Background Challenge

Just saw this on Twitter:

D&D challenge: Give your characters a pleasant backstory. Give them a good relationship with their parents. Make their childhood idyllic. Make their need for adventure about them just trying to live their life. 

The funny thing is, some of my characters are like this.  Okay, most of them do have some sort of tragedy in their backgrounds, but who really goes twenty years to without some bad moments?  My characters are still far from the edgelords some people design.  Am I wrong?  Let me revisit some of my characters:

Dervish - Human Weapon Master, NeverWinter Nights
Raised by a single father and six brothers, she was a tomboy.  When her father tried to get her to be more ladylike, she left home.  Okay, the tweet has me there.  Guilty.

Sillia Aylomein - Human Bard, NeverWinter Nights.
Was expelled from music college, ran away from home so she wouldn't have to tell her parents.  Fine.  Guilty.

Brynwyn Elswyth - Elf Arcane Archer, NeverWinter Nights.
Left home because she blamed herself for not saving her brother from being killed by orcs.  Guilty.

Nara Cavell - Human Cleric, Tantris Campaign.
I never really wrote out a backstory for her or mentioned her parents, but it was implied that she was an orphan that was raised by the church.  So Guilty, I guess.

Voranna Elun - Eladrin Ranger, Living Forgotten Realms.
I never wrote out a background.  She had spent years living in the forest, because that's what makes her happy.  I have no reason to believe her home life was unhappy, I'm going to plead Not Guilty on this one.

Aria Thatcher - Half-Elf Bard, Scarred Lands campaign.
Okay, she never really grew close to her stepfather, because she was the product of an affair, but overall she had a happy home life.  She left home because she didn't want to end up being a farmer.  I think this is pretty close to the Background Challenge itself.  Not Guilty.

Talindra Seryth - Razorclaw Shifter Avenger, Artifact Hunters campaign.
Her birth tribe abandoned her because they saw her unusual fur color as a bad omen.  Guilty.

Kryla Bloodfang - Dragonborn Sorceror, ToEE campaign.
Left home because her parents feared magic.  Guilty.

Calla Noble - Human Knight, ToEE campaign.
The daughter of a prostitute and a con artist... you know what?  I'm just going to stop right there and plead Guilty.

Vex Corman - Half-Elf Monk, Unlikely Heroes campaign.
Raised by a monastery, with no memory of her real parents.  Guilty.

Dalia Lockwood - Human Ardent, Unlikely Heroes campaign.
Had a wonderful childhood, thanks to her latent psychic powers making everyone like her.  Not Guilty.

Flora Oakwillow - Hamadryad Seeker, Unlikely Heroes campaign.
Presumably had a wonderful childhood as one of the Fey protectors of Darkmoon Vale.  Not Guilty.

Malta Klonk - Human Engineer, Traveller campaign.
She was clumsy, causing her parents to steer her away from physical activities, but it seems like they were supportive and she didn't have any tragedies until she was an adult.  Not Guilty.

Terri Bolton - Human Mechanic, Rifts 2112 campaign.
She was closer to her father than her mother, then her dad died while she was in high school.  Guilty.

Danica Branford - Human Inventor, Gurps campaign.
No childhood mentioned in her background, which means Not Guilty.

Raz - Human Sorcerer, Dragon's Demand campaign.
I rolled her background randomly, so this one's exempt from the challenge.

Bjertha Brawlbaker - Dwarf Fighter, Shattered Star campaign.
Also rolled randomly, exempt.

Val Ravensword - Half-Orc Paladin, OAWYM campaign.
Rolled randomly, exempt.

Welp, I'm a lot guiltier than I thought.

I dunno, though.  I think some sort of tragedy is a good way to get people out of the house, rather than complacently trying to follow in their parents' footsteps.  But the tweet has a point; it's weird that so many people have similar backgrounds.

On the other hand, "adventurer" isn't supposed to be a common profession.  It takes a very specific type of person to accept such a dangerous and unpredictable career, and that sort of decision may require a specific background.  For example, someone who feels they have nothing to lose, because they already lost their family or hometown.

The first movie I ever really remember seeing as a kid was Star Wars.  The Star Wars universe shaped a large part of my childhood.  Luke Skywalker's arc is probably a huge influence on my backstories.  He was raised by farmers, but always wanted something more.  He wanted to leave to become an adventurer (actually to "join the academy", but really he was looking for any excuse to get away), but his family wouldn't let him go.  Then there was the tragedy - his surrogate parents getting killed - and he barely even mourns them in his haste to get off planet.

My favorite DM seems to dislike it when people write out long backstories.  As far as I can tell, he prefers randomly generated backgrounds and/or level 1 characters being blank slates with no predefined personality.  I'll have to actually ask him about that sometime.  Maybe he's just seen so many similar backstories at this point that he prefers the variety of randomly generated ones.

Honestly, I think a backstory should be interesting.  It gives the player a chance to write, and writing is a wonderful hobby.  As long as the player doesn’t try to shoehorn in any crazy out-of-character abilities, or claim the character has already done big things (if they’ve already slayed dragons, how come they start with 0 xp?), I think a detailed backstory is great.  It gives the character life and dimension, so they’re more than just numbers on a page.  And a good backstory will contain some degree of tragedy.

I can see why it’s tedious, though.  When a new movie or TV show comes about, a lot of players get inspired to create similar characters.  Everyone who reads R.A. Salvatore goes through a Drizzt phase, and wants to build a Drow Ranger.  When the Lord of the Rings trilogy hit theaters, a ton of people rolled up Aragorn clones.  So it makes sense that even when they aren’t trying to emulate existing characters, they still use similar tropes to make their backstories.  It can be annoying for players/DMs who’ve already passed that phase to see a bunch of newbies bring the same tired archetypes to the table. 

But get over it.  Frankly, I think this is another case where players should be allowed to play what they want to play.  If you want them to get through that phase, you have to let them play it out.

And there’s always the risk that your backstory will be the most interesting thing that happens to your character.  It’s like when you watch a movie that has some sort of introductory flashback in the beginning, and you realize, “Wow, that would make a better movie than this one.  I wish they’d filmed that story instead.”  So that’s another good reason to concentrate on family issues.  If these characters haven’t gone on any epic adventures yet, then of course the most significant events are going to be more personal and related to their friends and family.

As for myself, I’m going to make an effort to make my next character with this challenge in mind.  Loving family, great upbringing, no tragedies, I just wanna slay dragons.  Seems a little boring, but I suppose the backstory isn’t supposed to be the most exciting part of your character’s life.  It’s whatever happens next that matters.

The Importance of Agency

As far as I'm concerned, D&D is a game about living out your fantasies.  It gives you the opportunity to control a character in a fairy tale, and allows you to tune out real life problems in favor of fictional problems for a few hours a week.  Considering how difficult it is to arrange a time each week that all the players can make it to the game, it's important that each player is having fun and is playing a character they really want to play.

I've already mentioned this subject in past blogs, most notably my rant about rolling stats.  TL;DR version:  If that's how everyone at your table wants to generate characters, great, but I personally prefer allowing players to have more creative control in building their characters.

But today I want to talk about campaign ideas that remove agency.  For the record, I'm using the following definition of agency:

"In social science, agency is the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices." - Wikipedia

Every DM lies awake at night trying to come up with brand new, creative ideas for campaigns.  Unfortunately, a lot of them come up with the exact same "brand new, creative ideas".  One that I see tossed around a lot is amnesia-themed campaigns.

In a typical amnesia scenario, the DM builds characters for all their players, who don't even know what race or class they will be playing at the beginning of the campaign.  The PCs typically wake up with no memories, knowing only what they see in front of them.  They fill out their own character sheets one discovery at a time.

I look like a human?  Write that down.  I'm good with a lockpick?  I must be a Rogue, write it down.  By the end of the first session, you'll probably have most of your character sheet filled out, and can start working on the campaign's true plot - finding out why you lost your memories and getting your life back.

Yes, it’s an interesting idea, and it would make a pretty fun one-shot.  But after the initial session, you’re left playing a character you didn’t design.  Now, a good DM might know their players well enough to build characters they’ll enjoy.  If you’re reading this and considering running such a campaign, ask your players in advance which races and classes they like most.  Then build characters with that in mind.  Once they’ve assembled their entire character sheet, allow them to make minor changes if they don’t like your choices.  I’m not much of a powergamer myself, but min/maxers deserve to have fun just as much as the rest of us, and should be given a little leeway.

One DM I know is bothered by players who always play the same characters.  He says he wants to run a campaign where, once everyone has created their character, they pass their character sheet to their left so that everyone plays a character they didn’t design.  Now, I want to stress that this DM is a good friend and I love him.  But if he pulled this crap on me at the start of a campaign, I would walk the fuck right out, and he knows it.  Not only would I be playing a character I didn’t create, but in such a scenario, it would feel like I was playing someone else’s character.  I’d have trouble making decisions as that character, because I wouldn’t know if I was playing the character the way the original author intended.  Basically, I want my character to feel like an extension of myself, and this scenario makes me feel further detached from my character.

Although, switching character sheets around could be fun for a “body swap” story, where the PCs get their minds switched by an evil wizard.  The story could have them searching for the wizard to get themselves switched back.  But this story works best in an existing campaign, where the characters’ personalities are well established, so that the switching has more impact.  If you do it to brand new characters, when they’re still just numbers on a page, there’s nothing really to “switch”, it’s just making the players play different classes.  I also think this side story should only last two or three sessions before they go back to normal, so the players can get back to controlling the characters they designed.

Honestly, I don’t get why some DMs care so much what their players play.  The PC is the one part of the story the player controls.  Everything else in the world is DM’s choice – setting, NPCs, technology level, whether magic is common, all the way down to whether the local butcher is left handed.  I just don’t understand DMs who also want to control the one part of the game that’s supposed to be up to the players.  It seems greedy.  Might as well roll their dice for them too, and make all their decisions.  Heck, might as well not even bother meeting up, and just write a book instead.

I know a guy who almost always plays the same character.  Not just the same race/class, but even the same name, personality traits, and facial disfigurement.  I’ve seen him play this character in several campaigns, taking place in different universes.  And you know what?  It’s never caused us any problems.  It’s never pulled me out of the game.  Is my friend missing out by not experiencing what other classes might offer?  I doubt it; he’s been playing D&D a lot longer than I have.  He probably tried all the classes and races long before I ever met him, and now he has his favorite.  I can’t fault him for that, any more than I can fault someone for always ordering their favorite flavor at Baskin Robbins.  If a DM forbade him from playing that character, he’d probably go find a different group.

Maybe you think it’s good for your players to get out of their comfort zones.  But you know what?  That’s not your job.  You’re not their psychiatrist, you’re their dungeon master.  Your job is to create interesting worlds for them to explore, design powerful villains for them to fight, and craft intricate plot hooks for them to ignore.  Unless a player wants to play a character that doesn’t fit the theme of your campaign, then it’s none of your business what kind of PC they play.  Actually, even if a player wanted to play a race that doesn’t exist in my universe, I’d probably work with them to make it happen.   Maybe they fell through a wormhole or something.  An out-of-place character generates some cool roleplay scenarios.

I believe in player agency.  It’s part of what makes RPGs appealing, as opposed to more restrictive board games.  And it’s a large part of the reason I play.