "non-main story" stuff is Imbroglios (PC side stories), Side Quests, Missions, Fetch Quests, and a few other things. Very much structured and having a template that I can use to build out and drop it into things (which I do while they are leveling up to 5th level).
So, make of that what you will in relation to writing up a back story. I am as good with a three sentence one as I am with a three page one.
After that, well...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Personally, I prefer to focus on characters with clear arcs first, not out of any pettiness or a "they put in the work" mentality or anything, but because it's more convenient for me, and those players tend to prioritize story more in my experience. As the group goes on those adventures, see if you can get the character to have some sort of inviting incident for their own hero's journey! You don't need a backstory for a compelling arc if the campaign is long enough. https://vlc****/
Always required, but if someone is having trouble getting an idea, we delay the start of the campaign and workshop ideas until they find enough to turn in a written direction that the DM can work with. It is still a collaboration and the written piece is just the beginning of the story conversation that leads us into playing the campaign.
I went with optional, though I would have preferred something like “encouraged.” And required is such a strong word.
I like writing them as a player to help me figure out my character.
I like getting them as a DM for the plot hooks. But I understand they’re not everyone’s cup of tea. I just explain to my players that the more they give me to work with, the more I can incorporate moments for their character. But some people don’t want to. They prefer being more in the background. I’m not going to try and tell them otherwise.
I put optional because while I prefer players have an idea of their backstory, that's really all you need to start with: an idea.
Some players will take that idea and gradually explore it and discover more about their character as the game progresses, and some know all the details from the start.
I've changed my way of being a dm. I didn't have a single bbeg trying to take over the world. My players and their backstreets each have their own bbeg to deal with. I've chosen to further their characters instead of forcing them to fend for the world. It's about them. The higher ups can take care of the world disasters.
So I just put my players through their backstory issues and confront them. Helps them grow and they enjoy it.
It’s a requirement at my table for everyone to have something, even if it’s just a sentence, but I do make it clear that the more I get the more likely they are to get a story involving their character. I’ve got a couple of players who couldn’t care less about the role play aspect so their backstories tend to be very short and never really come up
Detailed backstory is required. Although, if a player doesn't want to write one, they can give me cliff notes version and I will write up a detailed backstory for them and send it back and forth until they are happy with it. But, no backstory. You don't get to play.
Many players find that written backgrounds add depth to their characters, giving them clear backstory and motivations. It also helps enrich the roleplay and create meaningful interactions with the environment and other characters.
We do written backgrounds and the DM is very good at incorporating elements of them into game play. Might be a character has a certain knowledge because of where they grew up, who they trained with or such. BBEG sometimes target a character because of the same.
As a DM, I prefer a written backstory. This gives me something tangling I can use for weaving the character’s stories together, as well as a starting point for how I expect the characters will act in those early sessions. Additionally, I like how backstories can help flesh out my own world building, giving me new elements I can weave into the tapestry of the world itself. I also find thinking about one’s backstory before the game helps players step into the shoes of their characters.
That said, while encouraged, I do not require backstories - a sentence or two just saying who you are generally is fine, which, if I don’t get in advance, I’ll just ask during the first session.
An interesting topic that came up in another thread and I thought I would throw out a quick poll to see how the community see's the importance of written backgrounds for their games.
My prediction is that most modern D&D players and DM's would consider it pretty important leaning more towards required if not mandatory, but it's been suggested that the opposite is true that written backgrounds are strictly optional and if you don't want to write one, you don't need to. Curious to see where the community consensus might be.
The trendline is in your favor, but still strongly optional.
There is a fundamental quirk to this game: requiring things is a negotiated space. The overall gist of this poll is “They are very strongly suggested, encouraged, and cajoled, but in the end, still optional.”
I’d have to split the point in the origin thread, but I would give you the two thirds of it because it is very strongly suggested.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Totally optional. I have a player who likes to engage with the story and I weave their stuff in. I also have a player who just wants to show up and solve puzzles and kill stuff. Both are great players who I've gamed with for many years.
Personally when I'm a PC I like to start out with my backstory only about halfway written. Keeping things open allows you to incorporate stuff you learn as you get to know the campaign world and kind of retroactively insert yourself.
I put optional. Players can write a backstory or not. There is no requirement. Most usually do, and our DM may work those into the story where it fits.
An interesting topic that came up in another thread and I thought I would throw out a quick poll to see how the community see's the importance of written backgrounds for their games.
My prediction is that most modern D&D players and DM's would consider it pretty important leaning more towards required if not mandatory, but it's been suggested that the opposite is true that written backgrounds are strictly optional and if you don't want to write one, you don't need to. Curious to see where the community consensus might be.
The trendline is in your favor, but still strongly optional.
There is a fundamental quirk to this game: requiring things is a negotiated space. The overall gist of this poll is “They are very strongly suggested, encouraged, and cajoled, but in the end, still optional.”
I’d have to split the point in the origin thread, but I would give you the two thirds of it because it is very strongly suggested.
Perhaps but I'm still surprised by the results. I mean it's a tiny sampling, but let's pretend the vote is representative of the community at large, the fact that 40% of the 5e community, which generally promotes the idea that the narrative is absolutely imperative to the game could see written backgrounds as optional is quite high. I would have guessed the optional backgrounds numbers would never go past 10-15% at the absolute highest.
In fact, I would imagine that these poll numbers would be far closer in reflecting the OSR community.
Well, hypotheses do that, after all. On the other hand, you can take some solace in that most of the folks who are engaged and active appear to be more experienced, which may skew things quite a bit. Enough to give you that feel of the OSR community.
Might duplicate your poll over on r/dnd, to see what a much more inexperienced skewing population thinks, then we could do some comparative analysis?
Personally, I suspect it would still trend the same way, honestly. It is why I voted one way and then explained my process -- but my group is still doing stuff we did in the 80's for character development, and it is a big part of our games -- so I'm not a mainline rp at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Optional. As a player, unless I’m playing in a campaign that is starting at high level any backgrounds I write are very short. There needs to be some sort of background but three lines are often plenty. As a DM I see the long involved backstories for young PCs. That drive me nuts with the angst. I often send them back to clear some of the nonsense out. I have no problem with a well written and well reasoned background but when the history covers enough history to provide the experience for tier 2-3 levels.
An interesting topic that came up in another thread and I thought I would throw out a quick poll to see how the community see's the importance of written backgrounds for their games.
My prediction is that most modern D&D players and DM's would consider it pretty important leaning more towards required if not mandatory, but it's been suggested that the opposite is true that written backgrounds are strictly optional and if you don't want to write one, you don't need to. Curious to see where the community consensus might be.
The trendline is in your favor, but still strongly optional.
There is a fundamental quirk to this game: requiring things is a negotiated space. The overall gist of this poll is “They are very strongly suggested, encouraged, and cajoled, but in the end, still optional.”
I’d have to split the point in the origin thread, but I would give you the two thirds of it because it is very strongly suggested.
Perhaps but I'm still surprised by the results. I mean it's a tiny sampling, but let's pretend the vote is representative of the community at large, the fact that 40% of the 5e community, which generally promotes the idea that the narrative is absolutely imperative to the game could see written backgrounds as optional is quite high. I would have guessed the optional backgrounds numbers would never go past 10-15% at the absolute highest.
In fact, I would imagine that these poll numbers would be far closer in reflecting the OSR community.
Its an interesting result.
Don't forget that there's a very strong culture in newer D&D players, reflected in a lot of the advice in the new DMG, towards being as inclusive as possible. I suspect the high optional response is not so much a set of DMs that don't care and more a set of DMs that don't want players to feel like they can't play if that's a part that doesn't interest them. I'm a good example of that, I love a player who researches the world and writes pages of personality and backstory and will happily weave those threads into the campaign, but I've also got players whose idea of a back story is "I want to kill monsters" and all they care about is combat and mechanics and I'm not going to force them to engage with an aspect of the game they don't care about
I tried writing a deep backstory of a character once. It's now become 34,000 words of a first novel out of 4 (not that it is something that will ever see the light of day, but I enjoy writing it). I can't use him in any games now until I'm done XD.
An interesting topic that came up in another thread and I thought I would throw out a quick poll to see how the community see's the importance of written backgrounds for their games.
My prediction is that most modern D&D players and DM's would consider it pretty important leaning more towards required if not mandatory, but it's been suggested that the opposite is true that written backgrounds are strictly optional and if you don't want to write one, you don't need to. Curious to see where the community consensus might be.
So, I had to click "optional, because it isn't precisely a set up where folks have to write anything out (and I love being a contributor to the three sentence backstory thread). But, um, at the same time...
the core premise for my group of players is really "character growth". So, options, choices, and more are really important to us. And creating a character is one of the most important steps in our games -- we always do it together, as a group. Even virtually. No one creates a PC off on their own.
When we create those PCs, each of the DMs in our group has a basic, key points type of set up that is slightly different according tot he DM's whim and the setting they use, but follows the same basic principles I will now list below:
Backgrounds
Species
Homeland
Personality
Class
And that's all a normal part of character creation. The Personality stuff is pretty much optional, but the questions are mostly about odds and ends that are silly and useful in getting around to the ideas about how that person will behave.
So, in a lot of ways, it is essentially required, but a one word answer is often possible. You don't even have to answer the 20 questions, or you can do it in part, or you can do it later, and answers can be changed at 2nd and 5th level.
But no one has to write anything up that explains it all. And there's a lot more involved in the above, as well -- a whole things on appearance, alignment, picking a deity if you want, blah blah.
I don't require anyone to even give me something to use as a hook for a PC side story. As far as I am concerned, that's my job, and part of the reason for a lot of this is so that I can pull n threads of potential.
I have a small questionnaire for my purposes if someone wants a romance side story, and my structure for "non-main story" stuff is Imbroglios (PC side stories), Side Quests, Missions, Fetch Quests, and a few other things. Very much structured and having a template that I can use to build out and drop it into things (which I do while they are leveling up to 5th level).
So, make of that what you will in relation to writing up a back story. I am as good with a three sentence one as I am with a three page one.
After that, well...
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Personally, I prefer to focus on characters with clear arcs first, not out of any pettiness or a "they put in the work" mentality or anything, but because it's more convenient for me, and those players tend to prioritize story more in my experience. As the group goes on those adventures, see if you can get the character to have some sort of inviting incident for their own hero's journey! You don't need a backstory for a compelling arc if the campaign is long enough. https://vlc****/
Always required, but if someone is having trouble getting an idea, we delay the start of the campaign and workshop ideas until they find enough to turn in a written direction that the DM can work with. It is still a collaboration and the written piece is just the beginning of the story conversation that leads us into playing the campaign.
I went with optional, though I would have preferred something like “encouraged.” And required is such a strong word.
I like writing them as a player to help me figure out my character.
I like getting them as a DM for the plot hooks. But I understand they’re not everyone’s cup of tea. I just explain to my players that the more they give me to work with, the more I can incorporate moments for their character.
But some people don’t want to. They prefer being more in the background. I’m not going to try and tell them otherwise.
I put optional because while I prefer players have an idea of their backstory, that's really all you need to start with: an idea.
Some players will take that idea and gradually explore it and discover more about their character as the game progresses, and some know all the details from the start.
Both are super fun.
I've changed my way of being a dm. I didn't have a single bbeg trying to take over the world. My players and their backstreets each have their own bbeg to deal with. I've chosen to further their characters instead of forcing them to fend for the world. It's about them. The higher ups can take care of the world disasters.
So I just put my players through their backstory issues and confront them. Helps them grow and they enjoy it.
It’s a requirement at my table for everyone to have something, even if it’s just a sentence, but I do make it clear that the more I get the more likely they are to get a story involving their character. I’ve got a couple of players who couldn’t care less about the role play aspect so their backstories tend to be very short and never really come up
Detailed backstory is required. Although, if a player doesn't want to write one, they can give me cliff notes version and I will write up a detailed backstory for them and send it back and forth until they are happy with it. But, no backstory. You don't get to play.
Many players find that written backgrounds add depth to their characters, giving them clear backstory and motivations. It also helps enrich the roleplay and create meaningful interactions with the environment and other characters.
snaptube vidmate
We do written backgrounds and the DM is very good at incorporating elements of them into game play. Might be a character has a certain knowledge because of where they grew up, who they trained with or such. BBEG sometimes target a character because of the same.
As a DM, I prefer a written backstory. This gives me something tangling I can use for weaving the character’s stories together, as well as a starting point for how I expect the characters will act in those early sessions. Additionally, I like how backstories can help flesh out my own world building, giving me new elements I can weave into the tapestry of the world itself. I also find thinking about one’s backstory before the game helps players step into the shoes of their characters.
That said, while encouraged, I do not require backstories - a sentence or two just saying who you are generally is fine, which, if I don’t get in advance, I’ll just ask during the first session.
The trendline is in your favor, but still strongly optional.
There is a fundamental quirk to this game: requiring things is a negotiated space. The overall gist of this poll is “They are very strongly suggested, encouraged, and cajoled, but in the end, still optional.”
I’d have to split the point in the origin thread, but I would give you the two thirds of it because it is very strongly suggested.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Totally optional. I have a player who likes to engage with the story and I weave their stuff in. I also have a player who just wants to show up and solve puzzles and kill stuff. Both are great players who I've gamed with for many years.
Personally when I'm a PC I like to start out with my backstory only about halfway written. Keeping things open allows you to incorporate stuff you learn as you get to know the campaign world and kind of retroactively insert yourself.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I put optional. Players can write a backstory or not. There is no requirement. Most usually do, and our DM may work those into the story where it fits.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Perhaps but I'm still surprised by the results. I mean it's a tiny sampling, but let's pretend the vote is representative of the community at large, the fact that 40% of the 5e community, which generally promotes the idea that the narrative is absolutely imperative to the game could see written backgrounds as optional is quite high. I would have guessed the optional backgrounds numbers would never go past 10-15% at the absolute highest.
In fact, I would imagine that these poll numbers would be far closer in reflecting the OSR community.
Its an interesting result.
Ouch.
Well, hypotheses do that, after all. On the other hand, you can take some solace in that most of the folks who are engaged and active appear to be more experienced, which may skew things quite a bit. Enough to give you that feel of the OSR community.
Might duplicate your poll over on r/dnd, to see what a much more inexperienced skewing population thinks, then we could do some comparative analysis?
Personally, I suspect it would still trend the same way, honestly. It is why I voted one way and then explained my process -- but my group is still doing stuff we did in the 80's for character development, and it is a big part of our games -- so I'm not a mainline rp at all.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Optional. As a player, unless I’m playing in a campaign that is starting at high level any backgrounds I write are very short. There needs to be some sort of background but three lines are often plenty. As a DM I see the long involved backstories for young PCs. That drive me nuts with the angst. I often send them back to clear some of the nonsense out. I have no problem with a well written and well reasoned background but when the history covers enough history to provide the experience for tier 2-3 levels.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Don't forget that there's a very strong culture in newer D&D players, reflected in a lot of the advice in the new DMG, towards being as inclusive as possible. I suspect the high optional response is not so much a set of DMs that don't care and more a set of DMs that don't want players to feel like they can't play if that's a part that doesn't interest them. I'm a good example of that, I love a player who researches the world and writes pages of personality and backstory and will happily weave those threads into the campaign, but I've also got players whose idea of a back story is "I want to kill monsters" and all they care about is combat and mechanics and I'm not going to force them to engage with an aspect of the game they don't care about
I tried writing a deep backstory of a character once. It's now become 34,000 words of a first novel out of 4 (not that it is something that will ever see the light of day, but I enjoy writing it). I can't use him in any games now until I'm done XD.