• The curse of the dark backstory

    From Spalls Hurgenson@spallshurgenson@gmail.com to rec.games.frp.dnd on Sun Oct 5 19:32:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd


    SO, go watch this video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixgzbL0r0s0
    (Or don't, since I'm just going to describe it here anyway. You'll
    probably enjoy their rendition more, though).


    IT'S a short comedy video of a bunch of players in a D&D gaming,
    meeting in the proverbial tavern, and introducing their characters.
    Each one tries to out-compete the others, Four Yorkshiremen-style,
    with who has the most tragic backstory. At one point the beleaguered
    DM even snarks, "well, that's enough for your 1st level characters,"
    trying to rein them in. It's a bit over-the-top, but funny.


    BUT it's not really the video I wanted to discuss. Rather, watching
    that video reminded me of my own D&D sessions. Because we had similar
    issues in our games: all to often, our characters --some of my own
    included!-- would have these epically long histories. They weren't
    always dark and full of woe (but often were), but it all seemed a bit
    much for starting characters, some of whom would have a hard time
    winning a battle against a 1st Edition House-cat.

    BUT, really, that video reminded me of TWO characters in particular
    who suffered from this angsty plight (No, this time, neither of them
    were mine) who perhaps epitomized the problem like no other. You'll
    forgive me if I don't remember specific details but I think you'll get
    the gist.

    *

    LET'S start with Andy's character. He was a 1st level fighter, of
    course, but one who had amassed an amazing history. We were, at the
    time, playing in the Forgotten Realms, and his character had managed
    to involve himself -even if only peripherally- with pretty much every
    major event and character to that point. He'd met Drizzt and
    Elminster, he'd dallied briefly in Thay, he'd sailed to Maztica and
    back; the lot. But when the DM called him on this, and asked how he'd
    done all this and yet was now here in a tavern bereft of all the most
    basic skills, Andy explained, after a moment's thought, that as his
    character had low wisdom, he thus 'hadn't learned anything from his experiences.' It was such a perfect answer that the DM allowed his
    character. His stories made for perfect 'grizzled old warrior'
    commentary throughout the adventure that it was the right call. The
    only downside --for Andy, that is-- is that his character gained the
    nickname 'The Gump'... after the eponymous movie "Forest Gump", whom
    had a similar career. Since Andy envision his character as slightly
    less carefree (and less mentally challenged) than Forest, this irked
    him terribly, but he was never able to escape the nom de guerre.

    *

    PETER joined a different campaign sometime later. His character --a
    fallen paladin-- likewise had quite an impressive history, but in his
    backstory he was much more directly involved in the action. He'd
    fought demons, toppled evil monarchs, and rescued cities from
    rampaging dragons; he'd done it all. But, it was explained, all that
    backstory also earned him innumerable enemies, one of whom eventually
    caught and tortured him for years. Also, being undead (and this being
    a 2nd Ed game), they'd sucked away all his levels until he was a
    pitiful level 1 character again. After his nemesis was defeated (by
    some other adventurers) the battered paladin re-emerged into the world
    to try and make something new of himself. The DM grumbled a bit, but
    allowed the character.

    THERE was a follow-up to that, though. A few adventures later, the
    party was hired to clear out some wights from a local cemetery.
    Because the characters were relatively low-level, the DM conveniently
    allowed them access to a priest who offered Restoration spells at an
    extremely low price. It was a special offer mainly made because the
    monsters were too high-level for the players.

    [Rules-As-Written, the Clerical /Restoration/ spell didn't
    actually restore levels lost to energy drain, but it's
    been a house-rule used by pretty much every DM I played
    with in that era. Level drain was such a nasty, permanent
    attack that was granted to waaay too many low-level
    monsters that everybody tried to mitigate its effects one
    way or another]

    AFTER a while, Peter pointed out that, with his hoarded gold, he
    could probably afford to pay the cleric to restore him to his
    original, back-story character level. He then graciously allowed he
    wouldn't do this, in order to maintain party balance, but strongly
    suggested the DM recompense him in some other way for this sacrifice.
    The DM, in turn, agreed that there was nothing in the rules that would
    stop the player from restoring his character, and if Peter wanted to
    do that the DM would allow it... but then rule that Peter's character
    would fairly quickly start remembering all the Unfinished Business
    from his former life that he'd put off because, as a low-level
    schmuck, it had been beyond his abilities up to that point. That
    business being more important than the random adventures (and far too
    difficult for his current companions to face), he'd have to leave the
    campaign and go off on his own... effectively retiring the character.
    Player's choice.

    (Peter stayed low-level... but he was a disruptive player who didn't
    really fit in well with the rest of the group, and he parted ways a
    little bit later.)

    *

    ANYWAY, watching the video (do you remember the video? This is a
    post about a video) reminded me of those particular characters, and
    I'd thought I'd share their stories here.


    DO you have any other tales of PCs with outlandishly detailed back
    stories unsuitable for 1st level characters?




    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mortimer Houghton@mortimer@VivoBook.X512D to rec.games.frp.dnd on Tue Oct 7 02:27:27 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd

    Never experienced that myself, but I have to admit the
    two stories you shared were pretty funny. Thanks for
    sharing.
    --
    There are the known knowns, things we know we know; and the known
    unknowns, things we know we do not know; but there are also the
    unknown unknowns, those things we don't know we don't know...but
    what about the unknown knowns, things we do not know we know?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Spalls Hurgenson@spallshurgenson@gmail.com to rec.games.frp.dnd on Tue Oct 7 11:13:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 02:27:27 -0000 (UTC), Mortimer Houghton <mortimer@VivoBook.X512D> wrote:

    Never experienced that myself, but I have to admit the
    two stories you shared were pretty funny. Thanks for
    sharing.

    I suppose it depends on the group. Some don't really bother with
    backstories for their characters. I've known some DMs who get quite
    upset if your character /doesn't/ have a backstory; they take it as a
    sign that didn't see your avatar as anything but a token, rather than
    a character in and of itself.

    But that attitude did sometimes lead to situations like in my original
    post, where the backstories became so grandiose and top-heavy that
    they became ridiculous.

    I tend towards the "your character should have a backstory" camp
    myself, but I try not to force it on other players, and I don't think
    it's a mandatory part of the game. Different people play D&D for
    different reasons; some people (like myself) like the theatre of it,
    the story. Others just like the mechanics. If this difference is
    leading to a conflict within the players and DM, it probably means
    somebody is in the wrong gaming group ;-)


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mortimer Houghton@mortimer@VivoBook.X512D to rec.games.frp.dnd on Tue Oct 7 16:41:19 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd

    Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 02:27:27 -0000 (UTC), Mortimer Houghton ><mortimer@VivoBook.X512D> wrote:

    Never experienced that myself, but I have to admit the
    two stories you shared were pretty funny. Thanks for
    sharing.

    I suppose it depends on the group. Some don't really bother with
    backstories for their characters. I've known some DMs who get quite
    upset if your character /doesn't/ have a backstory; they take it as a
    sign that didn't see your avatar as anything but a token, rather than
    a character in and of itself.

    But that attitude did sometimes lead to situations like in my original
    post, where the backstories became so grandiose and top-heavy that
    they became ridiculous.

    I tend towards the "your character should have a backstory" camp
    myself, but I try not to force it on other players, and I don't think
    it's a mandatory part of the game. Different people play D&D for
    different reasons; some people (like myself) like the theatre of it,
    the story. Others just like the mechanics. If this difference is
    leading to a conflict within the players and DM, it probably means
    somebody is in the wrong gaming group ;-)

    Our group does backstories, but they are usually light, probably
    befitting a level 1 character.
    --
    There are the known knowns, things we know we know; and the known
    unknowns, things we know we do not know; but there are also the
    unknown unknowns, those things we don't know we don't know...but
    what about the unknown knowns, things we do not know we know?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Spalls Hurgenson@spallshurgenson@gmail.com to rec.games.frp.dnd on Tue Oct 7 14:52:56 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.dnd

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 16:41:19 -0000 (UTC), Mortimer Houghton <mortimer@VivoBook.X512D> wrote:

    Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 02:27:27 -0000 (UTC), Mortimer Houghton >><mortimer@VivoBook.X512D> wrote:

    Never experienced that myself, but I have to admit the
    two stories you shared were pretty funny. Thanks for
    sharing.

    I suppose it depends on the group. Some don't really bother with >>backstories for their characters. I've known some DMs who get quite
    upset if your character /doesn't/ have a backstory; they take it as a
    sign that didn't see your avatar as anything but a token, rather than
    a character in and of itself.

    But that attitude did sometimes lead to situations like in my original >>post, where the backstories became so grandiose and top-heavy that
    they became ridiculous.

    I tend towards the "your character should have a backstory" camp
    myself, but I try not to force it on other players, and I don't think
    it's a mandatory part of the game. Different people play D&D for
    different reasons; some people (like myself) like the theatre of it,
    the story. Others just like the mechanics. If this difference is
    leading to a conflict within the players and DM, it probably means
    somebody is in the wrong gaming group ;-)

    Our group does backstories, but they are usually light, probably
    befitting a level 1 character.

    Oh, most of ours weren't as bad either. But it did happen, more than a
    few times, that a player would come in with an excessively detailed
    history (and sometimes I was that player, I admit). Alternately, the
    player might have a fairly basic backstory, but over the course of
    several adventures we'd fill it in with more and more details.* Either
    way, one way or another a few characters had pre-adventure biographies
    that probably could have filled several fantasy novels ;-P

    Which is fine. Like I said, as DM I always appreciated players who put
    so much effort into their characters. It got a bit antsy if the player
    put stuff in the game that blatantly violated the tone or lore of the
    world, but in pretty much every occassion the player was considerate
    enough to accept my edits to keep things in line with the rest of the
    campaign.

    The only real problem is if a player uses this extensive back-history
    to try and give themselves advantage over the other players (or the
    game). I didn't DM in either of the examples in my original post, but
    I'd have been fine with Andy's character. Peter's (especially after he postulated the idea that he could magic his way to 15th level), not so
    much.

    But also, there are some people who just don't care for that sort of
    stuff. They just want the fun of killing trolls, finding loot, and
    solving their way through trap-dungeons. That's absolutely fine too...
    although that player probably wouldn't have as much fun in campaigns I
    ran, where character-interactions had a lot more import.






    * there was one character who started the game with a fairly basic
    backstory: family murdered by goblins, found by an adventurer who
    raised him and the PC later took the trade as his own. But several
    years later we'd discovered he was the prince-descendant of a lost
    kingdom, the orcs were led by a wanna-be god, and all sorts of
    nonsense of the sort. We joked about how soap opera-ish the whole
    thing was becoming, but we were having fun so we didn't really care.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2