Background Story Rewards

[Greywind]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Just so long as it avoids the "us vs GM" syndrome.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Rolling dice for stats is inherently unfair. Do you have any idea how many characters were killed during generation? Around here it was often referred to as "Sudden Character Death Syndrome".

 

Yes, but when you combined the smaller on average stat bonuses that are tied to the likelihood of rolling that score with the stat minimum on classes what you end up with is a system where any character that passes chargen can actually perform as a member of his class.

 

If only because the GM doesn't have to balance for the elven wizard that rolled a natural 18 Int

[Laundry Knight]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Hey, Bodkins, does your name have anything to do with Jed and clan? If so, kudos. I actually have an NPC names Flaming Desire inspired by the same TV show.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Jed Clampett? No, although I am a fan of the show. I'm just named after a super archer I came up with once but never played. I named him that in the vain hope that someone would notice his arrival and say, "Odds Bodkins! It's Bodkins Odds!"

[Beast]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

the only problem I have with extra points for a good back story ,is not everybody is that talented or is having a writer's block

and that is where the level playing field gets tilted

 

I like to flesh out major things and leave it loose enough that the GM does not get railroaded with my backstory

at best maybe 1/2 a page more like a 1/3 to 1/4

 

As for Arkham Horror

it is the Cthulu mythos of course every thing is trying to kill you or have you go insane

Actually, I'm one of those that remembers that G stands for game, which means:

1) Chill out, it's a game.

2) There is no implication whatsoever that things start on an even playing field. The only implication is that, whatever the field, it should be designed for fun. I recently played Arkham Horror for the first time. That game is not premised upon a level playing field- the opposite in fact. The game hates you, and wants to kill you. I had a blast, since I was warned about that upfront (also, we did win- by having one our companions make the ultimate sacrifice in the Dreamworld).

 

Are you one of those that forgets that, if the option is available to all players, then the playing field is level, whether they choose to take advantage of the opportunity or not?

[Christopher]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

It seems to me that there are two major reasons for having a character backstory:

 

1. To increase player investment in the character, and

2. To help the GM in preparing a tailored campaign background.

Indeed. Those two are the core.

 

An old version of the game Traveller actually allowed your character to die in roll-up, which always struck me at the time as weird, but now strikes me as kinda cool.

 

Useless, but kinda cool.

 

Struck me as stupid first time I heard about it' date=' still strikes me as stupid.[/quote']

Traveller is unusual. There is a high amount of randomness during character Generation. You have very limited controll about how your character turns out. You can decide the direction (carrer path).

 

About dying during char gen in Traveller:

This was highly based on picking a career where the "survival" roll was good (the right attribute gives a bonus). And dropping out of said career once aging dropped your bonus giving score.

In the first edition "Scout Service" was afaik the best career. But it had a 7- death roll (+2 when CON over X).

 

I think both D&D and Traveller work better when used with a point buy system for Characteristics. D&D 3.0 had such a system in the Gamemaster book. It also avoids the 18 score (by making it unfeasibly expensive).

[Manic Typist]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

 

It is useful to know CERTAIN information (family, friends, where they grew up, what their (BRIEF) history is, etc.) but I tend to either ascertain that from a questionnaire, or do that in game. Generally the scenarios I write are for a specific group anyway and I try to put in story arcs for the characters in any event, so I do not necessarily find backstory useful: it is more for me to integrate.

 

See, I suspect questionnaires to be a bit restrictive/limiting (though still better than nothing). I worry that a player would only focus on those questions (and not work beyond them), and that they would give answers like "My parents were killed when I was a young boy" instead of "One day, when out picking apples, a group of bandits waylaid my family..."

 

The latter gives the GM and player all sorts of ammo for fun. Does he always have an unpleasant flashback when he sees an apple? Perhaps an NPC could accidentally or on PURPOSE use this during a conversation.... or perhaps the GM could opt to set an important fight in an apple orchard, as a nod to the PC's backstory.

 

I find questionnaires can be useful as before/during character creation, however. I'd still welcome a backstory on top of it though, to paint a picture.

 

 

And you're right: the real reward is in the player having fun with it. Though I can't imagine how a background would limit a GM...unless he didn't realize he could say no to a particular element of that story.

[Christopher]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

See, I suspect questionnaires to be a bit restrictive/limiting (though still better than nothing). I worry that a player would only focus on those questions (and not work beyond them), and that they would give answers like "My parents were killed when I was a young boy" instead of "One day, when out picking apples, a group of bandits waylaid my family..."

 

The latter gives the GM and player all sorts of ammo for fun. Does he always have an unpleasant flashback when he sees an apple? Perhaps an NPC could accidentally or on PURPOSE use this during a conversation.... or perhaps the GM could opt to set an important fight in an apple orchard, as a nod to the PC's backstory.

I have one of these questionares. A 20 Question one.

 

But to some I simply have no answer. I have some pretty solid ideas for some of them, but for others I just draw a blank.

 

 

About such small things like "fear of apples":

I don't think that should be part of either complciation or background. I think it would better to give the player the option to make a list of "things I would like the GM to implement". This can be good things ("One day the president should have a reason to gratulate my hero personally."), bad things ("I want her to be captured by her villain and almsot killed, before the others save her.") or odd things:

Being forced to work with his foe. Being saved by ones Nemesis. Showing an unusual protectiveness of Labradors (but not other dogs).

You know, the kind of stuff that might be nice to have in one adventure - but wouldn't make it to a complication or a relevant part of the storyline.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

It could absolutely be relevant to the STORY, though. I'm not talking anything as concrete as a Complication being triggered.... just a tie in that a player would appreciate it, would note. They may or may not anticipate the GM utilizing that detail, but for perhaps a more concrete example....

 

A PC from a former game of mine grew up on the street as an orphan (Fantasy setting). He amassed a small gang of close confidants, and was recruited by a master of assassins type. To make a point, their recruiter executed one of the band of four (named Owl) during their initiation/acceptance into the organization. This was very traumatic for the PC, but as a part of this ritual he had received an earring which granted him some magical protection (5th edition, some invisible Armor that was always active. Just a few points, but very useful in a city of duelists).

 

Now, the PC already had a Watched on his sheet (since the Master of Assassins was his boss), and he did a fine job on his own roleplaying out his tension with the man. However, that detail better enabled ME to participate in that effort. For instance (this never came up), I could have had the Master of Assassins require that the PC tug on his right earlobe as the secret sign for a particular meeting.... the same ear that had the earring. It's a detail that requires no extra time, doesn't take the spotlight from the other PCs, but it is something that THAT PLAYER might smile and say "You bastard."

[Zen Archer]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

An old version of the game Traveller actually allowed your character to die in roll-up, which always struck me at the time as weird, but now strikes me as kinda cool.

 

Struck me as stupid first time I heard about it' date=' still strikes me as stupid.[/quote']

 

Stupid it may have been, but evidently it's notable enough to get a mention on the current Kickstarter page for the 5th ed.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

See, I suspect questionnaires to be a bit restrictive/limiting (though still better than nothing). I worry that a player would only focus on those questions (and not work beyond them), and that they would give answers like "My parents were killed when I was a young boy" instead of "One day, when out picking apples, a group of bandits waylaid my family..."

 

The latter gives the GM and player all sorts of ammo for fun. Does he always have an unpleasant flashback when he sees an apple? Perhaps an NPC could accidentally or on PURPOSE use this during a conversation.... or perhaps the GM could opt to set an important fight in an apple orchard, as a nod to the PC's backstory.

 

I find questionnaires can be useful as before/during character creation, however. I'd still welcome a backstory on top of it though, to paint a picture.

 

 

And you're right: the real reward is in the player having fun with it. Though I can't imagine how a background would limit a GM...unless he didn't realize he could say no to a particular element of that story.

 

 

Oh, I'm fully interactive. I will go through stuff with players either in a pregame chat or (sometimes) a solo introductory session. Well, I say I will, i do not play that much these days and when I do it tends to be weekend sessions, so getting on with the scenario is usually a priority, but I have done all that stuff, and even in time restricted games, I find that individual elements inevitably come to the fore. Players are used to me introducing someone and telling them that one or more of them know that NPC.

 

I ask pretty basic questions: family, and relationships, job, career, aspirations, people you are particularly impressed by, people you particularly don't like, potted history bio stuff, and it varies from game to game - if you are playing a group of hothoused clones, you may not even know your own background, beside training and immediate group dynamics.

 

What I tend to find is that people will either provide too much information, then be faintly disappointed when it does not all get used, or the wrong sort of information for what I CAN get into a game - of course there are also some really useful ones, which is why I think it is in idea worth pursuing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

I have one of these questionares. A 20 Question one.

 

But to some I simply have no answer. I have some pretty solid ideas for some of them, but for others I just draw a blank.

 

 

About such small things like "fear of apples":

I don't think that should be part of either complciation or background. I think it would better to give the player the option to make a list of "things I would like the GM to implement". This can be good things ("One day the president should have a reason to gratulate my hero personally."), bad things ("I want her to be captured by her villain and almsot killed, before the others save her.") or odd things:

Being forced to work with his foe. Being saved by ones Nemesis. Showing an unusual protectiveness of Labradors (but not other dogs).

You know, the kind of stuff that might be nice to have in one adventure - but wouldn't make it to a complication or a relevant part of the storyline.

 

We have adopted the idea of 'Quirks' - 1 point complication - you can have up to 5 of them - that are pre-complications, literally quirks of personality, like 'does not like apples', 'prefers redheads', 'crush on X', 'constantly drinking water', whatever - nothing you are ever likely to get a bonus or penalty for but which helps to direct your role play. They are not, in any way, enforced, they are there for colour - a freebie that everyone gets. I actually find that they tend to have quite an impact on role playing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Both Greywind and Sean Waters make valid points and represent where I am getting even if I have failed to make it clear. If I read you guys correctly' date=' you more or less agree with me when I believe that fair and balanced are seldom, if ever, the results of game mechanics. They are a matter of how the story is ran which to me means both the choices of the GM and the players. One of my aphorisms is "roleplaying is a team sport" meaning we either win together or lose together, and if we are playing as a team, the differences between character point costs shouldn't matter.[/quote']

 

I absolutely agree: the fairest and most balanced game mechanics will not ensure a fair and balanced experience for the player - that is the job of the GM. Each player will have different views of what they want anyway - one friend of mine was never happier than when his character was suffering terrible strife, both physically and emotionally. I think fielding characters with wildly different points can be a real challenge for the GM, so I avoid it, but a few points don't really make a lot of difference.

 

Despite that I am against rewarding backgrounds with points, at least that way round, because, from a psychological point of view, I do not think it is the best way to engage players in the game and their characters.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Rolling dice for stats is inherently unfair. Do you have any idea how many characters were killed during generation? Around here it was often referred to as "Sudden Character Death Syndrome".

 

Never played a game with the sudden death syndrome, but rolling a three for a dwarf in D&D and not allowing to change it was disapointing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Never played a game with the sudden death syndrome' date=' but rolling a three for a dwarf in D&D and not allowing to change it was disapointing.[/quote']

 

Does DnD have a Height stat now?

[rjcurrie]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Players always have the option of asking where the plot is going in regard to their character and have the power to say "no" if they don't like that direction.

 

Really? So the GM should give up future developments because poor little player might not like it? Good grief. You're creating a character to interact with the GM and the world (including the other player characters). That interaction will bring about changes in your character. Some you'll like; some you might not like. I see far too many players who don't want their characters to be affected by the world but rather just play out some kind of pre-determined story with their character regardless of the rest of the world

[rjcurrie]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Just a comment on character generation death in Traveller. I think it's important to note that rolling up a character in Traveller from start to finish took about 10 minutes, so starting over because your character died was seldom a huge issue.

[The Main Man]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

I reward Character Points, Active Points, and bonus Heroic Action Points per game depending on the background and character concept. It makes for nice diversity. General rates are +4% of base CP

In bonus CP, +2% in bonus AP, or +1% in bonus HAPs/game.

 

I also reward bonus Character Points that are strictly for Background Skills and Perks. +6 CP for each reward (see below).

 

Furthermore, I give one reward if the player at least discusses their character concept with the majority of the group, one reward for a written background, and they get to choose a reward for completing both to my satisfaction.

 

I offer much to gain to my players if they really think about their characters and discuss it with their fellow players. Nothing like a group of realized characters who have chemistry out of the gate.

[Christopher]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Really? So the GM should give up future developments because poor little player might not like it?

I firt thought you meant that ironic. The answer is: "Yes, of course. How can you even ask?"

 

This is a game with the goal of everyone having a nice time. Inlcuding the player who plays the character. One can't enjoy a story he distastes or a character he cannot relate to.

 

You're creating a character to interact with the GM and the world (including the other player characters). That interaction will bring about changes in your character. Some you'll like; some you might not like. I see far too many players who don't want their characters to be affected by the world but rather just play out some kind of pre-determined story with their character regardless of the rest of the world

The sheet or the GM aren't the ones who have ultimative say about how the character develops. They player is.

 

I don't say characters should not develop, but it should be the player that decides the direction and the time. The GM forcing changes on the Player that later does not likes will only result in grief.

 

Setbacks may happen (in fact any true heroic story needs a mayor setback with "all hope is lost"). But the players must trust the GM that it will ultimatively work out well.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Really? So the GM should give up future developments because poor little player might not like it?

Absolutely. If your GM decides to go on a "tragedy porn" kick and rape and murder DNPCs a player absolutely has the right to say "hell no". If an issue hits to close to home (perhaps something related to abuse earlier in life, recent death of a friend/relative, et cetera) the player has every right to say "you know, I'm not comfortable role playing this topic".

 

Good grief. You're creating a character to interact with the GM and the world (including the other player characters). That interaction will bring about changes in your character. Some you'll like; some you might not like. I see far too many players who don't want their characters to be affected by the world but rather just play out some kind of pre-determined story with their character regardless of the rest of the world

 

I don't think anyone said that a player can (or should) simply refuse to deal with any development in the game world they don't like. That being said, the point of the game is for everyone to have fun and if there is a subject that makes someone truly uncomfortable the GM should at least consider alternate possibilities to his plans. Yes the player is "creating a character to interact with the GM and the world" but the GM is also creating a world for the players to have fun interacting with. Your attitude (condescending comments: "poor little player" "good grief") comes across very adversarial, GM vs PC, "if the player doesn't like it too bad, it's my world". That's not the sort world I want to play in or the sort of GM I want to play with.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

I firt thought you meant that ironic. The answer is: "Yes, of course. How can you even ask?"

 

This is a game with the goal of everyone having a nice time. Inlcuding the player who plays the character. One can't enjoy a story he distastes or a character he cannot relate to......

 

...and including the GM who probably put more work into the game than any other participant, and presumably is not out to simply screw over the player. Sometimes going somewhere unexpected with a character, or having something happen to them you would not have wished on them makes for the most interesting sort of game.

 

The player gets to react to what the GM presents them with and even guide the story, within the envelope of the game story itself. The player can suggest ideas about what might happen. The GM directly controls what actually happens with the world and everyone in it but the PCs though.

 

I'm with rjcurrie here, the player comes to the GM's table. Of course they don;t have to play if the game is not to their liking and of course they should discuss their issues with the GM, but don't ever forget that the GM is playing too, and the role of the GM is to run the game.

[Christopher]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

...and including the GM who probably put more work into the game than any other participant' date=' and presumably is not out to simply screw over the player. Sometimes going somewhere unexpected with a character, or having something happen to them you would not have wished on them makes for the most interesting sort of game.[/quote']

When the player has a problem with his characters DNCP's being brutally raped and murdered but the GM's story depends on it - then the GM plays a type of game the players simply does not.

When you start preparing your adventure, the FIRST step has to be to figure out if the Players are okay with the tone and the bad stuff that will happen (without any chance for them to prevent it).

 

Again, I don't say "nothing bad should ever happen". That would be dull gaming.

But if the player expresses that he is not comfortable with the direction the adventure takes, then the GM has just to accept that and go on without that part. No mater how much the GM loves his scenario and how much work he put into it, his fun should never come at the expense of one player.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Again, I don't say "nothing bad should ever happen". That would be dull gaming.

But if the player expresses that he is not comfortable with the direction the adventure takes, then the GM has just to accept that and go on without that part. No mater how much the GM loves his scenario and how much work he put into it, his fun should never come at the expense of one player.

 

Never say never. Is the GM's fun coming at the expense of one player, or are that player's demands reducing/removing the fun for all the other players and the GM.

 

GM: "The news is broadcasting a report of a supervillain attack downtown"

 

P1: "To the RatCave - I'll take the Ratmobile to the scene"

P2: "Up, up and away - flying downtown"

P3: "Zounds! I hurl my mighty spear, grasping it to fly downtown - ho, villain!"

P4: "That has nothing to do with my tea shoppe. I continue brewing tea for the afternoon rush."

 

The GM should set the tone of the campaign, and it should be understood and agreed with the players. The players then have a responsibility to build characters who fit in that campaign setting and tone. The GM should be reviewing the characters with that in mind. If Player 4 obstinately insists his character's life focus is his tea shoppe and "it will fit, don't worry", then he has no right to whine that he sits around watching the others battle supervillains while his character operates his tea shoppe.

 

The GM bears responsibilities as well. If he's promised a four colour Supers game and accepted a True Blue Law Abiding Super, then don't make success contingent on contravening international law by violating the borders of a sovereign nation. But the players also bear responsibility.

 

And, coming back to the original question, why should the GM reward a player for presenting a character background/personality sketch that runs counter to the campaign?

[Christopher]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

Never say never. Is the GM's fun coming at the expense of one player, or are that player's demands reducing/removing the fun for all the other players and the GM.

 

GM: "The news is broadcasting a report of a supervillain attack downtown"

 

P1: "To the RatCave - I'll take the Ratmobile to the scene"

P2: "Up, up and away - flying downtown"

P3: "Zounds! I hurl my mighty spear, grasping it to fly downtown - ho, villain!"

P4: "That has nothing to do with my tea shoppe. I continue brewing tea for the afternoon rush."

Quite obviosly that player 4 is not intersted in superheroics at all, so he is in the wrong game. That is a million miles from any example we had so far.

 

And' date=' coming back to the original question, why should the GM reward a player for presenting a character background/personality sketch that runs counter to the campaign?[/quote']

The same reason he rewards players for being present: It apparently improves the quality of the gaming experience for everyone.

And he decided too, because he is the GM.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Background Story Rewards

 

The same reason he rewards players for being present: It apparently improves the quality of the gaming experience for everyone.

And he decided too, because he is the GM.

 

One: A background counter to the game is not likely to "improve the quality of the gaming experience" for anyone, much less everyone.

 

Two: The reward for being present is participating in the game. As Sean pointed out, the reward for a good personality and background that ties to the game is enhanced participation in the game.

 

Three: What is the GM's reward for being present? If the intrinsic reward of running the game is sufficient for him, why is the intrinsic reward of playing in the game inadequate for the players? "Fun" is the reward. If the fun is there, character power bribes are not needed. If the fun is not there, character power bribes are not going to fix that.

 

Except, I suppose, for players who are motivated by character power fantasies.