My latest video:

[video=youtube_share;3sglQ94v6Es]https://youtu.be/3sglQ94v6Es[/youtube]

I never read backstories anyway.

You should have titled this video "Why GM's should learn how and when to say NO."

Quote from: tenbones;1046445You should have titled this video "Why GM's should learn how and when to say NO."

Seconded. This ain't improv class, guys. "Yes, and" is irrelevant.

To use hipster speak: "For your world to remain en flique you, the GM, must be able to curate contributions according to your desired primary lens, lest the audience is disconnected from the material's resonance... plus 'paradigm' for the triple word score."

Bullshit.  If players want to give me things to use against them, the less work it is for me and added bonus of players knowing they added a little something to the game, which invariably makes them happy.  And if your players are happy, they play along with you, than against you.  (and don't start on 'coddling' players, that's boring.  Give them a challenge, but don't TPK them because you feel the need to swing the e-peen around.)

If this is 'Doing it wrong' (But, but, but I thought we didn't do that here...) then fuck you, and I'll keep having my 'BadWrongFun'.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1046460For your world to remain en flique you, the GM, must be able to curate contributions according to your desired primary lens, lest the audience is disconnected from the material's resonance... plus 'paradigm' for the triple word score.

:eek:

Quote from: Opaopajr;1046460To use hipster speak: "For your world to remain en flique you, the GM, must be able to curate contributions according to your desired primary lens, lest the audience is disconnected from the material's resonance... plus 'paradigm' for the triple word score."

:mad::mad::mad:

Yes, I mad doggone it, even parody newspeak makes me fume.

I like it if the players give me plot seeds that involve their characters. My current campaign for 5ed dnd has a character who was a member of a "robin hood"-style thief gang and it will come back to haunt him.

One of the reasons you get in game texts from games that require player input for world-building (whether before session zero like in Dresden Files Accelerated or Unknown Armies 3e) or during (PBTA games where you "ask questions") is that it reduces the work for GMs. I'm not 100% sure it really does that, because none of those games require the players to spend an hour detailing thing they just made up, so the work for using and integrating that newly made up element on the GM.

However, I do get the concern for gm workload. The amount of effort required to build a usable sandbox game seems prohibitive and require a very high level of GM skill.

Quote from: PencilBoy99;1046494The amount of effort required to build a usable sandbox game seems prohibitive and require a very high level of GM skill.

Not really.  But I will say that for those who wish to have every "i" dotted and "t" crossed before players start poking around somewhere it can be prohibitive, yes.  But that's based on the comfort level of the DM regarding running games on a basic framework of information as opposed to something they could publish the next day if they wanted to.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1046464Bullshit.  If players want to give me things to use against them, the less work it is for me and added bonus of players knowing they added a little something to the game, which invariably makes them happy.  And if your players are happy, they play along with you, than against you.  (and don't start on 'coddling' players, that's boring.  Give them a challenge, but don't TPK them because you feel the need to swing the e-peen around.)

If this is 'Doing it wrong' (But, but, but I thought we didn't do that here...) then fuck you, and I'll keep having my 'BadWrongFun'.

For a long time, I tried to let my players run rampant with backstories. I seriously would get things of 25+ pages. Then after three or four campaigns ground to a halt because I couldn't tie all the threads together, I told my players I wouldn't accept backstories longer than 100 words. That was still a pain in the ass.

The last campaign I ran, I told the players essentially that "your backstory is your race and class. Give me -one- reason why you're adventuring." and we ran with it. Best campaign I ever ran (lasted 4 years before life intervened and we had to put it on hold).

Quote from: Herne's Son;1046519For a long time, I tried to let my players run rampant with backstories. I seriously would get things of 25+ pages. Then after three or four campaigns ground to a halt because I couldn't tie all the threads together, I told my players I wouldn't accept backstories longer than 100 words. That was still a pain in the ass.

The last campaign I ran, I told the players essentially that "your backstory is your race and class. Give me -one- reason why you're adventuring." and we ran with it. Best campaign I ever ran (lasted 4 years before life intervened and we had to put it on hold).

So?  I can give you a background that's less than a hundred words and gives both hooks and reasons for adventuring.  And this is off the top of my head.

Son of a 'heroic' bandit, who's entire clan/family got wiped out save him by a power robber baron.  Looking for allies and power (whether that be in items or more allies) to take the villain down.  The Baron wants my character dead and has the money to send bounty hunters and other miscreants after me.

Not even fifty words and I've left the DM enough openings to use.  Doesn't mean backstories are bad.  It just means that the DM didn't specify what they wanted.  COMMUNICATION is key!

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1046464Bullshit.  If players want to give me things to use against them, the less work it is for me and added bonus of players knowing they added a little something to the game, which invariably makes them happy.  And if your players are happy, they play along with you, than against you.  (and don't start on 'coddling' players, that's boring.  Give them a challenge, but don't TPK them because you feel the need to swing the e-peen around.)

If this is 'Doing it wrong' (But, but, but I thought we didn't do that here...) then fuck you, and I'll keep having my 'BadWrongFun'.

Agreed here. A little backstory is perfectly fine. The PC was a farmers kid trained by the militia captain. The PCs mom was once a famous thief and they taught their kid. The PC just wanted a cool starship and so learned to pilot and astrogate. etc.

Where you may run into issues is when the backstory either grants the PC stuff they shouldnt have access too. "The PC has a small army of skilled retainers they dont need to pay."
Or that none of the other PCs have access to, "The PCs father is the king and gave her a +5 Holy Avenger sword.". Or the backstory is somehow actually altering the setting. "The PC is the only survivor of Greyhawk when it was destroyed by a huge meteor that devastated the country." etc... Or all of the above.

Also what about RPGs with lifepaths? Are those bad? Those are backstories. Sometimes simple, sometimes more convoluted and overwrought than anything a player jots down.
Dragon Storm for example has background cards that the player can apply to their character during chargen. Stuff like Peasant, or Remorseful Apprentice and a sentence or two explaining what that was. You are a peasant. You are a necros apprentice who learned the truth and quit. And so on. Another would be Mekton Zeta.

Or Adventures in Tekumel which has a large lifepath section, moreso if you include the pick-your-path books that are part of the PCs backstory. Or games like Traveller and Universe.

Best campaign I ever ran (most popular anyway) was in Earthdawn 1.0. I had the players write in a notebook between sessions, and put down some bit of character info, backstory, etc. With the stipulation that it should be something I can use when setting up adventures. I didn't use everything, but if I had a situation where I could slot in a background NPC, or a bit of lore, I'd do it.

I'm happy for players to write any amount of back story they want.  But I'm not reading any of it.  Whatever the players puts down for their backstory is between them and the document.  It's what they think about the way things are, not necessarily how they are in the game.

If the player wants to know something particular about the world to make their backstory work for them, let's talk.  Can I be from over there?  Can I be related to person X?  We'll work it out.  If the player wants to do something in the game that is informed by their backstory--THAT I can work with.  The character does something meaningful at the table, with everyone there, and the world reacts.  Of course, that's the same as if it wasn't in their backstory, too.