Do You Reveal PCs' Backgrounds?

[Brian Stanfield]

I'm running a Pulp HERO campaign, and some of my characters have really (I mean really) interesting backgrounds mired in secrecy. These are all new players, and some of them really dug deep for their character conceptions. I'm proud of them just for that. However, now I have some characters with secrets, which are included as Complications. It makes for some good possible drama within the group of PCs as well as the players themselves.

 

So what I'm wondering is, have you ever had a situation like this in your campaign? How do you go about protecting the PC's secrets from the actual players while playing the game? Or do you? I like the idea of some secrecy among the PCs, obviously, because they don't know each other yet. I also like the idea of the players themselves discovering new things about each others' PCs as the game progresses (just as their characters would). But this makes for some dicey moments when the players are trying to play to their backgrounds without revealing all of their backgrounds. 

 

For example, I have a player whose PC was part of a pre-Soviet "Red Sparrow" program, so she has all kinds of training as an assassin. But none of the characters know this because she left Russia and became a translator at the League of Nations, and is so cosmopolitan that she no longer appears to be Russian. Her skills come up in the game, and I try to encourage her to remember what she can do, but she tends to say things like "Oh yeah, because I know how to kill people," or something like that, which immediately attracts the other players' attention. She's still learning how to play, after all. 

 

I have another player who is a former Romani circus performer turned silent film actress with a heavy accent that didn't translate into the "talkies" very well, so she had to retire. The players know her as an actress, but nobody knows her background. I keep trying to remind her of things she can do in certain situations, but she too, as a new player, is not completely cognizant of hat she's revealing in her comments about her character. 

 

Given these two examples, what would you do in situations like this? In reality, the players don't seem to remember the little slips, so it's probably not going to spoil the surprises later as their backgrounds get revealed. But it's a bit nerve-racking for me to try to keep track of what's been revealed and what hasn't. 

 

What I don't want to do is have the players soliloquy their backgrounds to each other as PCs, as so often happens with new players (I actually had one player's PC say to another PC "I'm surly and I don't like people" ). But does it make a difference if the players actually know the information about each other's PCs? They could all be invested in developing the story if they have all the information, but it loses some of the fun of genuine revelation later in the campaign. 

 

What do you think? Keep in mind, I'm trying to teach role-playing best practices to my new players in the process of playing. 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

I'm of the opinion that giving new players (any players really, but mainly new players) access to information out-of-character that they don't have in-character is a Bad Idea.  They're learning to pretend to be their characters, don't make them multitask by also pretending to not know things.  The human brain is not good at having-but-not-using information because it's very good at having-and-using information. 

 

That said, I feel that the sharing-of-secrets is a great way to bring a party together.  I'd personally suggest running adventures early on in which revealing parts of the background will make things much easier, then follow that up with reveal-adventures wherein the secrets come to light. 

[Duke Bushido]

Yeah, pretty much what he said.

 

Let them keep a few secrets, but right off the bat get them in the habit of accepting that secrets are more fun when they come out. 

[dsatow]

You want to leave whether they reveal their secrets or not up to them. You can, however,  help them along based on your scenarios and environment.  Start subtly and watch the player reaction.  If they feel comfortable with this, you can expand otherwise back off.

 

Examples:

In the former Red Sparrow:

1. They encounter another Red Sparrow whose skills appear to be very similar to the player.  That player can make Int rolls to determine what the other Red Sparrow will do.
2. The team encounters a spy and tracks them back to their base of operations.  Again, the PC can make Int rolls based on what spies generally do.
3. A security incident at the League of Nations has them tracking the player down.  Some suspicious items in her background sent up red flags.  If they don't respond to this threat, the player will be arrested by the League of Nations task force and possibly scapegoated.
4. Maybe the program hasn't had a spy as good as her and want to take her back in.  Several current Red Sparrow trainees come after her to take her back.  Of course, the trainees are conditioned not to talk about the program, but other players maybe curious why this trained assassin group are after the player.  This scenario is a hit the players on the head with a brick scenario.

In the former actress:

1. A millionaire obsessive fanboy has canisters of film, publicity photos and posters, of the character.  They may even have gone so far as to send a detective to take pictures of her in stalker-ish fashion.
2. Family is big with the Romani in a Clan-Mafia sort of way.  If she is a practicing Romani, this might be included to her being sold as a bride since as she's no longer an actress her worth is declining.  Her extended family sold her to take advantage of what worth she has now and the bridegroom has come to collect.
3. The players come across a circus they need to infiltrate and guess what, the circus has an opening which the player has done before.

[zslane]

I sorta feel you're over-thinking this. Just let them play the game, and if some secrets are accidentally revealed, just let it happen. It's not going to ruin the game. It is all valuable learning experience for the new players anyway, so don't sweat it.

[Tech]

As a GM, I don't reveal PC's backgrounds. I let the players decide how and when, if at all, they want to tell their character's background to another character.

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, zslane said:

I sorta feel you're over-thinking this. Just let them play the game, and if some secrets are accidentally revealed, just let it happen. It's not going to ruin the game. It is all valuable learning experience for the new players anyway, so don't sweat it.

 

Yes and no.  While I would not design the game around revealing or maintaining their secrets, building their backgrounds into scenarios makes the game more focused on the characters.  If a character has KS's of Japanese history, geography and culture, and speaks Japanese, it would be a shame to have the whole campaign proceed with no link to Japan, ever.

[Brian Stanfield]

20 hours ago, zslane said:

I sorta feel you're over-thinking this. Just let them play the game, and if some secrets are accidentally revealed, just let it happen. It's not going to ruin the game. It is all valuable learning experience for the new players anyway, so don't sweat it.

 

19 hours ago, Tech said:

As a GM, I don't reveal PC's backgrounds. I let the players decide how and when, if at all, they want to tell their character's background to another character.

 

18 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Yes and no.  While I would not design the game around revealing or maintaining their secrets, building their backgrounds into scenarios makes the game more focused on the characters.  If a character has KS's of Japanese history, geography and culture, and speaks Japanese, it would be a shame to have the whole campaign proceed with no link to Japan, ever.

 

On 2/24/2020 at 6:53 PM, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I'm of the opinion that giving new players (any players really, but mainly new players) access to information out-of-character that they don't have in-character is a Bad Idea.  They're learning to pretend to be their characters, don't make them multitask by also pretending to not know things.  The human brain is not good at having-but-not-using information because it's very good at having-and-using information. 

 

That said, I feel that the sharing-of-secrets is a great way to bring a party together.  I'd personally suggest running adventures early on in which revealing parts of the background will make things much easier, then follow that up with reveal-adventures wherein the secrets come to light. 

 

I sorta am overthinking this, but I'm doing it in the interest of teaching good roleplaying habits. For example, when the driver in our last scene is waiting in the car, but then suddenly wants to participate in the conversation in the restaurant, we had to remind her that she wasn't actually there in the game. The balance between in character and out of character discussion is new to them, and I don't want to complicate it even more by making them have to bracket out what they know as players, but couldn't possibly know as characters. We all just roll with it as we go, but I was curious if anyone had any methods to minimize the "multitasking," as Gnome put it.

 

Thanks for the feedback.

[Brian Stanfield]

20 hours ago, dsatow said:

You want to leave whether they reveal their secrets or not up to them. You can, however,  help them along based on your scenarios and environment.  Start subtly and watch the player reaction.  If they feel comfortable with this, you can expand otherwise back off.

 

Examples:

In the former Red Sparrow:

1. They encounter another Red Sparrow whose skills appear to be very similar to the player.  That player can make Int rolls to determine what the other Red Sparrow will do.
2. The team encounters a spy and tracks them back to their base of operations.  Again, the PC can make Int rolls based on what spies generally do.
3. A security incident at the League of Nations has them tracking the player down.  Some suspicious items in her background sent up red flags.  If they don't respond to this threat, the player will be arrested by the League of Nations task force and possibly scapegoated.
4. Maybe the program hasn't had a spy as good as her and want to take her back in.  Several current Red Sparrow trainees come after her to take her back.  Of course, the trainees are conditioned not to talk about the program, but other players maybe curious why this trained assassin group are after the player.  This scenario is a hit the players on the head with a brick scenario.

In the former actress:

1. A millionaire obsessive fanboy has canisters of film, publicity photos and posters, of the character.  They may even have gone so far as to send a detective to take pictures of her in stalker-ish fashion.
2. Family is big with the Romani in a Clan-Mafia sort of way.  If she is a practicing Romani, this might be included to her being sold as a bride since as she's no longer an actress her worth is declining.  Her extended family sold her to take advantage of what worth she has now and the bridegroom has come to collect.
3. The players come across a circus they need to infiltrate and guess what, the circus has an opening which the player has done before.

 

Consider a good portion of these stolen! I actually had some ideas along these same lines, but hearing them presented back to me reassures me that I was on the right track. Thanks for the plot seeds!

[Greywind]

It depends on the character and any interactions with Hunteds and the like. If there is a big enough axe to grind and they don't care, they may toss out personal stuff as a way to goad the character.

[dsatow]

Just a comment

 

I had a player once who asked for other player input.  He basically said, "My Int is at best a 13.  I am playing a 23 Int character.  I could use the help."

[death tribble]

It is the same for Champions but it can depend on how the characters meet and how gregarious and garrulous the characters and by extension the players are. Then there are the questions of Mystery Disads which the players may wish to have so they may not know who their hunted is and why they are hunted for example..

[Brian Stanfield]

I need a dozen more "likes" for the day. I'll just give the whole group a 

[Amorkca]

7 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

For example, when the driver in our last scene is waiting in the car, but then suddenly wants to participate in the conversation in the restaurant

 

What genre is your game? Time frame (Current year? war time 1940's? 1980's? before internet?) involved, could they have high tech ear gadgets for communicating back & forth when not all together. 

 

Anything that keeps the players attention on the game is good stuff!

 

I used to have a player who would goof off while we were going through phases, and when his turn came up, he'd inevitably say, "What's happening?"  I took it a couple times then started saying your holding your phase till you know what you want to do. And move on...

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

5 minutes ago, Amorkca said:

Anything that keeps the players attention on the game is good stuff!

This can't be stressed enough.  People disengage when they're not being engaged with.  A great way to keep your players in the game is by keeping their characters in the game and doing things. 

I'm completely certain this is the cause of

7 minutes ago, Amorkca said:

I used to have a player who would goof off while we were going through phases, and when his turn came up, he'd inevitably say, "What's happening?" 

because if the player is twiddling their thumbs with no ability to interact with the game until their next Phase comes up, why would they pay attention?  They're not playing a role-playing game at that point, they're watching one when they came to play. 

[dsatow]

7 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

This can't be stressed enough.  People disengage when they're not being engaged with.  A great way to keep your players in the game is by keeping their characters in the game and doing things. 

I'm completely certain this is the cause of

because if the player is twiddling their thumbs with no ability to interact with the game until their next Phase comes up, why would they pay attention?  They're not playing a role-playing game at that point, they're watching one when they came to play. 

 

This sometimes happens, especially in combat, where say 2/3rd your players are martial artists/speedsters, and the other 1/3rd are slow plodding bricks.  I've had players go out for lunch, come back with pizza, finish the pizza, by the time all the speed 7s were done and the speed 4s could go.

 

In role playing situations, I try to do the "round the clock" method where you go to each player and ask them what are they doing and giving them 5 minutes.  This doesn't alleviate them not doing anything, but then again, its not like I didn't give them a chance,

[Tech]

12 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

13 hours ago, Amorkca said:

Anything that keeps the players attention on the game is good stuff!

This can't be stressed enough.  People disengage when they're not being engaged with.  A great way to keep your players in the game is by keeping their characters in the game and doing things. 

I'm completely certain this is the cause of

13 hours ago, Amorkca said:

I used to have a player who would goof off while we were going through phases, and when his turn came up, he'd inevitably say, "What's happening?" 

because if the player is twiddling their thumbs with no ability to interact with the game until their next Phase comes up, why would they pay attention?  They're not playing a role-playing game at that point, they're watching one when they came to play. 

 

People disengage when too much time goes by before their character can do something. This is, in part, the GMs fault. I've had a player who was more interested in his cell phone than playing - that was on him, not because of any character or game mechanic. If someone is getting pizza because combat is too slow, something's wrong. When in combat or not, keeping a PC involved is necessary, I agree. It takes some time and experience to make that happen, though. Players have to be patient when a beginning GM gives things a try. There needs to be player and GM interaction of what's working, what's not and what can be done. The GM is the play director, the actors still have to say something if the play isn't going well to get things moving smoothly (or vice versa).

[Brian Stanfield]

13 hours ago, Amorkca said:

What genre is your game? Time frame (Current year? war time 1940's? 1980's? before internet?) involved, could they have high tech ear gadgets for communicating back & forth when not all together. 

As I mentioned in the OP, it’s a pulp campaign so no fancy technology to help them keep in touch. Looking back on it, I probably should have had her standing guard outside and then give her some mysterious dude lurking in the shadows to keep her occupied and engaged. 

[ScottishFox]

Just did a piratical scene last night for a group.  There was the classic ship-wrecked damsel is a horrifying seaweed monster happening about 100 yards from the ship.

 

Let the players run through that and then surprised the guys who sat behind with, "Meanwhile, your attention is drawn by the sharp scream and sudden death of the sailor next to you as piscine monstrosities board your ship!".

 

I agree with the posters above.  You have to keep everyone engaged,

[Hugh Neilson]

6 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

This sometimes happens, especially in combat, where say 2/3rd your players are martial artists/speedsters, and the other 1/3rd are slow plodding bricks.  I've had players go out for lunch, come back with pizza, finish the pizza, by the time all the speed 7s were done and the speed 4s could go.

 

In role playing situations, I try to do the "round the clock" method where you go to each player and ask them what are they doing and giving them 5 minutes.  This doesn't alleviate them not doing anything, but then again, its not like I didn't give them a chance,

 

So none of the SPD 4 characters get attacked in combat when it's not their phase? 

 

How many players are we dealing with?  4 SPD 7 and 2 SPD 4 should still not be a huge lag for the SPD 4's, unless something else is dragging the pace down.  Even 6 players is a lot to share time.

[Tjack]

  It depends, I ran a ‘30’s campaign based on the old radio show “I Love a Mystery” and the PC’s were all members of “The A-One Detective Agency”  a kind of gumshoe’s version of the Adventures Club. The starting group were all supposed to be long time friends, so they knew most of each other’s history’s.  As new players/characters came in they could choose to be old time members or have me fold them into the current story. This dictated how much they knew about the others. 
   It’s a lot more fun do this kind of thing in game.

[dsatow]

2 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

So none of the SPD 4 characters get attacked in combat when it's not their phase? 

 

How many players are we dealing with?  4 SPD 7 and 2 SPD 4 should still not be a huge lag for the SPD 4's, unless something else is dragging the pace down.  Even 6 players is a lot to share time.

 

From what I could remember the game had 4 Spd 7 characters fighting 3 Spd 7 Characters and a bunch of agents at the bottom of the tripsheet.  The bricks were speed 4 and were fighting bricks.  Back then, most brick actions were limited and most agents had low damage attacks (I've changed my retinue of attacks since 4th ed).  So all the lower damage fighters fought each other while high damage high defense fighters fought each other.  The people playing the bricks would leave their DCV and Def on the table for people to see.  They would get hit a lot, find out how many times they took stun and resume later.  Their defs, stun, and con were high enough that it didn't matter in the short term.

 

So say you are at segment 9 as part of the brick pack and just finished your segment, this meant all the agents would go. Then top of 11 with the 7 characters(PCs and NPCs) going, then top of 12 with them all going again, before the bricks went.  Assuming each action took 3 minutes, that's 42 minutes of non-brick actions.  This doesn't include speedsters who did multiple move bys.  If a brick aborted, it was even worse for them.