Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: Crazy Ivan on <07-15-13/2314:46>
-
As a player in any system, when designing background for a character, it is something that is nice to be used by the GM for something somewhere in the plot/storyline/campaign..
But how much is the right amount?
Primarily, there is the elements of
-How much effort did the player put into it?
-How much does the GM do to even look at it?
-Are there any hooks, feasible to the system?
-How does the rest of the party feel about surrendering spotlight time to another characters plothook?
I'm just curious how different groups handle it. Personally, I will create a background, but I try to resolve it where it fits certain criteria-
-Hooks are easy to throw at the character, but not exclusively obvious.
-I should be able to play the character effectively without having to read a small novel to the other players so they 'get' the backstory.
-Character should be believable. A person, not just a collection of numbers. Upbringing, goals, rise and falls, and mentality are all important.
-
Generally, a good background is a reason to reward someone by incorporating it into the campaign, if at all possible. It doesn't need to be over a page or two to be good though, and going over that often means it's padded with stupid stuff.
The typical player I found you have to push a bit. And the old 20 questions is a good way to go about it. You can literally force players to have a background with this device, by putting them on the spot, even if they don't want a background. I haven't met a player yet who will refuse to answer the questions, even if some of them will be grudging about it. :)
-
Honestly, I think the bare skeleton that comes from having a character idea at all is plenty. Anything more runs too much risk of the effort put into it being completely wasted.
-
I think that the "right amount" is something to negotiate between the GM and the player - unless you particularly enjoy doing it, there's no point writing stuff that the GM won't use. So talking about it first and establishing what's appropriate prevents both the GM being frustrated that the player didn't contribute anything and the player being frustrated that the GM didn't use their 500-page novel.
-
I haven't met a player yet who will refuse to answer the questions, even if some of them will be grudging about it. :)
I offer my players 5 Karma for completing them. Works every time!
-
Honestly, I think the bare skeleton that comes from having a character idea at all is plenty. Anything more runs too much risk of the effort put into it being completely wasted.
As the background helps me understand my own character, I pretty much do it anyway. If the GM uses it, great, otherwise I can still use it myself. Of course, during the first seasons, I will probably continue to work on it, include things that suddenly developed in the game (because I always see my characters' backgrounds evolving when starting to really play them).
-
Primarily, there is the elements of
-How much effort did the player put into it?
-How much does the GM do to even look at it?
-Are there any hooks, feasible to the system?
-How does the rest of the party feel about surrendering spotlight time to another characters plothook?
Personally, I think it's more important to have a well developed character than a well developed background.
You can write 10 pages about a PC, but if you're just "RPing" yourself, what have you really done? You might as well just bullet point a bunch of random thoughts and be done with it. Similarly, if you only write a paragraph about your PC, but have a well defined notion of how they look, think and conduct themselves, it can say so much about the PC that the background writes itself.
I'll usually develop my PCs background in a couple of sentences and provide the DM/GM with 1 "hook" about my PC, because that's the most I'd ever incorporate from any single PC as a DM/GM myself. Much more than that and you're getting into the realm of mental masturbation, IMO. You don't need to be able to recite your PCs hometown, date of birth, and blood type and all that rot to know who they are. Which isn't to say that sometimes it's appropriate, but it's not needed for every PC or even most.
-
Forgive my ignorance, but what are "the 20 questions"? I like the 5 karma idea, neat!
-
Forgive my ignorance, but what are "the 20 questions"? I like the 5 karma idea, neat!
They were a questionnaire included (at the very least) in one 4E book (and I believe in books in earlier editions, not sure which ones).
They consist of:
1) What's your heritage?
2) What would your parents say about you?
3) What historical events does your character remember?
4) How did you get into shadowrunning, and why?
5) What is your living space like?
6) What are your beliefs / convictions (if any) and why do you hold them?
7) what do you think is your most annoying / worst trait?
8 ) What megacorp do you like the most? the Least? Why?
9) How did you come to know your contacts?
10) What do you do on a day off?
11) How did you come to learn your skills at your present proficiency?
12) Are there any moral limits on what jobs you take or things you'll do?
13) How do you view magic / technomantic abilities?
14) How do you view augmentation / implantation?
15) What do you think of ordinary life and those who live it?
16) What would be a bad nightmare for you? Any deep-rooted fears? Why is it so frightening to you?
17) What is your 'sacred object' or 'close one', and how did they become so important to you?
18) What did you want to become as a child, and what are your goals now?
19) What does your character look like, and what inspired her choices?
20) How did you get your street name?
-
RelentlessImp; Thanks!
-
Similarly, if you only write a paragraph about your PC, but have a well defined notion of how they look, think and conduct themselves, it can say so much about the PC that the background writes itself.
Ok, how they look, sure, but how they think and conduct themselves... Personally, I made the experience, that my characters never seem to survive the first session without changing at least a little bit from their concept. So I don't try to fix it extremely, just the generic direction and then see how he really is when playing him.
I'll usually develop my PCs background in a couple of sentences and provide the DM/GM with 1 "hook" about my PC, because that's the most I'd ever incorporate from any single PC as a DM/GM myself.
Personally, as a GM, I would like more than one, but that's probably personal choice.
-
As the background helps me understand my own character, I pretty much do it anyway. If the GM uses it, great, otherwise I can still use it myself. Of course, during the first seasons, I will probably continue to work on it, include things that suddenly developed in the game
Yes, I find my best characters from a good background, as it tells me why they act like the act, and sometimes gives me ideas how they will act. And that's all it needs to do really, and so it can be quite short if it's serving it's function. It's other function is to give the GM hooks, but this is a secondary function and an optional one.
My shaman character Skyscraper was a Salish kid that ran away from a rich boarding school in Seattle where he was being harassed due to his race and extreme height and skininess. He was also nearly killed by a dog pack at one point, which is how his Awakened powers manifested. These events pretty much guide how the character interacts with the world and lead to a skittish nature. Skyscraper didn't become a coward because he was a Giraffe shaman. The Giraffe totem found him because his had this skittish nature already, which fit in with the totem's belief system. He doesn't trust predators of any kind, which all metahumans potentially are. (Giraffe shamans fear confrontations of all kinds, to a greater degree even than Rat shamans for example)
Because I view background as important is why I harass my players about it sometimes. I'm not a dictator about it though. I don't require them to write even a sentence down. I just grill them a bit verbally and I have a fairly good memory about such things. I don't require hooks either, that's optional. I just want to know a bit about who the hell this is.
Keep in mind you don't have to stick with the traditional and official 20 questions. In fact, I haven't read them in quite some time and I just ask whatever comes to my mind. I usually start like Sigmund Freud, and have them tell me about their parents. :)
-
Similarly, if you ... have a well defined notion ... it can say so much about the PC that the background writes itself.
... my characters never seem to survive the first session without changing at least a little bit from their concept. So I don't try to fix it extremely, just the generic direction and then see how he really is when playing him.
A "well defined notion" is not "immutably fixed in stone". I would agree that it usually takes me a few sessions to really find my PCs "voice". I just use my PCs characteristics to tell his story instead of a story, that's all.
-
What has not been mentioned: I think it is very important to make players choose names for those background connections (loved ones, enemies, etc)! Not just like "this corporate asshole framed me", make them choose a name (using celebrity names helps if they struggle to come up with ideas, even using random name generators is fine) - it gives the GM the opportunity to just let the name appear somewhere... it will ring a bell... and a player at your table suddenly sits very upright!
-
I create a character background for the sense of the character and the fun of it. By its very nature there'll usually be a hook or two either for the GM to work in, or for the character to try to pursue in game. I tend to keep things fairly broad with a couple of specifics, because the character tends to develop a little as the group gels and I find out more about the game.
It's a good idea to know what your GM is trying to do, in a broad sense, as any background needs to be compatable with their game plan.
I wouldn't put anything in a background I wasn't happy for the GM to use. Or at least if you want to have it stay background say so and they can tell you if that's cool.
As an example, here's my current character's background:
Jack is bland. He has no distinguishing features and is just an average looking Ork. Even his tusks are remarkably average. He wears a dusty trench coat over cheap work shirts and jeans. He wears scuffed work boots.
Originally known as Doug Lomax, Jack started out as a comfortable security guard for Minutemen Security at a bank. He volunteered for a pioneering new procedure for giving people Orthoskin being tested by a Mega Corp. It was designed to be both quicker and cheaper. Unfortunately, about two thirds of the way through the treatment there were complications which resulted in a sideaffect removing all blemishes and distinguishing marks from Jack's body and leaving him looking like a symmetrical and perfectly average Ork.
When investigating this sideaffect the Corp discovered that Jack had been buying Cram from a street gang and blamed the effect on the drug. They also sacked him for using unlicenced and illegally obtained substances. Down on his luck and hopped out of his head on Cram, Jack decided to get revenge by holding up the delivery truck to his former work place. In his drugged state he believed that his new Orthoskin made him bullet proof. This wasn't entirely true, although it did save his life when the security guard shot him with her Colt Manhunter. Once he got out of hospital, he was prosecuted for robbery and sent to prison for two years.
When Jack got out, he immediately began creating a new identity as Jack Blackstone P.I. who makes most of his nuyen running the shadows.
Jack's card says
"Jack Blackstone. Private Investigator.
Lost Found. Surveillance. Critters Gone. Wrongs Righted. Bounties Hunted. No Abductions."
His contacts include a KE Det Sgt, who used to be his boss at Minuteman, but moved over to Lone Star to do law enforcement and then got transferred to KE. And a Ganger who acts as his dealer. He got off so lightly, because he also has a pal at K-SAF who was asking awkward questions, so he got a small severance package and only short Time. He really dislikes ARES, who were developing the new Orthoskin treatment and so he believes screwed up his life. He's a bit of a rip off of Dresden, but without magic.
It's not much, but it gives me and the GM a sense of where the character's come from, what he wants, how he acts and where he's going. And it's expanded in my head as things go.
-
Character Backgrounds are always a funny thing for me ... for no reason I could explain.
I always do the actual creation together with a Mind Map, so that both evolve at the same time (this can be anywhere from 2 hours to several days of time).
Then, after I am happy with the character I put it away for at least a week to let it all settle.
After that I reserve an evening for the story, and then it happens. I created anything from barely answering the 21 questions to an 177 page story. Sometime I get into the flow, sometimes not.
Unfortunately the only thing the 177 page beast got me was an angry GM hitting me with it ... repeatedly :(
-
The main problem with the "20 questions" is that the answers to most of them have no relevance. There might be five or six that do have any.
-
The main problem with the "20 questions" is that the answers to most of them have no relevance. There might be five or six that do have any.
Depends on the game, the table, and the character. There are tables where any of those could be very relevant. Typically I prefer to have the players tell me what is important to their characters, but if they're having trouble a prompt like 20 questions can be useful.
-
The main problem with the "20 questions" is that the answers to most of them have no relevance. There might be five or six that do have any.
I only use the 20 questions technique if the player has given me absolutely nothing. I don't consider it necessary if the player has given me a few lines of background. I'm well aware that some characters take time to develop, because some of my own characters are like that. Sometimes I just have a very vague concept to start. And if I only get useful information out of 6 questions out of 20, that puts me ahead of where I was before, with zero information.
Also, it's less about the actual content of the questions than it is about putting a player on the spot. The questions are a guide for people not familiar with the technique. I just ask what I'm interested in at the time, and some answers lead to new questions to ask. One of the reasons this technique works is that it can actually help a player make things more concrete or answer things they haven't even thought of. It helps create a foundation for a character, even if the character isn't all there until later. If all I have is that this person is former corper and his parents are living in Chicago, that's better than just knowing the person is a Human street sam and nothing else.
Writing anything over 2 to 3 pages is probaly a waste of time and can actually obscure things. Many GMs won't even read more than a couple paragraphs. I'm at the extreme end, I believe, because I'm a heavy reader, and I really can't see myself reading more than five pages, unless it was really drek hot good. Or I might start scanning it for key details if it got too long, or just ignore it and turn to the questions technique. I will try to read backgrounds because I'm a people pleaser and I like backgrounds, but this isn't the norm. GMs are busy people.
It can be effective to be boil things down because then the key points actually reach the GM's brain, and then he might use those background points in the actual game. If you are making hugely long backgrounds, you might consider making a set of bullet points type outline for the GM.
-
I only use the 20 questions technique if the player has given me absolutely nothing. I don't consider it necessary if the player has given me a few lines of background. I'm well aware that some characters take time to develop, because some of my own characters are like that. Sometimes I just have a very vague concept to start. And if I only get useful information out of 6 questions out of 20, that puts me ahead of where I was before, with zero information.
Also, it's less about the actual content of the questions than it is about putting a player on the spot. The questions are a guide for people not familiar with the technique. I just ask what I'm interested in at the time, and some answers lead to new questions to ask. One of the reasons this technique works is that it can actually help a player make things more concrete or answer things they haven't even thought of. It helps create a foundation for a character, even if the character isn't all there until later. If all I have is that this person is former corper and his parents are living in Chicago, that's better than just knowing the person is a Human street sam and nothing else.
If they give you nothing, then just assume they don't want anything in the game specifically tailored to them aside from their skill-set being useful.
-
If they give you nothing, then just assume they don't want anything in the game specifically tailored to them aside from their skill-set being useful.
I don't consider that acceptable in my games, to just play a set of numbers. I mean, why force players to even have names, if this is just a wargame? To each his own, I guess though. It literally takes 3 seconds to create a vague background. "I'm a former ganger and my parents are both dead." Bam, done. The point isn't to use the background in the game, but to inform character thoughts and actions. If you want to run Shadowrun as just a tactical wargame then I guess it doesn't matter though.
-
If they give you nothing, then just assume they don't want anything in the game specifically tailored to them aside from their skill-set being useful.
I don't consider that acceptable in my games, to just play a set of numbers. I mean, why force players to even have names, if this is just a wargame? To each his own, I guess though. It literally takes 3 seconds to create a vague background. "I'm a former ganger and my parents are both dead." Bam, done. The point isn't to use the background in the game, but to inform character thoughts and actions. If you want to run Shadowrun as just a tactical wargame then I guess it doesn't matter though.
The way I look at it is if they don't give me anything, then they don't want to give anything, and I'd rather move along without information on that character than make that player possibly feel like he/she has been given a homework assignment. That's all.
-
The way I look at it is if they don't give me anything, then they don't want to give anything, and I'd rather move along without information on that character than make that player possibly feel like he/she has been given a homework assignment. That's all.
Fair enough. Just something that bugs me when it happens. :)
-
In my particular case as a player i normally make a character with an extensive background but no goals or at least none that the character knows about.
with this i mean that for example i made a Shaman for a campaign and told the DM "look when i get 1.000.000 nuyen you can destroy the body of my character so he gonna born again as a burnout Samie". Or in a changeling game i was i told the DM "My doppelganger is still alive and is probably an antagonist but i want to go highlander on him so dont make him a unlikeable asshole".
But what i never make is a goal for my character like "he is looking for his lost sister" because i prefer just going with the flow and minimizing conflicting goals and never to get into the argument of "why would my character work with this guys?" i just like to get the party together and do the missions/quest let the conflict comes during that time.
However as a DM i always ask of the players a bare skeleton of the character and that they are party friendly with the rest. However on shadowrun i add the rule that they also have to have a reason for being there. I have had to many "My PC is a arms dealer" who when the run sound at the very least off they bolt and dont take the job.
One thing i never allow anymore as character background (i dont think it has pop out on shadowrun though) is characters having a master (i dm a lot of mage/changeling/werewolf) as a contact as i find that they rely way to much on him instead of doing legwork.
-
But what i never make is a goal for my character like "he is looking for his lost sister"
Those are my favorite goals as a GM. I think I usually end up running much more enjoyable games for my players when we collaborate to come up with interesting reasons why a bunch of individuals with individual goals would be working together.
-
With my current group, we never have problems with creating backgrounds. In character creation, if you spend the points to buy it then you have to explain how it corresponds to who you are. At some point, everyone's background comes into play. When it is incidental, its an extra karma. When it is a heavy plot occurrence, its five.
As a GM, I thread everyone's backgrounds into whatever grander plot I plan on running, keeping the details of such a plot as fluid as possible until we start the actual runs. Character's hometowns, favorite sports teams or sim stars come into play, on top of all the corp conspiracies. My current group is way into it. My previous group, didn't give two dreks.
Their backgrounds were like pulling teeth, even the twenty questions couldn't save them. As a whole, they were into a different style of play then I like to run, so my narrative and their style didn't mesh.
-
I personally leave that up to the players, if they give me something to work with, all the better. If they don't, well, I can't make something out of nothing, can I? The current group runs the gamut from "This is Papa Legba, he's a dwarf from Jamaica" to shorter novels answering those 20 questions and then some.
If the players came up with a cool concept and just went with it I'm not gonna shot it down by demanding to know what a Jamaican dwarf is doing in Seattle. I as a player wouldn't dream of not having a background story, but that's my style and not everybody goes that route.
So yeah, they give me something I might be able to use, or they don't. The former is preferable, but not required.
-
I don't consider that acceptable in my games, to just play a set of numbers.
Yeah, I'm definitely more of a deep character story person. Random violence is what vidya is for. On that note, however, I think pretty much everyone has to play the character for a session or two to really start flushing out the personality. A few main points of background to start with are good but ya just gotta get behind the wheel to see how it handles(and whether you are going to enjoy the concept)
-
Background is not important at all. The important parts of the story are what happens in game. If you want to write a novel of a background for your character, have at it, but don't expect anyone else to do very much or any at all, including members of your own group.
-
History gives context and depth to what happens in the game. It should never be homework, but having a character history makes the game more fun for everyone involved.
-
History gives context and depth to what happens in the game. It should never be homework, but having a character history makes the game more fun for everyone involved.
If it's to the point where you are tempted to try and force them to do it, then just take that as a sign that it does not make the game more fun for them.
-
Fortunately I never have to force anything. Most of my players love having a GM who will listen to their back stories and work it into the game.
-
Fortunately I never have to force anything. Most of my players love having a GM who will listen to their back stories and work it into the game.
That's all well and good for you right now, but remember it if you do get someone coming in that doesn't enjoy that kind of stuff.
-
Most of my players love having a GM who will listen to their back stories and work it into the game.
I don't even go so far as 20 question(although most of my players flesh stuff out pretty well) but I have a strong distaste for something like, say
A career criminal mastermind(aka, shadowrunner) with no explanation whatsoever as to why he is what he is or why he's doing it. Why he would have, say, a half million 'yen in his body yet still be after money. Just a real basic question: Why is this character in this profession? That usually gives background adverse and newbies enough to work with.
-
Most of my players love having a GM who will listen to their back stories and work it into the game.
I don't even go so far as 20 question(although most of my players flesh stuff out pretty well) but I have a strong distaste for something like, say
A career criminal mastermind(aka, shadowrunner) with no explanation whatsoever as to why he is what he is or why he's doing it. Why he would have, say, a half million 'yen in his body yet still be after money. Just a real basic question: Why is this character in this profession? That usually gives background adverse and newbies enough to work with.
As long as you don't go trying to force them if they say "I don't really care why he's doing this, it doesn't matter to me." That is a perfectly acceptable response.
-
Background is not important at all.
This is the opposite of true in any game I run (and the vast majority of games I've played). The more you give me in the background, the more I have to work with as a GM, which helps me tailor the game to the characters I have there. It helps a LOT, too, if I know what the characters want. The return, though, is that this grants the players more control over the sort of story that they'll be playing, and the character development be able to have - and most players I've gamed with like that a great deal.
-
As long as you don't go trying to force them if they say "I don't really care why he's doing this, it doesn't matter to me." That is a perfectly acceptable response.
Wouldn't be at my table. Don't think my other players would appreciate it either. this is a ROLE playing game, ya know. I know some groups are all about ROLL playing but we're not those guys. Those guys are somewhere else. Just the bare minimum to get inside the head of a career criminal, what makes them tick, etc.
-
Why have names for player characters? Seriously, what is the point? Why not call them Shadowrunner 1, 2, and 3? I consider that about equal to not having a really basic background story. All I'm talking about is a couple of simple lines. "I'm from the Barrens and I used to steal cars while in a minor gang." "I'm former UCAS army and fought in the Desert Wars." I literally made those two backgrounds up in 5 seconds a piece, and typed them in 10 seconds or less.
I rarely run into a player not willing to do this, and it was players that have done this before just being lazy in that particular game. At which point I questioned them. I've never once ran into a person belligerent enough to not answer a few simple questions. And if I did, I doubt I'd continue playing with them. It just seems like someone refusing such a simple ten second request is just a belligerent person and probaly going to be a pain in the ass to deal with on a regular basis.
Deeper backgrounds are excellent, but it's cake and I don't require it. It just lets me build more tailored and customized games for players. I pretty much set the upper limit at 5 pages, and I believe I'm more tolerant than most GMs, since I am a heavy reader. It's the Internet age and many just won't even read a page of background.
I've had some great characters start from very vague concepts as well. But some have started as more detailed backgrounds. Both methods can work. But I think it makes it difficult to go anywhere with a role when you start a game with absolutely have zero to go on. Your character wasn't hatched in the bar where the Johnson is.
Laslty, my games are pretty violent. Enforcing a very barebones background is a completely separate thing from if a game is Pink Mohawk or whatever. To me, it's like a name and physical description. If I don't know vagely what you look like, your name, and where you're from, you're just a set of numbers. Would it be unfair of me to ask someone if their character is thin, fat, or muscular?
-
As long as you don't go trying to force them if they say "I don't really care why he's doing this, it doesn't matter to me." That is a perfectly acceptable response.
Wouldn't be at my table. Don't think my other players would appreciate it either. this is a ROLE playing game, ya know. I know some groups are all about ROLL playing but we're not those guys. Those guys are somewhere else. Just the bare minimum to get inside the head of a career criminal, what makes them tick, etc.
Like I said, the really important stuff is what transpires in game. Whatever came before just doesn't really matter.
I used to occasionally put together background stories and whatnot (actually had an English professor try to get me to publish a story in a magazine once), but I just can't do it any more. Part of it is because there used to be a GM in the group that would just look at a background and say "Oh, that's nice", and that was the end of it. The rest is that I just don't see it as important enough to bother with anymore--at least compared to what happens after play starts--and that I don't really want part of the game tailored to my character anymore; I pretty much try to actively dodge the "spotlight".
-
Like I said, the really important stuff is what transpires in game. Whatever came before just doesn't really matter.
Having some basic premise of a character is necessary unless that character is nothing but 'shadowrunner 1' as it was so well put. I really have no interest in running a game with 'shadowrunner 1', 'shadowrunner 2', etc. Character motivations and whatnot are the meat of the game, not blowing stuff up. If I wanna blow stuff up, I'll fire up my computer and play video games. I'm not asking for depth. In fact, I've had people decide to totally rearrange their backstory after a session or two of getting a feel for the character. But not being to explain even why the character is there to start with is either laziness or lack of interest. Either of those traits will drag down the game for myself and the other players as well. That person shouldn't have even bothered showing up.
-
But not being to explain even why the character is there to start with is either laziness or lack of interest.
Or they're there to hang out, sling some dice and go with the flow of whatever is centering on the other characters. Not everyone gives a rat's tush about anything else. If it "drags down the game" for you for someone to be like that, you might want to lighten up and not take it so seriously.
-
Or they're there to hang out, sling some dice and go with the flow of whatever is centering on the other characters. Not everyone gives a rat's tush about anything else. If it "drags down the game" for you for someone to be like that, you might want to lighten up and not take it so seriously.
If I ask a player his character's hair color and he refuses to answer me, am I being a dick by pressing the point? To me it's pretty much the same thing as me asking them if their character is from the Barrens. Refusing to answer either of these questions seems belligerent to me, bordering on hostile. because it literally takes 3 seconds and a second of thought time. I'm not even demanding 2 sentences of background at this point. It's a diplomatic way of dealing with people that don't to waste time on backgrounds and it hasn't failed me yet.
-
Or they're there to hang out, sling some dice and go with the flow of whatever is centering on the other characters. Not everyone gives a rat's tush about anything else. If it "drags down the game" for you for someone to be like that, you might want to lighten up and not take it so seriously.
If I ask a player his character's hair color and he refuses to answer me, am I being a dick by pressing the point? To me it's pretty much the same thing as me asking them if their character is from the Barrens. Refusing to answer either of these questions seems belligerent to me, bordering on hostile. because it literally takes 3 seconds and a second of thought time. I'm not even demanding 2 sentences of background at this point. It's a diplomatic way of dealing with people that don't to waste time on backgrounds and it hasn't failed me yet.
Description, I can see asking about, but anything else I just think that if they don't give anything that they don't want anything "tailored" to them. It's a game, and getting all bothered by someone not giving background is just taking things way too seriously.
-
Description, I can see asking about, but anything else I just think that if they don't give anything that they don't want anything "tailored" to them. It's a game, and getting all bothered by someone not giving background is just taking things way too seriously.
What I'm "getting bothered" by isn't that they aren't giving me background. What I'm bothered about with this fictional scenario (Fictional because it hasn't happened to me yet) is the player refusing to answer simple questions. I'm doing half the work for them by asking these questions, and I even give suggestions.
Background is just another dimension that helps make a character a living, breathing entity. I'm not asking these questions because I get off on it. It's part of my job as I see it to help bring out vague character concepts into something more.
It just seems belligerent of a player to refuse to grant the GM 30 seconds of their precious time. Not having the ability to create a background isn't an excuse, since I'm providing examples and it's damn easy. I understand some people don't like this stuff, which is why I make it very easy and quick. It's for the benefit of the entire game, including me, the GM. Remember, GMs like to be entertained too, it's a 2 way game.
-
Why have names for player characters? Seriously, what is the point? Why not call them Shadowrunner 1, 2, and 3?
Actually, one of my players recently did create a character called 'Mook'. He was a rebound character though, after the last one died... and he did begin developing personality, until he was killed (but the player kinda let it happen, which was sad :'( )
-
It just seems belligerent of a player to refuse to grant the GM 30 seconds of their precious time. Not having the ability to create a background isn't an excuse, since I'm providing examples and it's damn easy. I understand some people don't like this stuff, which is why I make it very easy and quick. It's for the benefit of the entire game, including me, the GM. Remember, GMs like to be entertained too, it's a 2 way game.
It seems more belligerent to me to badger them over something like background (which, again, I think is worth far, FAR less than what occurs in game).
Background is just another dimension that helps make a character a living, breathing entity. I'm not asking these questions because I get off on it. It's part of my job as I see it to help bring out vague character concepts into something more.
Just let them develop while they play.
-
Actually, one of my players recently did create a character called 'Mook'. He was a rebound character though, after the last one died... and he did begin developing personality, until he was killed (but the player kinda let it happen, which was sad
Sounds like a name worthy of a karma reward. Hilarious. I wanted to make a character with the street name "Mope", after the Baltimore slang from the Wire, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
-
It seems more belligerent to me to badger them over something like background (which, again, I think is worth far, FAR less than what occurs in game).
To badger means to ask repeatedly or in an annoying fashion. Neither applies to me. I'm friendly and diplomatic about it. And I don't have to repeat, as I said before I've never had a player refuse to answer it. If I ever was refused, I certainly would not repeat or hound them. I've got better things to do than force people to roleplay. I make a simple and quick effort when no background is provided for the benefit of everyone at the game table.
It might be something that varies by table though. Where I'm from players are aware that the GM is working hard to make an entertaining story for everyone's benefit. Thus they are happy to help with simple requests. That's why refusing to answer a few questions would seem belligerent to me. I'd be comparing it to a long list of reasonable players I've dealt with. And some of them don't like creating backgrounds, but there is a mutual respect level.
Just let them develop while they play.
Sometimes they do. But often having more than one of the dimensions helps a character grow. It's pretty silly if you don't even know what country a person is from, or if they cam efrom a corporate or street background. Very basic stuff. I have the feeling you think I'm demanding detailed backgrounds, but that is NOT the case. I've in fact built vaguely detailed characters before and had them grow successfully. But they usually have some core, yet vague concept. Like once I built a character off the concept that he was a war vet with PSD and flashbacks, nothing more.
BTW, many of the Qualities are tied to background. To use my giraffe shaman character Skyscraper he has a Negative quality of Phobia (Canines). Such a quality demands a story attached to it I'd think.
-
Few of us hear the horses coming.
-
Few of us hear the horses coming.
I don't know - they sound more like they're fleeing. Think maybe they've heard what gets done to horses 'round these parts.
-
Just let them develop while they play.
I do get where you are coming from. Even when people put a LOT of detail in to the background, the real character development doesn't start until play. That said, I have yet to GM for a single person who did not enjoy the game far far greater once their character's motivations, history and personality were established. Because they had a character to be emotionally invested in, just like if one is watching a good movie or reading a good book. Then they cared about the outcome way more. Like I said, a simple 'why is your character a career criminal' is all I would absolutely require. That's such a bare minimum thing that someone could just rattle off the first thing that came to mind. We'll make it entertaining and interesting regardless of how minimal it starts off. I do require some level of springboard to start from. After all, I'm putting hours of my time into running a game. They can put the 2 seconds in to answer the question. As for taking the game seriously...I take it as seriously as I take anything else I enjoy. And I play with a group that prefers at least medium levels of RP/character interaction, if not heavy.
-
That's such a bare minimum thing that someone could just rattle off the first thing that came to mind.
Maybe it is like that for you, but not everyone enjoys thinking about things that minor and insignificant. If you get someone who doesn't, just go with it and let them do as they will.
-
I don't mind, but I do hope they pick non-roleplaying negative qualities then.
-
I don't mind, but I do hope they pick non-roleplaying negative qualities then.
I really hope you're not saying that just because someone doesn't give a rat's butt about background that they can't RP at all...
-
I don't mind, but I do hope they pick non-roleplaying negative qualities then.
I really hope you're not saying that just because someone doesn't give a rat's butt about background that they can't RP at all...
If someone has 0 interest in giving any details about where their character is coming from, it does seem highly unlikely that they'll have even a little interest in roleplaying their character beyond dating-simming the NPCs, so while I wouldn't forbid roleplaying qualities, I would definitely give them a frown, a "Really. You want that quality.", and if they turned out not to be actually using the quality, I'd have a conversation with them about the matter.
-
I don't mind, but I do hope they pick non-roleplaying negative qualities then.
I really hope you're not saying that just because someone doesn't give a rat's butt about background that they can't RP at all...
Not that they can't. Simply that I expect they won't bother, and that'd be an utmost waste and only serve to frustrate because if they actually ignore their flaw I'll be forced to make it come up against their will and that amuses nobody.
-
Maybe it is like that for you, but not everyone enjoys thinking about things that minor and insignificant. If you get someone who doesn't, just go with it and let them do as they will.
We wouldn't enjoy playing with someone who thought their character's entire shadow lifestyle and reasons for doing the very thing the game is named after is 'minor and insignificant'. So it makes an excellent screening process.
-
Even as a relatively inexperienced GM (PbP only), I'd be very wary of anyone who submitted a char but couldn't be arsed to write up my 5 basic questions:
-who is your char + what do they look like?
-where do they come from?
-how did they become a shadowrunner?
-what do they like to do when not working?
If someone can't think of the answers or simply cannot be arsed, then I don't think they'll be right for my games. I think you need to have basics sorted for a character to be able to roleplay them, and hell, this is a roleplaying game after all! If you don't, then I guess the best you can do is use the character as an avatar for yourself rather than the character's own personality
-
I guess I've seen both sides of this argument in action, though I tend to lean towards one rather than the other.
What I mean is, there is a player in my current group that just made a cool smuggler character concept without knowing much about their motivations or how they'd act. Just started with basically nothing for a backstory, had their name, their character sheet and such, but that was it, so he really only had a purely mechanical character that he wanted to do "cool Han Solo things" with. Bear in mind this player has slight character ADHD, where he loves building and playing with mechanics and so the character roleplay aspects sometimes fall behind.
The last session, events happened where he got to flush out how his character would act in a tense situation(think Reservoir Dogs where half the party nearly killed each other after a run), and it was hilarious and completely believable. No one actually died, but now there's some beautiful intercharacter tension that promises to be fun, and he's having the time of his life with it. He's about the last guy I expected to develop realistic motivations and reactions for his character, and he essentially did no background work to accomplish it.
Now, personally I like to flush out my background a lot. I like to know why my guy acts the way he does, why he turns left instead of right, whether he'll help the wounded merc on the street or finish him off and take his stuff. But I tend towards the other end, where I'll write pretty damn detailed descriptions and information about otherwise insignificant stuff. But I also really enjoy roleplaying an interesting character more than some do, and that's also fine.
My basic rule to go by is very similar to ones posted above, where at the VERY least a player should have a basic concept down for how they act in a situation that is something above the pure mechanical. If they don't, and I've seen this before too, then their motivations become entirely based on metagaming how much loot they can strip off the corpses of their foes once they finish showering the street with bullets. Their only reason for existing becomes to min-max their stats and become the "best" Street sam, decker, runner, etc. Gets really, really boring after a while, and in my experience most of those players also are complete insufferable dicks who like to elect themselves defacto El Presidente of the group.
Anyways, that's my rant. Basic behaviour and motivations for me are a must, but anything other than that is completely optional.
-
Bear in mind this player has slight character ADHD, where he loves building and playing with mechanics and so the character roleplay aspects sometimes fall behind.
this make me remember once I had this same kind of player in one-shot deadlands game who tried to convince a sherriff not to arrest him, he roll and there was a success but i ask him "you succedd, but tell me what exactly do you say to the guy?" and he just look at me and in the most whinny voice possible said:
"Roleplaying?.... i hate roleplaying :-[ "
It just baffle me.
But more on topic, something i had implemented this couple of years is not to ask them to write down a background/motivation/etc but to say them. As writting feel like a chore both to the player and to me as they may get isnpired and write a block of text i have to diggest. However i normally make tables of 4-3 players.
-
Oh I agree, it doesn't have to be written at all. Just the player should have a basic grasp of it, and the GM should usually be aware of any important details, so that they have options to make the game more interesting and personal, should they choose to do so.
I just say written because that way the GM has something to refer back to, but it would also work if the GM himself takes notes to use later.
-
Well that became an interesting debate.
The biggest points;
-We're here to play a game; it should be fun, not work.
-Background is unique to each person. Some are all about the novels, others are 'figure it out as I go.'
-GM's and Players need to talk to each other so they can reach an understanding before hand. Probably when the GM is giving the rules for the chargen session so everyone can be semi-prepared. Everybody needs to be on the same page, or at least close to it.
-If you don't give anything to the GM, don't expect anything.
Those points said, I'll give my own bit of background development story-
I like a full background if only for my own reference and taste. I really don't care if it's implemented in game or not. If it is, cool. But I'll go the extra mile and research lingo for a specific subculture, traditions, mannerisms for a character and look at subtle things to implement. etc. etc. One of my favorite examples is one of my troll street sams with a background in the UCAS Army. Initially, he was probably as cookie cutter as hundreds of others; badass, quiet, ex-special forces sniper, etc. etc. It was easy to research and play. I made this character several years ago, and I continually tweak my creations (I'm odd like that). Anyways, fast forward to now and now that I'm in the Army, I really re-imagined the character;
He wasn’t just in the Army; he was an 11B who got his Sergeant while he was involved in the Renraku Arcology incident. He’d aspired for the Tower of Power (Airborne, Special Forces, Ranger) when he initially joined, but realizations of how the Army works drove him to just grind through. In speaking to others, he was initially going to be done like most movie characters in the Army (nothing special, except maybe some R. Lee Ermey lines). Now, little things in his lingo changed. Instead of saying “I understand”, it’s replaced with “Tracking” or “Roger.” He still does PT in the morning more as a force of habit. Morning chow time is replaced by a breakfast at his favorite little diner or him sitting down with a bowl of cereal to watch reruns of the Football game he missed the other night due to his run and he couldn’t risk streaming it (actually, he didn’t want the hacker to find out and start bitching). He’s got the understanding of how the Army and similar make-up in corporations take time to maneuver. More of his Army life itself was flushed out. The story of how he got his Rover changed from getting it after he left the Army to ‘As a dumb young private, he took out a loan and got screwed by Briggs Auto Dealership- since then, he takes meticulously good care of it since he had to ‘pay so damn much for it.’’ He has little stories from when he was in the barracks or out drinking with his soldiers (actually based off a lot of stories from my friends doing the same stuff, I’m more of a homebody with my family).
I look at how the Army is changing now and try to apply that same level of changes. I can see how mages would acquire their own MOS, and probably be brought in as Officers right out the gate akin to the way certain degrees are. Deckers/Hackers actually have their own MOS now in our modern day, which makes me laugh.
Character background can make characters immensely memorable in that they can add such a life to the character over it being just ‘John playing a street samurai with a different voice’ to ‘John is Julian King.’
But the depth and level of this background seems to definitely vary by group according to their tastes.
-
A good background adds a lot to a character. It gives you ideas on how to rp him, and it also helps you tackle questions that you get asked during a campaign. The best times I've had rping were when both myself, and the other players had a rich history. You don't need to write a book, but a little bit helps a lot and it does give the GM ideas that you could decide to incorporate into a the campaign.
One of my players had Chess Theory 6 as a knowledge skill and he mentioned he played competitively in his history page that he sent me. I designed a run that involved him competing and attempting to defeat a yakuza boss in an annual tournament to bring shame to him, and then him and his team had to ransack his room during the intermission before the finals so they could complete some kind of objective(I forget what that was). But they had to discreetly take out his guards and it was a really interesting run. He really enjoyed the fact that I used his history to enrich the game and now he always makes a good history for me to read.
Also, it's just satisfying when you see the GM is clearly using something from your history and it almost always make for a good scene and experience.
-
I'm getting a chance to be a player character in a different campaign (different system/setting though... Supernatural RPG), and I am trying something different out. The other players and I are all making our characters related (cousins actually). So we get to make characters that suit what we want to play, but our background hooks us together. Thinking it will add a whole new aspect to the game and I am looking forward trying it out.
-
If they give you nothing, then just assume they don't want anything in the game specifically tailored to them aside from their skill-set being useful.
I don't consider that acceptable in my games, to just play a set of numbers. I mean, why force players to even have names, if this is just a wargame? To each his own, I guess though. It literally takes 3 seconds to create a vague background. "I'm a former ganger and my parents are both dead." Bam, done. The point isn't to use the background in the game, but to inform character thoughts and actions. If you want to run Shadowrun as just a tactical wargame then I guess it doesn't matter though.
I hate to be a thread necromancer, but I've used the 20 questions with my group and added a few of my own. Mind you, my players are all pretty narrativist, so it doesn't suit all groups. I like having them justify their choices in character because it helps establish who they are.
21) What would you do if you were as untouchable as a Megacorp?
22) What gives you the greatst sense of pride or accomlishment?
23) Have you ever been discriminated against, and have you ever discriminated against others?
24) How would you like people who know you to describe you?
25) How do you fear others might describe you behind your back?
Choose the trait that is more important to you, and explain why.
26) Personal HONOR or a good REPUTATION.
27) Comfort and SECURITY or the power of WEALTH.
28) REVENGE or JUSTICE.
29) ADVENTURE or KNOWLEDGE.
30) To be FEARED or LOVED,
31) A band of COMMRADES or a team of COWORKERS.
32) Being OVERESTIMATED or UNDERESTIMATED.