"GM: Your (single paragraph) backstory is not mandatory

>>53437116
4 of my 6 players put little to no effort into their characters.
1 gives me about a page (yay)
1 gives me a novel that I tell her to summarize into one page maximum

>>53437136
But you take the time to read what they write, right? I kind of just took it to be basic decency, to read what you ask someone else to write

>>53437152
Yeah, when people write something for me it's a pleasant surprise

>>53437116
He's either a lazy asshole, super autistic or both.

>>53437116
Hell, I would require players have at least a couple of sentences of backstory, even for a one shot. Lucky they normally have more without making a novel out of it.
My players are champs, thanks for not sucking.

>>53437116
>>53437484
Anything that's actually important to know about your character will occur naturally during play, not through reading their backstory.

As a dm I will make the effort to read what my players write because that's common courtesy. If your backstory is longer than one page or contains dialogue I will immediately just skim it. It's nice that you put effort into it, but there is any easy line to cross between being informative and being masturbatory

>>53437116
>Players wrote almost a page of background
>Try to integrate backstory into game
>Lol I mean I just wrote that to get by you on all those items XDD

>>53440016

That's asinine.

People have history, and people from that history exist. Your player isn't the one responsible for saying "Oh by the way, my brother who hates me for abandoning the family shows up today". That's the GM's role. Literally.

>>53437116
Wait, what? The GM is dismissing brief backstory? Is that what's happening?

I would have expected players to ignore all the notes the GM prepared, not the other way around.

I read everything my players give me, even when I know that they wouldn't bother to read anything I give them (which is why I don't bother).

>>53440109
People have history, but I don't think anyone is interested in hearing how I woke up, took a shit, washed my hands, ate a bagel, and drove 10 minutes to pick up some bananas from the supermarket before I walked in on a mugging and kicked a dude so hard in the dick that I tore a ligament in my foot.

You should only mention the bits that are relevant to the story, anything else should be thrown into a bin and filed away as "assumed" until such a time when they become relevant.

>Player writes 4-page backstory
>It runs contrary to just about everything the group agreed to when setting up the game

I mean, I did my best but I still had to make him cut out large chunks of it.

>>53440079
I hate people who do this, If I ever have an item because backstory I run it by my GM first.

>>53440154
Yeah? I don't think anyone in this thread disagrees with that statement. It sounds to me like you're just trying to start shit.

>>53440280
I'm just stating an opinion chief. If people get butthurt over then that's their problem, not mine.

>>53440042
all I see is masturbatory gms
>>53440079
if they did it for the wrong reasons, it's even sweeter to have their past haunt them

>>53437116
If I get a backstory from a player, especially a good one (fitting for the world, interesting hooks, that sort of thing), that player gets preferential screen time.

Hell I usually coerce players into giving me a backstory by handing out "free knowledge skills" in exchange for a sentence or two of justification for each. 95% of the time these free skills are legitimately covered in their entirety by common knowledge (which by raw requires enough of a back story to be able to imply what you should know).
>>53440016
See like this guy?
He auto fails common knowledge and doesn't get an arc unless he really works for it.

>>53440079
You want an item to be from a backstory you buy it out of your starting funds like everyone else or wait until I actually run a game with that heirloom item rule I saw this one time in a companion I think.

>>53440313
Yup. Definitely autistic

>>53440154

>mundane day-to-day nothings
>important people in your past that are likely to still be relevant

That is, quite possibly, the single most egregious false equivalence I've ever seen, and I've been on 4chan for the better part of a decade.

>>53440391
>If you don't design my narrative for me, you don't get to do anything in muh campaign
>Oh, and you autofail common knowledge rolls just because.
I gotta say man, your shitty system is how you get Old Men Henderson at your table.

>>53440313
You're stating an opinion that was never contested and that everyone with common sense agrees with. I don't see what the point was at all, it's just fanning the flames.

>>53440459
Why does it matter who my character's parents are? Unless we're playing in my character's hometown, or are planning on going there at some point, there's really no reason to mention them?
It's also assumed that someone taught my character the things that they know but unless we actually meet them, how are they relevant to the campaign? Lastly, it's assumed that my character got their gear from somewhere as well but unless we go back there (assuming it isn't a mart or something) how is that relevant to the campaign?

If they become relevant, they'll be mentioned during the campaign, but until then I'd rather focus on something else.

File: what a lovely argument you made.jpg (91KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x450px

>>53440470

>>53440510
So you're saying there are absolutely no people in your character's past that are likely to still be relevant?

File: 1377045291806.jpg (43KB, 341x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 341x500px

>>53440422
>He has a different opinion than me
>Must have autism.

>>53440470
>If you don't design my narrative for me, you don't get to do anything in muh campaign
If you give me hooks I will include your narrative. If other people don't then I have nothing to add in, as a result you get more screen time.
>Oh, and you autofail common knowledge rolls just because.
By raw you don't make the checks. Any knowledge related to the skills you've included on your sheet is handled by rolling those skills as knowledge assuming you want to know something esoteric under their purview. You've given 0 information to base what "common" means to you ergo it doesn't mean a thing.

Old man henderson doesn't work in practice, and if anything can be more easily produced when your backstory is a blank slate that you make up on the spot. If you want to bring a character specifically meant to disrupt the game I will ask you why you've not given expressed your issues with my game to me like an adult before asking you to leave.

>>53440516
How is anything I wrote a strawman when it's shit that you wrote in your own post? Do you even know what a strawman is?

>>53440526
I'm saying that if they were relevant to the current situation, they'd be brought up naturally as a result of the situation.

I'm not going to talk about how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling to survive in an undead catacomb but if we're on an island and I catch us some fish, I'll bring it up since now, it's actually relevant to the situation.

>>53440547
Yes, I know what a strawman is.

Let's compare his post to yours.
What he said:
>A good backstory equals more screentime
What you claimed he said:
>No backstory equals no screentime

That's pretty much the definition of a straw man.

>>53440536
>If you give me hooks I will include your narrative.
What if I'd rather participate in your narrative?
>By raw you don't make the checks.
In what game?
>Any knowledge related to the skills you've included on your sheet is handled by rolling those skills as knowledge assuming you want to know something esoteric under their purview.
So wouldn't that mean that I'm making the checks?
>You've given 0 information to base what "common" means to you ergo it doesn't mean a thing.
What kinda logic is this? If I invested a bunch of points into lockpicking, shouldn't I inherently know how to unlock a shitty padlock?
>Old man henderson doesn't work in practice, and if anything can be more easily produced when your backstory is a blank slate that you make up on the spot.
OMH only worked because the player dedicated enough time to write out over 100 pages of info for his character though.

>>53440622
>OMH only worked because the player dedicated enough time to write out over 100 pages of info for his character though.
OMH only worked because the fictional GM was a spineless faggot.

>>53440571
Ahem
>>53440391
>He auto fails common knowledge and doesn't get an arc unless he really works for it.
But, y'know, I'm obviously just strawmanning here.

>>53440641
What he said:
>A person who makes himself no backstory at all doesn't get an arc unless he works for it
What you claim he said:
>A person who doesn't design narrative for me doesn't get to ever do anything in my campaign

You are strawmanning. Stop it.

>>53440657
Tell me chief, if he's focusing all his attention on the snowflakes and makes me auto fail common knowledge shit, how the fuck am I supposed to do anything within the campaign?

He might as well be saying "a person who doesn't design narrative for me doesn't get to ever do anything in my campaign" because that's essentially what's going to fucking happen.

>>53440682
>if he's focusing all his attention on the snowflakes
Because there's absolutely no middle ground between writing a novel's worth of a backstory to your special snowflake, and not writing even a line of what he's all about. The problem arisen was the latter: no one ever advocated for going to the former extreme instead.

You are still strawmanning.

>>53440622
Are you so upset by being asked to write a backstory that you've actively avoided leaning what one actually is? You write out a few lines that say who your character is, why they're here, and maybe some stuff you'd like included in the game.

"His name is Jeffery Smith, he grew up in a small fishing town off the coast, and joined the war out of a sense of patriotic duty." That's a backstory, and it covers everything I've mentioned up until this point. Bonus points if you include some more like maybe an old friend and school mate was an immigrant from the nation that you're fighting against. That would be great, gives me a fuck ton to work with.

>What if I'd rather participate in your narrative?
Then do? Why would you think including other people's contributions to the game would be mutually exclusive to the...well the game itself?
So wouldn't that mean that I'm making the checks?
You'd be making completely different checks.
>What kinda logic is this? If I invested a bunch of points into lockpicking, shouldn't I inherently know how to unlock a shitty padlock?
Did you already forget the past line that explains exactly that? If you want to know some esoteric lockpicking knowledge, roll lockpicking. If you want to know your shitty as ever example you don't make a roll because any system worth its salt has a clause about not having to roll for something you have no chance at failing at.

>OMH only worked because the player dedicated enough time to write out over 100 pages of info for his character though.
No he worked because the gm not only accepted that book, but allowed the player to walk all over them treating that document as the gospel truth. Keep in mind that oldman henderson was used against a gm the player explicitly thought was shitty to begin with. The idea that they'd allow this sort of player behavior assuming the story is even true, proves that.

>>53440563
We're not talking about bringing up 1 page of backstory in the middle of a game but writing it on character sheets. Nigga

>>53440693
If I can get a free knowledge skill for every sentence or two that I write that justifies it, why the fuck wouldn't I write a novel and justify every single thing my character knows?

>>53440773
He's encouraging players to write a bit of backstory and get more invested in the game by giving them a mechanical benefit for it. You turn it around into powergaming. He will probably stop doing this because of you, and everyone will be a little more sad as a result.

You are why we can't have nice things.

>>53440773
Who said you get an unlimited amount of these things which I already stated were a trick and mechanically identical to common knowledge?
You get one above average (technically usually better than common knowledge), 2 at human standard (which is usually identical to common knowledge), and below average (which is there for the illusion).

Gets me a nice little story and players to think about who their character is.

>>53440811
Nah I'd treat him like I said I'd treat henderson. I don't abide people who don't actually want to play a game together at my table.

>>53440811
>>53440827
>He's encouraging players to write a bit of backstory and get more invested in the game by giving them a mechanical benefit for it.
He's encouraging people to only focus on backstory when it's mechanically viable for them to do so. You shouldn't NEED to be encouraged to come up with a backstory for your character, you should do it because you feel invested in the goddamn game.

If you need to dangle some meat on a hook to get people to play your games, chances are they weren't all that interested in the first place.
>>53440812
Who is to say that a long-lived race can't know more than four things though? Human beings aren't fucking pokemon.

>>53440773
Because you're not interacting with an automatic program (knowledge = f(Backstory)), but with a human being able to judge what make sense and what is excessive.

>>53440563
>I'm saying that if they were relevant to the current situation, they'd be brought up naturally as a result of the situation

"What's that, we need to sneak into the castle of Baron Suspiciatory? Thankfully my uncle is the captain of the guard there!"
"Yeah, I know the last five strongholds have been staffed/commanded/built by a different relative of my PC; what can I say, he's got a big family."

While the above is an exaggeration, "only 'bringing up'/making up backstory when it's relevant to the current situation" is rife for exploitation via "useful coincidences." Even if your trust your group to not exploit this, on-the-fly background creation/revelation limits the ability of the GM to plan ahead and create interesting narrative arcs for the players. Telling your GM you're hunting your old master who betrayed the cause at the outset of the game lets them work it in to the story in a much better way than dropping it only them randomly later on.

>>53440873
It's entirely possible some of them were only in it for the mechanical aspect at first, but it's a good way to get them to realize it has its own benefits and to come up with some better backstories even without the mechanical stuff the next time.

You need to start easy.

>>53440898
That still doesn't explain why I shouldn't write a novel to get the most out of my knowledge skills though. I mean, you ask old man for their life story and they'll probably be able to tell you of dozens of shit that they picked up over the years.

>>53440933
Feel free. You waste your time with that and I'll boot your dumb ass from the game for trying to turn a small incentive for RPing into another source of muchkinry, because as >>53440898 said, I'm not a machine beholden to my programming and have the ability to deem someone a fuckhead and have them removed from the table.

>>53440915
What does it necessarily matter if the PC in question has an uncle who is the captain of the guard though?

>>53440994
If he does, it was brought up in his backstory and the DM had the extra warning to prepare for it and turn it into a possible option in the infiltration.

>>53440873
>Who is to say that a long-lived race can't know more than four things though? Human beings aren't fucking pokemon.

Then give me a backstory that covers that? The free knowledge skill explanations aren't a backstory. They're justification for those specific things, in order to get people like you present something at all. Actually I take that back. People with don't generally like backstories aren't always obstinate cunts.

Also I generally don't include long lived races purely because of the mechanical disconnect between Joe elvenston the 1000 year old elf being mechanically balanced with Joe everyman the 18 year old human. Or rather I generally request said creature be young or be given a really believable reason why they've accomplished practically nothing by their age. When it comes down to it though people generally don't play ancient characters like they're actually ancient, so the whole play a young elf if you want to play an elf thing is generally accepted without batting an eye.

Fun fact though, if you want to play someone who is elderly there is a disadvantage for that which includes free knowledge skills to compensate for your age catching up to you. So jokes on you if you want to play an old man you effectively have to do what you dread most and actually tell me about yourself. AHAHAHAHA

>>53440917
It really isn't. The type of people who only do shit if there's a mechanical benefit to their overall effectiveness are the type who will gladly show up to next game with nothing but a name with some stats the moment there's no longer a carrot on the stick.

>>53440994
You can't think of a way to spin "I have a relative/relation in a position of power at [location]" into a way to help you get in to [location]? Just no link between the two whatsoever?

>>53440971
Oh I gotcha, so you reward backstories but only when it helps you fill in your skeleton of a plot. Oh, and if someone points out how stupid your houserule is, out the door they go.

I gotchu senpai.

>>53441040
I've seen it work as often, or more so, as I've seen it not work. It's worth a shot.

>>53441002
>>53441064
Even if his uncle is the captain of the guard, it doesn't actually change anything about infiltration mission as a whole. You're also assuming that the uncle in question is obligated to help the PC just because they're family, even at the risk of his job (and possibly his life).

>>53441065
>Hurr why are you only rewarding people who cooperate with you in a cooperative hobby? I should get all the benefits of being a fuckhead and no one can get mad at me because I'm momma's special baby boy.

>>53440915
On-the-fly background bits can be fun though, but I suppose the last word should be to the GM.

So for example:
> "What's that, we need to sneak into the castle of Baron Suspiciatory? Considering my noble origin, shouldn't I know something about him and is family?"
> "You left young, would your character have paid attention to politic at the time?"
> "Well he was already very curious about military matters at least, and my teacher was strict... so maybe."
> "Ok here is what you know/knowledge roll."
But the GM can also simply say the Baron is a very seclude man, or the PC family live in another region and would only know the baron by name so the PC get nothing specific. Or maybe the GM want the PC to have a personal link with the baron and that became a plot point.
Of course, on-the-fly background is not opposed to starting backstory, all the contrary they should benefit each other.

>>53441040
For a good number of newbies, it's less "I don't want to roleplay; gimmie my numbers" and more "I don't know how to/don't feel comfortable roleplaying; I probably won't try it unless I'm incentivized." Yes, grognards that hate RP will forever only be in it for the mechanical benefits, but for others, it can be a helpful push that has them make that first important step.

>>53441094
I could spin it as
>I spent a season staying with him a few years ago. I know the castle. Kind of.
And then ask the DM about how much I actually know/think I know.

>>53441094
It's a potential avenue that didn't exist beforehand and at the very least is better than making a cold call to an unknown captain. Also, we only stopped at "the uncle is there"; theoretically, we could push it further, characterizing the uncle as a strong family man that always puts family first, or maybe make him a lout easily plied by drink or coin, or whatever.

>>53441134
True. Most things are okay as long as you keep GM veto in mind.

>>53440016
Spoken like a lazy asshole who can't make a character to save his life.

>>53440971
>I'll boot your dumb ass from the game for trying to turn a small incentive for RPing into another source of muchkinry
You know, I'm with you for the most part, but if you are going to do this sort of thing, it's important that you as a GM make sure the shit you hand out isn't wildly unbalanced.

>>53441109
>Everyone should love and respect my opinions, otherwise they get the boot.

File: orks 40k it says you're a grot.jpg (132KB, 830x900px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 830x900px

>my character is a self-taught alchemist
>stumbled across an abandoned alchemy laboratory in the sewers when he was a street urchin
>previous (now dead) alchemist was mad and his scribblings on the walls and in his books display this quite obviously
>my character absorbed his alchemy skills as well as intense paranoia from this
>said paranoia is about the world being ruled by a secret high-tech goblin conspiracy
First mission
>GM has us stumble across some "you no take candle" tier gobbos in the forest, we kill them, my character sprouts the usual paranoia about the situation
>one of them has some weird watch-like pendant trinket, we test it for magic and whatever, turns up no results, whatever, loot and scoot
>a few hours later get circled by a small goblin army operating mini-mecha like the Shredders from WoW
>turns out the trinket was literally a GPS beacon and they're here for revenge
>get killed in the second session by an unstoppable onslaught of robo-goblins

If you're reading this, fuck you Cody.

>>53441166
I still don't see what the problem is. Castles are fucking huge and you might not recall every sinle nook and cranny from a few years ago, nor would you be aware of any changes that were made in the interim.
>>53441191
And then when you meet him for real, you find out that he's become jaded and hateful after being betrayed by another family member and focused all his attention on his work or he values the coin of his employer more than the coin that the party could possibly give him.

Of course, you'd be discussing this shit between sessions, or at least, you should be.

File: nsr.gif (2MB, 316x213px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 316x213px

>most players don't give a backstory, let it develop through the sessions (preferred)
>some players give me an excessively long backstory
>always skim through it halfheartedly, pick out a sentence or two and add references to it in the game
>"Wow, you actually read my character's backstory. Thanks man."
>mfw

Works every time.

>>53441488
>I'm entitled to play in someone else's game.

>>53441237
Brevity is wit.

>>53441553
>I'm entitled to be wrong and loved at the same time.

>>53441554
Silence is golden.

File: FB_IMG_1489844446881.jpg (39KB, 600x599px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x599px

>>53440529
Yeah, basically

>>53441554
>>53441582
So I should keep my backstory as brief as possible and only play in text only games?

>>53441620
>Everyone who disagrees with me is autistic
>Me though? I'm the only normal person in the room.

>>53440503

Right? My backstory is today I had a bagel for breakfast. That shit is totally a normal thing people do and this guy is mad for legit reasons ok

>>53441573
>I'm entitled to force My Way down other people's throats
You are taking things to extreme in order to show absurd the extreme is, but everyone already knows that.
Also, giving your backstory over to the DM while throwing out assumptions at every turn doesn't seem smart. It's just crying "I don't care about your setting, senpai! Also, please screw me over!"

>>53441829
I've literally never met a GM that asked for an extensive backstory before session 0 who didn't turn out to be a shit GM who loses steam 3-5 sessions in.

>>53441554
That's not even how the saying goes, much less what it means.

>>53440510
your parents are now evi cultists, and they along with their family, including you, are now wanted by the church to be executed.
your teacher tried to assassinate the lord of wherever and his pupils are being hunted as sleeper agents.
and the guy you bought your gear from, turns out he was a fence for a powerful thieves guild, all members and associates of which are considered to be the bane of the kingdom.

oh, but you were playing a "hero", well the entire populace is after you for various reasons.

session one you get captured/killed/etc. now make a new character.

>>53440563
well how did you know that your dad was great fisherman struggling... if you didn't have it in your backstory. did you just make that up now? that is not how backstories work.

File: well that escalated quickly.jpg (85KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1280x720px

>>53442472
At this point I'd just pack up and leave and suggest to others that they do the same.

>Write decently extensive backstory
>Use literally none of it
>Forced to rewrite character's entire personality, because otherwise it'd make no fucking sense without having to go into anime-tier monologues about their past/present/future
Fuck you, you're getting four sentences or less from now on.

>>53442514
>well how did you know that your dad was great fisherman struggling
If your reading comprehension is so shit that you can completely misunderstand a post that's less than 100 words long, you really don't deserve a more detailed backstory.
Please reread: >>53440563
>I'm not going to talk about how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling to survive in an undead catacomb but if we're on an island and I catch us some fish, I'll bring it up since now, it's actually relevant to the situation.

>>53442407
>extensive
Who the fuck said about background needing to be extensive? The arguement was "There should be no background at all, else you've no plot!"
Have you met a GM that made an extensive backstory for PCs before session 0 who was a great GM with enough steam for a year-long campaign?

>>53442578
>I've pulled something out of my ass, got caught, so my answer is "You're dumb! Here, look how I pull things out of my ass!"

>>53437116
It's not mandatory, but if he doesn't read it, he's a shit GM.

Not just because he's not catering/pandering to you as the player, no. If he doesn't understand your character's history and motivations, he has no predictive capability with regards to your actions.

A GM who doesn't have any clue what his players are gonna do next is a GM working on his back foot.

>>53441134
well your example seems to indicate an existing backstory of being a noble.

on-the-fly background would just now be calling in as a noble, and the gm should say "since when?, you don't know anything about baron suspiciatory."

>>53442583
No, the best GM's that I know focused all their attention on developing a detailed setting that we could use to fill in the blanks as we progressed though the campaign. No need to develop more than a few sentences of backstory when we know that the line is open whenever we need to talk to the GM about whether or not our character knows something specific that could relate to their backstory.

File: damage control.jpg (101KB, 650x650px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 650x650px

>>53442605

File: received_1719963124686357.jpg (15KB, 960x422px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 960x422px

>>53441642
Nope. Also autistic. We're on 4chan. Of course we're autistic.

File: 1478299526290.png (253KB, 568x638px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 568x638px

>>53442665
>Implying circumstances of your ass pull matter
And then, when GM vetoes your bullshit, you throw a tantrum and leave the game.

>>53442825
I'm just saying man, I sent you a link to the post your replied to and even quoted the parts that you misread, but let me be a little more specific since it's obvious that your reading comprehension is shittier than I thought.
>>53440563
>I'm not going to talk about how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling to survive in an undead catacomb but if we're on an island and I catch us some fish, I'll bring it up since now, it's actually relevant to the situation.
>I'm not going to talk about how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling to survive in an undead catacomb
>I'm not going to talk about how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling
>how my dad was a great fishermen while we're struggling
>dad was a great fishermen WHILE we're struggling
I never said anything about having a struggling father or anything, you just jumped the gun and are now trying to project your problems onto me as if it's somehow my fault.

>>53442890
how hard is it to show up to a game with "son of a fisherman" written down on a hanky or some shit?

>>53440470
I hate Old Man Henderson for the amount of shit players I've gotten over the years who think they're clever and apparently the only person in a big city with an internet connection, and just show up with a big fucking novel for a backstory and get pissed when I don't buy into the "epik memes xD."

I think all but one of those ended up in the trash, and the only one that didn't I just told that I'm not reading that shit and to boil it down to a paragraph. And then ended up in the trash because they didn't want to.

Anyone have that M&M greentext where the GM didn't bother reading the guys sheet and backstory and assumed every instance of him shooting someone with his stun weapon was straight up murder?
Seems relevant to the post and might be a good break from the tardfight upthread.

>>53443079
About as hard as it must be for you to admit that you fucked up your reading comprehension three times in a row.

File: DENSE.png (832KB, 600x814px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 600x814px

>>53442407
Literally no one has argued for an extensive backstory. They're talking about a few sentences, a paragraph at most. Are you so incapable that you can't even write 4 short sentences for your character?

>>53440622
>OMH only worked because the player dedicated enough time to write out over 100 pages of info for his character though.

Most of the shit in Old Man Henderson is only possible if the GM is in on the joke, like the trail of explosions that happen to erase every trace of OMH's involvement multiple times.

Which normally is fine, but a little damning when the entire joke is about how your sticking it to a shitty GM.

>>53443123
I've been talking about a few sentences of backstory since this whole argument began.

Have you just been angrily agreeing with me this entire time?

>>53443101
Completely different person bud. I'm just asking a very simple question. Why aren't you bringing up that aspect of your character's past until the very moment it starts being beneficial to you?

>>53437116
Is that motherfucking dali?

>>53443187
Because it wasn't relevant to the situation at hand and, let's be honest here, how often would fishing really be relevant in the average campaign?

More to the point, why exactly does it matter? Is your narrative so fragile that it couldn't handle someone actually being proficient in a non-combat skill?

>>53443425
So you're saying that, rather than write a few sentances at the beginning of the game like the DM is asking, so that he can give you that non-combat skill in addition to your others and account for it later on, you want to be free to randomly declare what your backstory is once you get into a random situation during the game where that skill would have been helpful if you picked it initially?

Why not just write it down to start with instead of 'revealing' it through play?

>>53442890
I'll rephrase it for you:
Circumstances of your ass pull do not matter.

You're giving up narrative control over your character to the GM, only to claim it back whenever it suits you and oppose GM if you don't like the story he made for your character. You give no limits to yourself in that regard, not even some cursory boundaries, all on assumption that whatever your "reality editing" would be used on is not important for the GM.

>>53443619
>Why not just write it down to start with instead of 'revealing' it through play?
Why does it matter though? It's such a situational skill that I can't imagine just giving it to someone just to move the plot along provided they have the resources to spend on it.

>>53443702
>You're giving up narrative control over your character to the GM, only to claim it back whenever it suits you and oppose GM if you don't like the story he made for your character.
????
>You give no limits to yourself in that regard, not even some cursory boundaries, all on assumption that whatever your "reality editing" would be used on is not important for the GM.
If you equate my character revealing that he knows how to fish to warping the fabric of reality, you need to take a step away from the table and reevaluate your control issues senpai.

I'm not revealing that I have favored enemy against orcs, I'm not revealing that I can cast 3rd level spells, I'm not revealing that I can summon animals, I'm mentioning off-hand that my character knows how to fish.

It's not that big a deal.

>>53443734
A better question: Why didn't you just write down that your character knew how to catch fish ahead of time, since you seem to have it planned this far out?

And if you didn't have it planned this far out, why should you be allowed to pull out something to trivialize a challenge when nobody else can, just because they already did what the GM asked and you didn't?

>>53443791
>I'm mentioning off-hand that my character knows how to fish.

And then later I'll bet your an ace pilot. And then a professional wrestler, and the world's greatest chef, oh and he's also a master lock-picker, you would know this if you read my backstory that doesn't exist.

Every time I have players like you this is exactly what this shit ends up spiraling into.

>>53443425
Uhh, non-combat skills are probably the most important ones in my campaigns because I tent to run high lethality systems and a lot of political shit.

>>53443734
>It's such a situational skill
Exactly why pulling it out of your ass is detrimental. People should be rewarded for taking situational options instead of purely the optimal ones. What you're suggesting is fuck everything but what I deem functionally important, I might as well be able to do it all anyway. What you are suggesting is actively taking away from any "too situational to matter" skills that anyone else has invested points into.

Which is why I'll try to throw in moments for them to use their choices to shine, and you would have been vetted out during applications.

>>53443866
>A better question: Why didn't you just write down that your character knew how to catch fish ahead of time, since you seem to have it planned this far out?
Wasn't relevant then.
>And if you didn't have it planned this far out, why should you be allowed to pull out something to trivialize a challenge when nobody else can, just because they already did what the GM asked and you didn't?
You make it seem as though I'm asking the GM to let me auto-succeed and catch a bajillion fish or some shit. I'd still have to make the roll, unless you just let people auto-succeed shit based off of what they wrote in their backstories and shit.

Inb4 you focus on "wasn't relevant then"
in your reply while ignoring the rest of my post.

>>53443791
Are you implying that only mechanical benefits can have impact on a game here?

>>53441554
The phrase is brevity is the soul of wit, your statement clearly implies the two are synonymous, which is far from the case. Speaking two words doesn't make you clever at all. Nor does brooding in the corner under your hat hiding six guns under your duster coat.

>>53443934
> I'd still have to make the roll
And you'll make it untrained just like everyone else who doesn't know how to fish.

>>53443884
>And then later I'll bet your an ace pilot.
First off
>"You're"
Second off, why would my character be an ace pilot? If he was then we'd be flying in my sweet ass plane or something.
>And then a professional wrestler
If he made a decent wage doing that then he wouldn't be an adventurer in the first place.
>the world's greatest chef
see above
>he's also a master lock-picker
see above
>Every time I have players like you this is exactly what this shit ends up spiraling into.
Well I mean, you're not exactly selling yourself well if this is how you act on the regular basis.

There is a little thing called self-control y'know.

>>53443914
>Uhh, non-combat skills are probably the most important ones in my campaigns because I tent to run high lethality systems and a lot of political shit.
Okay, tell me how me knowing how to fish will help the group in a political campaign?
>>53443914
>People should be rewarded for taking situational options instead of purely the optimal ones.
You're assuming that I don't invest points into fishing just because I didn't write about it in my backstory.

>>53443971
>And you'll make it untrained just like everyone else who doesn't know how to fish.
I do know how to fish though, I put the points in and everything.

>>53443943
Are you implying that your narrative can't handle me knowing how to fish unless I give a signed invitation beforehand?

>>53443934
Yeah, you'd still have to make the roll, but that roll is going to be a lot easier if you're just now deciding that having a bunch of skill points in that skill is helpful

As for the spoiler, of course I'm going to focus on it, because you said it as your defense of the main thing we're talking about.

If it wasn't relevant then, then why didn't you still write it down back when the GM was asking if anyone had any events that happened to their character in their past that might be relevant to the future?

Or do you just leave all your skills blank, since it's not relevant until the situation to use them comes up?

>>53444060
>you're assuming that I don't invest points into fishing
>backpedalling this fucking hard

>>53444114
>>53444095
Are you implying that you're special and shouldn't have to mark down your skills beforehand like every other player at the table did?

>>53444128
see >>53444095

I invested my points into knowing how to fish, I just didn't mention it in my backstory because it wasn't relevant to mention at that particular time.

Should I be penalized for this when I invested the same allotment of points to learn it as anyone else who is around my level in an equivalent skill?

>>53444060
Politicking can mean a hell of a lot, and in this case keeping you alive, or did you miss the whole high legality system bit?

We also ain't talking bout no skills you have on your sheet and we haven't been doing so from the fucking beginning of this thread and you know it. Unless you legitimately think writing a backstory is some freaky code word for having to justify every single skill you've taken.

But considering you seem to make characters entirely out of the idea that they exist in a quantum state of (ass)umption I wouldn't put that past you.

>>53444171
I'm just saying man, you're assuming that I'm going to just pull out professions and skills out my ass when all I'm doing is mentioning "hey fellas, don't worry about food, my dad taught me how to fish when I was younger" while having invested points into knowing how to fish.

It's not my fault you're a sperg with control issues, and it doesn't hurt my argument either.

>>53443159
Literally everybody on this thread has agreed with you the whole time while you were sperging around not understanding the subject at hand.

>>53444251
>I'm just saying man, you're assuming that I'm going to just pull out professions and skills out my ass when all I'm doing is mentioning "hey fellas, don't worry about food, my dad taught me how to fish when I was younger"

This is what you've been saying all thread

>while having invested points into knowing how to fish.

This is what you brought up just now.

This is what's known as 'moving the goalposts'

>haha, you assumed my argument was one thing, because I didn't mention the one specific thing that would remove your complaints!

>>53444027
>Well I mean, you're not exactly selling yourself well if this is how you act on the regular basis.

Call it being over players who show up with no backstory, and then just happen to be complete experts at this skill that would be very useful to know eight now with no indication beforehand they might have been useful at this skill, and then is never brought up again unless they need to be an expert at it later. Or suddenly have a number of shady contacts that can get them all sort of stuff super cheap and then are never spoken of again.

These days if someone shows up without a backstory, I have them sit out until they write one and they can jump in then. I'm willing to be accommodating. Maybe they forgot, left it at home, the goldfish ate it, etc. One paragraph is all I need, three at the most. More is dicey, but I'm willing to at least skim it if you don't show up with a fucking novel because you just read that epik meme Old Man Henderson yesterday.

I've only had a few people straight up refuse to write a backstory, and these days they just get the boot. If someone can't work up the effort to write a single paragraph, then they show me they clearly have no interest in the game.

>>53444176
But I did mark down my skills though. I put in my points to know how to fish, I just didn't mention earlier because it I needed to focus my backstory on more important bullshit that was going to crop up more often during campaign.

>>53444114
Fishing is circumstantial example here. And circumstances of your ass pull do not matter, since you do not make an agreement with GM on its' limits before play.

>>53444284
See >>53444277

>>53444243
>Unless you legitimately think writing a backstory is some freaky code word for having to justify every single skill you've taken.
Well considering how angry you, and others, have gotten based off your own wild assumptions, excuse me for misrepresenting your position.

>>53444284
So not only are you no longer pulling fishing out of nowhere for some benefit, since you have the skill on your sheet regardless of whether or not you explain it right then, but apparently you also already have a backstory.

Y'know, a backstory? The thing that this entire argument has been about. The thing we've been telling you that you should have at least a few sentences of written down beforehand. The thing that you're now admitting to having?

For someone who has been in agreement the entire time, you sure have a funny way of showing it.

>>53444277
>>53444301
>I misunderstood your position and it's all YOUR FAULT!
This is what you sound like right now.

>>53444280
>Call it being over players who show up with no backstory
>These days if someone shows up without a backstory
I clearly stated that I wrote a few sentences though.

>>53444320
So you admit that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, despite trying to act all high and mighty on the subject?
And everyone else is the one making assumptions.

>>53444387
So what were you arguing with me about then?

Nothing I'm guessing, because you seem to be changing your argument every time someone pokes holes in it, and are just stirring shit up for (You)s at this point.

>>53444358
>>53444299
You honestly seem unreasonably angry at my character investing in a situational skill based purely upon the fact that I didn't mention it early in the campaign.

I mean fuck, I'd hate to see what would happen if I forgot about a skill that was actually important.

>>53444365
>I can't communicate properly, why can't you understand me?

>>53444401
There's them crazy assumptions again.

>>53444444
>Such digits wasted on backpedaling

>>53444444
Witnessed. Shame it was all wasted on such a terribly autistic post.

>>53444450
It's not my fault you have shit reading comprehension bro, which is weird considering you can easily go back and reread what I've wrote yet you continued to miss the point.

Maybe you're just stupid.

>>53437116
Never I have I done that myself, nor have I experienced it in any games I've played.

File: communicating.png (122KB, 740x538px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 740x538px

>>53444480

>>53444480
Except you've clearly miscommunicated your position to the entire thread by leaving certain points out completely. You're either baiting or stupid.

>>53444505
>This poorly drawn comic will surely make me look intelligent through association.
>>53444545
It's right there if you want to reread my posts and figure out where you went wrong.

>>53444575
>It's right there if you want to reread my posts and figure out where you went wrong.

The part where we went wrong was thinking you could have an intelligent conversation.

>>53444575
Oh, you mean like >>53443734 where you suggest you should just get to spend the points on it mid-game?

You've made quite a lot of posts without clearing up this 'misunderstanding' sooner.

>>53444575
The i'm just explaining how I got this skill that I already have is literally 100+ posts into this argument. And in no way shape or form alters your previous wanting to have a surprise contact and preexisting knowledge of a location immediately after it being described as playing a role to you bit.

>>53444575
Just stop already. You've been in the wrong the entire time. Simply accept it like a man and go on with your life, you aren't getting anything off stubbornly saying "everybody is wrong but me" on a Sri Lankan Surf Board

>>53444575
There's two options. Either

A) You didn't say anything of the sort and are just backpedling now

or

B) You said something along those lines initially, and yet have continued to argue without clarifying earlier

You're a faggot either way.

>>53444251
That was my only post in the thread, and you didn't refute it.

>>53443702
But asspulls is how backstories get made? My players make up small tidbits about their characters whenever, they write them down and I reward them with situational modifiers. It's a behavior I want to encourage because it makes their characters little bit deeper and players little bit more invested in the game, and the game becomes richer for it. I don't expect players to have detailed backstory for their character when they start, but do expect them to add on it as they go. This isn't a common way to play?

File: 1372929372949.jpg (18KB, 298x292px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 298x292px

>>53444916
>But asspulls is how backstories get made?

>all this thread
>all this posts
>all this awesome digits wasted
Every single one your arguments and complaints is solved by making the characters together at session 0. Tying their backstories together and to the setting with the help of the GM and the other players.

Also it's pretty obvious that the fishing guy is either a troll or a legit autist, either way it's not worth the time to reply to him.

>>53445133
Yes? What is your objection, anon.

>>53445142
Trolling lost its art status years ago. Its trite now. Always assume the equally banal autism.

Most of all my characters (if not all) are just common tropes wrapped in three or less sentences. I mean what's wrong with common tropes? They're simple, open ended and don't hinder GMs at all.
In my honest opinion they're better than
>3rd bastard son of cthulhu half demon half dog half human half angel azazel yada yada

>>53445142
>All the players absolutely have to know each other like they were held at gunpoint
Just no

I have no reason to know any of the peasants that obviously can't roleplay for shit.

>>53437116
it isn't common. your GM is a faggot

>>53442539
actually i was being extreme, but the point was that the claim was the details were unimportant unless they were being interacted with at that moment, and these examples show how they can be important in terms of the overall story. i was using the same methods of taken to an extreme that seems to be the standard for tg arguments.
if you don't write a backstory, the gm certainly can, and it might not be pleasant. particularly if you want a dynamic world where stuff happens even when the pcs are not in the scene.

>>53446130
/thread

>>53441624
Please do

>>53445895
They're the other players in this game. If you don't know them, you'll only hamper everyone's enjoyment even more.

Best just leave the game.

>Not having a 20 page backstory doc in Word summarizing your character's history, personality, interests, and abilities to bring up during play.
>Not having a 1 page summary of "Information that actually matters to the DM" for the DM

Plebians, all of you. I bet you don't even know your character's mother's name.

>>53447099
>implying you do any of this
>implying you would if you had a game
>implying you actually have any games to go to

Grow up.

>>53447131
>Implying I'm not running one campaign and in two others.

Plebians delenda est.

>>53447212
>implying anyone believes your smug bullshit
>implying anyone is impressed with your smug bullshit
>fishing for attention in anonymity
>being this childish

File: 1450131109931.jpg (163KB, 599x657px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 599x657px

>>53447319
>make sly comment in thread describing my own answer to OP's question with mock-disdain for those who disagree
>random anon gets absolutely assblasted

>>53447319
>Running one campain and playing in two others along with having a long backstory is smug bullshit
Do you even play tabletop?

File: congratulations, you've played yourself.jpg (24KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x360px

>>53444589
>Trying to have an intelligent conversation
>On nu /tg/

>>53444634
>>53444651
>>53444692
>>53444767
>You're wrong
>No, you just misunderstood what I said
>FUCK YOU SPERG I FELT THAT YOU'RE WRONG SO YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG REEEEEEEEEEEE!
Maybe you should all take a nap and come back once you've calmed down a bit. I can guarantee you that it'll be much clearer later.

>>53447579
>I'm only talking to one person

>>53447579
If the entire thread just "misunderstood" you, then maybe your argument wasn't very well-constructed to begin with.

>>53446589
I don't even mention any important figures in my backstory due to GM's who have a habit of murder-fucking every important figure in my backstory for "muh drama" and if a GM actually pulled that shit during play, I'd leave and strongly suggest to others that they do the same on the grounds that if this is how he acts before the session proper begins, imagine how he'll act is someone stumbles off the rails.

Leave the arguments for the big boys m'kay, you obviously can't handle it.

>>53447653
>If the entire thread just "misunderstood" you
Please, a handful of spergs is not "the entire thread," get over yourself.

>>53437116
I got one LARPer who usually GMs his own games and doesn't have much time/fun joining other games.

But when he does, holy crap! He can write entire pages of backstory and even when it's one page, he still writes something that inspires me to build and entire campaign around just for his character! Even the simplest of characters can still make my mind churn out adventures of drama and action!

He never played longer than one session and hasn't invited me for his regular games... Oh well.

>>53447793
This guy is a pretty obvious troll, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the guy who argues like a retard until bump limit, then comes in and reveals how "totally trolled" everyone is

>>53448107
I tell ya, I think that if everyone on /tg/ actually got a clue and stopped replying to obvious bait, the bulk of problems with the board would disappear over night.

File: 1484209254107.gif (3MB, 286x258px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 286x258px

>>53448107
>Everyone who disagrees with me is a troll
>Also, my mistakes are never my fault.
>Oh, buy you're the one with autism.

>>53444473
Look upon this thread, if it was going to happen it was going to be a terribly autistic post, no matter the person.

>>53440571

Isn't it more a false dichotomy? Backstory depth and screen time aren't locked in 1:1. The quality and relavance, both highly subjective, of the backstory is obviously a factor, but so is the dms willingness to take on New ideas and incorporate them. All of which should be laid out session 0

>>53450193
I'm still not entirely sure what "false dichotomy" means - I'm dumb - but I do know a strawman when I see one.

I guess it could be both.

>>53437116
>Backstories are relevant ever

I wish this fucking meme would die.

>>53450468
A false dichotomy is when you create two opposing positions that aren't mutually exclusive just to make it seem as though you can only choose one of the other.

For example
>You cannot roleplay properly while focusing on the mechanics of the game.

So in regards to this thread, the false dichotomy is that the amount of screentime you receive is proportionate to the quantity and quality of your backstory, when in actuality, every player involved should already be given screentime based on the fact that they are participating in the campaign as player characters and backstory shouldn't have anything to do with it.

To put it another way, just because a cashier doesn't tell you their life story doesn't mean it should affect their ability to perform their job.

Anyways, I hope this clears things up.

>>53450748
It does clear things up, although I personally disagree.

Take two characters I have in my current group.

One, a cleric of a warrior god, has a few backstory notes on how she fled home in violence, found her temple, on a mentor that taught her, and how she headed off to seek her own path. In total a couple paragraphs of text.

The other is an elven thief who has no backstory whatsoever and never talks about himself in rp.

Even if I didn't actively bring up the former's warrior-cult, the cleric would be infinitely easier to find plot hooks and sidequests for. She has a far clearer image in my head than the thief, who only barely exists as a sort of a misty afterimage, and for whom I really struggle to find anything in the campaign to do.

I understand that I shouldn't have favorites, and actively struggle to keep them equal, but having a bit of a character background legitimately makes it easier.

>>53450825
Here's the thing though.

On the assumption that both players aren't disruptive and are generally interested, both of them should have compelling reasons to participate in the campaign regardless of the quality of their backstory.

You as the GM should already have a narrative that the players want to progress through regardless of the quality of their backstory, because at the end of the day, they're the focus of this story and favoring one over the other will just make it harder for them to become interested in the stakes of your campaign.

I generally treat backstory as resumes, people will always put themselves (and their characters) in a favorable and will always embellish details in order to get the job. I don't really care if who your character was in the past because the focus of the campaign is on the present, and I'm more interested in how your character reacts to situations more than your writing abilities as a player.

>>53451112
Not that anon, but this is asinine. The thief character isn't just lacking backstory, they're not actually being distinctive as a character, either. You're asking for the impossible here, you have to give the GM something to work with. If you don't do it through backstory you take into account yourself, you have to do it by doing things in play that show you're a character they can mold their plot around.

If you just play a black box that hides in the corner, there's nothing they can do

>>53451168
It is not the player's job to give the GM ideas, it's the players job to participate in the narrative and not be disruptive to the flow of the game. If the thief character is capable of reacting to whatever situation happens to him, they're capable of being distinctive as a character.

The true test of their mettle as roleplayers should come when they're forced to confront situations that they never expected or wanted to be in because it shows how their character reacts to the world around them outside of their white room.

For example, I had a thief who was a flat character as well but after speaking with another member of the party who was a hot-blooded street artist, they both managed to maintain good chemistry simply because their personalities bounced off each other.

It's really not all that impossible at all, if they're interested enough to show up every week, they're probably interested enough in participating in your campaign, you need to give them a push.

>>53449963
That was my first time posting in the thread, Timmy, I don't care what you're arguing about or even what side you're on, you just argue like someone who is trying to get a rise out of someone instead of prove a point.
>Oh, buy you're the one with autism.
That isn't a sentence buddy, are you doing okay?

File: 1480090237109.jpg (35KB, 735x541px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 735x541px

>>53451375

File: 1494159758377-tg.jpg (43KB, 680x510px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 680x510px

>>53451411
I'm not arguing with you Timmy, I'm mocking you. Leave it to old Timmy to be completely unable to read 3/4 of a paragraph, right guys?

File: 1487233373587.png (80KB, 211x244px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 211x244px

>>53451442
>2 sentences and a quote is a paragraph.

File: Screenshot_2017-05-26-21-15-15-1.png (64KB, 997x440px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 997x440px

>>53451472
My bad, three paragraphs.

>>53451168
To be fair though(also not that anon), for one my current characters I have only a few sentences worth of background, and for the rest I'm basically winging it.

So far it seems to go ok. (and worst comes to worst, I might just need to think a bit more about his backstory as we go, no biggy)

File: 1475860055087.jpg (141KB, 500x362px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 500x362px

>>53451509

>>53440510
As GM, I didn't start the game until I got an acceptable backstory from every player and was thus able to integrate them into the story.

>conniving antipaladin got visited by snobby brother and head of the family, got snarled up in some family politics

>harrowed young changeling ranger was stalked by her mother, a hag, for an eventual climactic and VERY personal battle

>elf girl's nomadic tribe passed through, robbing town in desperation, party had to deal with well meaning estranged family members in a bad situation

>same character's ex-superior officer passes through on a witch hunt

It was fun, got characters more invested. The GM accounting for a bit of backstory is great fun.

>>53451670
Sometimes backstories are sparse because players start off with no idea of who they want to be but grow into their character as they go through more and more sessions and sometimes people only create backstories so that their characters feel more important than they actually are.

It's not always a bad thing to show up with a light backstory, nor is the presence of a backstory always indicative of strong roleplay. All in all, each player is different, and as long as they're willing to show up and play, it's ultimately up to you, as the GM, to make sure that each player feels as though they've contributed something to the campaign, whether it was a few minutes of roleplay, an entire session of roleplay, or something in between.

>>53451860
In my current game I asked my players to have a very sparse and loose backstory. My reasoning was they are low level characters and the first few adventures ARE their backstory.

If I were to run a higher power/level game I would require a little more backstory.
Like if they started at 10th level I would want a rough idea of the things they have done and people they befriended or became hostile with.

But at level 1? Less is more.

>>53451168
>you have to give the GM something to work with.
No you don't. Its entirely possible for the gm to just not take time out of their day to make personalized content for you.
>>53451321
>It is not the player's job to give the GM ideas, it's the players job to participate in the narrative and not be disruptive to the flow of the game.
And this is a thread about gms who want to incorporate that player into the world and the game by having them add to that narrative (which is everyone's not the gm's, if it was solely the gm's we'd have a novel on our hands) while said player absolutely refuses to contribute.

>>53452248
Fair enough.

>>53441747
What's it like sniffing your own farts?

>>53452258
>And this is a thread about gms who want to incorporate that player into the world and the game by having them add to that narrative (which is everyone's not the gm's, if it was solely the gm's we'd have a novel on our hands) while said player absolutely refuses to contribute.
If you want to incorporate a player into the world and the game, give them some focus so that they have a means to interact with the world around them.

I mean, what do you think is going to be more memorable to the player, the time that they spent writing up a backstory or the time their character did something interesting during the campaign?

Of course, it's going to be the latter, because anyone can come up with a brief backstory but it truly makes it all worth while when you sit down at the table and do something awesome that actually changes the direction of the narrative.

>>53452401
>What's it like sniffing your own farts?
This should a /tg/ banner, because every other thread devolves into this shit.

>>53440547
he included a jpg dude, you lose this one

>>53452421
How the fuck are you going to give them something interesting to interact with individually if there's nothing to distinguish them as a character?

At the very least you should see the basic advantage of a backstory, in that you can use it to tell your GM what you're interested in.

Most of the people who can't take 5 minutes to write a single paragraph have 0 interest in being proactive in the game, anyways. You're literally asking for the GM to drag your dead ass weight around

>>53440079
This is why GURPS has Signature Gear, which is an Advantage that gives you money (based on how many points you're willing to spend) to buy a single, plot protected (meaning the GM can't take it away against your will) item tied to your character's backstory. If you want an item that has importance to your character, spend part of your point total to "buy" the item.

>>53452421
Let me break it down for you person who has never dm'ed. I could either hope that this person who has given me no reason to be here gets attached to a moment. Given that they're actively refusing to give me a tiny amount of rp to "calibrate" their player character to place that character into the world as a person and not numbers. I have the distinct feeling that sort of behavior isn't going to magically change them into a masterful roleplayer that will seek involvement and immersion once things get underway.

>>53452530
>How the fuck are you going to give them something interesting to interact with individually if there's nothing to distinguish them as a character?
By throwing them in peculiar situations and seeing how they interact with the situation in-character. Sometimes it's as simple as an NPC asking for their input ("and what about you in the back, looking all dark and mysterious?") and sometimes it's as involved as conflict ("I'm sure this ruffian stole my money, I mean look at him, he has untrustworthy written on his face!") but the point is that for that one interaction, the spotlight is on them and now I see how they deal with it.
>Most of the people who can't take 5 minutes to write a single paragraph have 0 interest in being proactive in the game, anyways.
Not necessarily. Some people would just rather get into the game than worry about writing up a good backstory. If they're willing to come over every week than chances are they're at least somewhat interested in playing.

>>53452642
>Let me break it down for you person who has never dm'ed.
How presumptuous of you to say. Just because I share a different opinion than you doesn't mean that I lack experience in running games.
>I have the distinct feeling that sort of behavior isn't going to magically change them into a masterful roleplayer that will seek involvement and immersion once things get underway.
Well have you actually tried to focus on them to see how their character interacts with the world around them? I've had problem players too and after a little push they tended to get involved in the campaign simply because their actions caused the narrative to evolve in a peculiar direction.

>>53452687
There's nothing more annoying than an edgelord sitting at the back of the room pretending to be a deep character but actually doing nothing. They're especially bad when they have no backstory, because then I wasn't given the chance to save their ideas for that light-novel they've got brewing in their head and make a character that will actually interact with what's put forth instead.

You seriously have no idea what it's like to GM for that kind of player, do you? I would bet money on your only motivation for defending being the fact that you've done it yourself.

>>53452748
given a chance to tell them to*
for defending it*

Fuck my life, I need coffee.

>>53452724
You still haven't explained how you found the right way to push them. Was it by guessing? Do you not see, as a GM now (which I actually doubt you've ever been at this point) the advantage of a piece of text that will quite possibly give you the keys to all those locks so you don't have to go trying to pick them?

>>53452724
>focus on them to see how their character interacts with the world around them?
You want focus you earn it. I'm not going to waste everyone else's time playing pretend therapist to your social ills. You've plenty of chances during general interactions to take part, and if you don't want to be hear then by all means leave.

File: 1491908436326.jpg (130KB, 540x721px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 540x721px

>>53437116
>Please tell me this isn't as common as this GM makes it sound? I haven't played for very long, but this has to be false, right?

Nope, it's true. Let me explain: Players suck at writing. A character's background is a little story specifically about one faggot to explain why is in a bar willing to travel with people on adventures. It is all self gratification for the player to get them preoccupied with a character that is not well thought out or over thought out.

Let's kill the magic, next time you encounter a player character's backstory see if the hit the following:
>Orphan
>Was important then betrayed.
>Is somehow the last of their kind
>Was rich but now is broke.
>Had an encounter with monsters that they won, despite technically being level 1 at the time.
>Has a history with a character that would be high level and a big help to the party.
>Was well liked by everyone.
>Is royalty.
And my favorite
>Has a new age gender preference.

>>53452748
I've dealt with those types of characters at various points in my campaigns and you know what I did each and every time?

I took the piss out of them and had loads of fun doing it, why? Because there's nothing that takes the wind out of an edgelord's sails faster than being put in situations that they can't scowl at until it no longer becomes a problem or worse, when their edginess is so edgy that it ends up making them look comical in relation to everyone else around them.

Try as they might, there's no way to look cool while shopping for eggs and milk at a supermarket.

>>53452789
>Was it by guessing?
Not really, I would just have NPC's acknowledge their existence in some way and see how they interacted with them during the conversation. Either that or I'd give the party a chance to rest and see how they interact with the rest of the party during moments of downtime.

Backstory won't necessarily help on that front because at that point, it's how they roleplay the character rather than how they wrote them.

>>53452801
>You want focus you earn it.
This is a very unhealthy attitude to have, especially in a cooperative hobby that you're (presumably) playing with friends in your free time.

Sometimes you can afford to take a step back and have fun shooting the shit while saving princesses and slaying baddies.

>>53452913
Hey guy who is actively not participating I'm not going to drop everything I'm doing with everyone else to bring all the attention on someone who isn't going to do shit unless I spoon feed it to them like a fucking program.

>Hey ugh what was your name?
Let me look it up...Generic codename.
>So generic codename are you doing anything in this scene?
Ughhhhhhhh (on repeat)

And then I played his character for him and didn't invite him back.

>>53437116
Writing backstories doesn't work out.

I have my players create characters with me present. I get to know the characters by talking to the player about their character design choices, plus whatever concepts or ideas they have along the way.

It's a much more organic way of doing things, doesn't force players to write who are terrible writers, and gives a better sense of what the actual important aspects of the character are, that is to say what the player would be most interested in seeing implemented in the plot.

>>53453007
>Hey guy who is actively not participating I'm not going to drop everything I'm doing with everyone else to bring all the attention on someone who isn't going to do shit unless I spoon feed it to them like a fucking program.
How are they supposed to participate if you spend most of your time ignoring their existence though? For all you know, they might want desperately to participate but just don't have a solid concept for their character yet.

Hell, I didn't even start roleplaying seriously until my third campaign with one of my current GM's, and the reason was because I was shy and worried about messing something up for myself and the other players. Nowadays though, I can get into character no problem but I wouldn't be where I am today is my GM was like you and thought that participation was earned rather than given.

Granted, there are some shit players out there but at the same time, there's always a GM who never took the time to teach them the right habits as well.

>>53453101
Are you seriously turning my statements into "I take people out of the room individually and make everyone else sit out" because god damn do you have nothing to stand on.

>>53452807
OP here. I haven't seen this. I definitely didn't write this kind of garbage and I haven't seen another player do it in this group. We just wrote down where we come from, who we've pissed off in the past and justified out classes ("I got trained by these druids", "I became a fighter to replace my dad", etc.)

From what I see in this thread, you're just... wrong.

Why not talk it out, if specific backstory bits don't mesh with you? The thing about this GM that infuriated me so much was that they openly disliked every PC and didn't give a fuck about us, but had wasted every chance to say something as we were creating characters in front of him

>>53453101
I never implied anything of the sort.

>>53453086
OP here. Didn't think this thread was gonna last this long.

See, my problem is that this is how we did things. The GM was there in the call while we talked out what we were doing as we got out character sheets done. Now we find out he had basically tuned out the whole thing and had been playing Final Fantasy on his PSP

At least we assume this is why he made no comments up until recently, when he out-of-nowhere started saying he doesn't like the PCs and when asked why he couldn't answer. Eventually we got him to admit he barely knew anything about them, couldn't remember their names, and then he delivered the gem in the OP as an excuse

>>53453101
Nobody's asking you to recite your fucking backstory in perfect pitch, anon. Writing a paragraph should be perfectly doable even by the most shy autist in the block, and if they need help they can ask their GM like everybody else

>>53453278
Your response barely has anything to do with the discussion that's taking place.

>>53453255
>he had basically tuned out the whole thing and had been playing Final Fantasy on his PSP

Then yeah, trash GM.

>>53437116
>"GM: Your (single paragraph) backstory is not mandatory reading."
Sounds like an arrogant asshole who happens to share an opinion with some philistines in this thread...

>>53453255
>he out-of-nowhere started saying he doesn't like the PCs and when asked why he couldn't answer.
No, I was wrong. He is a faggot of the highest order.
Literally set him on fire.

>Eventually we got him to admit he barely knew anything about them, couldn't remember their names, and then he delivered the gem in the OP as an excuse
I was wrong again.
Tie him to chair, force him to read the arguing between idiots in this thread, which is like a guy arguing whether the blue ink in a blue pen is blue and not red with a guy who keeps saying it's "potato".
Once the GM's eyes start bleeding, then set him on fire.

To answer your question, it is not common to not read brief backstories, although incorporating them or remembering them varies with the backstory.
As he proved, anyone incapable of reading one brief page of backstory is incapable of GMing.

>>53440016
It's not about simply explaining who your character is, but giving your DM hooks of interest that relate to your character.

>>53452687
>By throwing them in peculiar situations and seeing how they interact with the situation in-character.

I'd rather have a PC proactively interacting with the world and these situations that come up instead of me having to force them to do something.

At the very least I'll throw you a bone every so often, but when I have 3 other people actively trying to get involved, I'm less motivated to try to appease the 4th person who refuses to do jack shit unless I drag him into it kicking and screaming.

>>53437116

>run a game
>tell players to just give me a few sentences describing their character and their motivations because the first few levels are their back story
>still managed to get pages and pages of cringe from my last group

Thank God I moved and found better people to game with.

>>53441554
brevi

Do people not sit down at the table before the first session and take turns giving a brief description of their characters?

>>53441554
I'm legitimately amazed how well you managed to both mangle and completely miss the point of the quote.

>>53440016
Fuck you you fucking nigger if I put the time to write anything I want at least an Npc or an antagonist who knows me from my backstory. Maybe as small as telling me that their is a tombstone in the graveyard of the big city for my war hero grandfather so I can visit and ask his blessing

>>53453101
>How are they supposed to participate if you spend most of your time ignoring their existence though?

Be proactive? You're not the only one at the table. We have 3-4 other people to make game time for as a GM, and if the others are more actively involved and trying to GET involved, and you refuse to do anything but sit back and wait for me to force you to react to something, I'm spending more time focusing on the others.

That said, if you didn't submit a backstory, you probably wouldn't even be at the table unless you were currently brainstorming one.

Similar to >>53453007, I find most players who just sit back and wait for the DM to make them get involved tend to not do much of anything even when you DO throw them things to get involved in.

>>53453543
There should already be a hook that motivates my character to join the party though, regardless of whatever backstory I provide you with.

I mean, worst case scenario, do you just not have conflict that motivates the party into action if they don't give you something to bait the hook with? Are your players so disinterested in your plot that they aren't willing to stop the BBEG just because they didn't do anything to THEM personally?

It just seems asinine to me to ask players to give you a reason for them to care when they already should simply because they're creating PC's to participate in your narrative.

>>53455000
>I'd rather have a PC proactively interacting with the world and these situations that come up instead of me having to force them to do something.
The thing is, not everyone is going to be proactive and look for something to do and it's not always because they don't give a shit about your campaign.
>At the very least I'll throw you a bone every so often, but when I have 3 other people actively trying to get involved, I'm less motivated to try to appease the 4th person who refuses to do jack shit unless I drag him into it kicking and screaming.
Then how do you expect them to find the motivation to be proactive when they can plainly see that you'd rather focus your attention on the rest of the party?

>>53457500
>Be proactive?
Again, how is a player supposed to be proactive when you're spending most of your time servicing other players?
>I find most players who just sit back and wait for the DM to make them get involved tend to not do much of anything even when you DO throw them things to get involved in.
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy really. If you focus on other players, the player won't do anything because they don't want to interrupt the rest of the party, which leads to them becoming bored with the game, leading to them not knowing what to do, which will end with them not knowing what to do even when they're put in the spotlight.

I've been in that situation before as a player and let me tell you, nothing will create a disinterested player faster than one who feels as though they are third wheels in their own story.

>>53457854
>Then how do you expect them to find the motivation to be proactive when they can plainly see that you'd rather focus your attention on the rest of the party?
This isn't pre-school dude, if the player isn't obligated to want to participate, the GM isn't obligated to bend the whole meeting around the chance that the player might at some point want to put some effort in.
Also you seem to just be twisting the person you're responding to's examples to match up with some other idea you have in your head. Not everyone who doesn't want to participate is doing so because they're too shy, some people are just assholes who don't deserve your time of day any more than they're giving you theirs
>but if they showed up they much automatically have (x) amount of interest! Completely presumptive and impossible to prove.

>>53457854
>Then how do you expect them to find the motivation to be proactive when they can plainly see that you'd rather focus your attention on the rest of the party
Because they're getting cause and effect mixed up.

The player isn't putting in no effort because I'm ignoring them, that they're putting in no effort is WHY I'm ignoring them.

Get involved if you want to be involved. Like I said, there's 3 other players, I have better uses of my time than trying to force a player to put some fucking effort into a game they're willingly showing up for.

>>53458224
If the player is uninterested and not participating in the campaign, it tells me one of two things, either they don't care about your campaign because they genuinely don't give a fuck one way or the other or they don't care because you never gave them a reason to care in the first place.

If it's the former, why would they waste time, energy, and gas coming to your session every week? If it's the latter, why wouldn't you sit down with them and figure out what the problem is? Lastly, how exactly is focusing some time on a singular entity taking up more time than servicing the rest of the party, especially when you're supposed to be focusing time on the party as a whole anyways?

>>53457961
>nothing will create a disinterested player faster than one who feels as though they are third wheels in their own story.
Then stop being a third wheel. Get involved.

Nothing is more frustrating than a player I have to browbeat into giving me some fucking response beyond
>I follow them I guess
>I just stand there
>I sit in the corner
>Uuuuuuh
>I dunno

That said, those types of players don't tend to last long anyways, for one reason or another, usually as soon as I find someone willing to fill the soon to be vacant spot.

>>53458403
>The player isn't putting in no effort because I'm ignoring them, that they're putting in no effort is WHY I'm ignoring them.
So you think that letting them sit in the corner is going to automatically make them more proactive as a player eventually?
>I have better uses of my time than trying to force a player to put some fucking effort into a game they're willingly showing up for.
What do you honestly have to spend your time on that's more important than making sure that everyone at the table is enjoying themselves?

>>53458457
>So you think that letting them sit in the corner is going to automatically make them more proactive as a player eventually?
They're only sitting in the corner of their own volition. They're more than welcome to leave it anytime.

>What do you honestly have to spend your time on that's more important than making sure that everyone at the table is enjoying themselves?
..I am? Everyone else is having a fun time. The only person who's disinterested and miserable is the person who refuses to fucking do anything. You are not the only person at the table.

>>53458448
>Then stop being a third wheel. Get involved.
How, when it seems as though you're only focusing on the other players? You can say "oh, just get involved" but that's not actually a solution to the problem, it's just flinching the responsibility onto someone else.
>Nothing is more frustrating than a player I have to browbeat into giving me some fucking response
You could always, I dunno, talk to them to find out what the problem is?

You have to remember that this is, at the end of the day, a cooperative game that you're supposed to play with friends and nobody is going to sit out on an activity with friends unless there's something wrong that's getting in the way of their enjoyment.

>>53458530
>You can say "oh, just get involved" but that's not actually a solution to the problem, it's just flinching the responsibility onto someone else.
This isn't fucking grade school. I'm not here to babysit you, we're here to play a game. You are actively showing up to said game, I expect you to be putting in some effort. As I have stated numerous times, there are at least 3 other players I'm accommodating, I don't have all day to bend over backwards just to get you to fucking do something besides stand there and drool on yourself.

>You could always, I dunno, talk to them to find out what the problem is?
I have. Multiple times. I've since stopped because I never get a straight answer. and just get "Um"s and "Er"s, or "Oh your game's fine" and "You don't need to change anything" followed by basically doing nothing again next session.

>a cooperative game that you're supposed to play
Cooperative implies everyone's putting in some amount of effort. I meet people halfway as far as effort goes, I'll put as much effort into helping them build their characters as they're putting in.

Players who are basically just logs that the party drags around with them and refuse to get involved in anything aren't getting any effort from me because they aren't putting in any themselves.

>>53457836
I agree with the sentiment of the latter half of your last sentence, but providing a backstory will give the GM more ideas of hooks going forward with the game. Getting into the party shouldn't fall on backstory reasons, but it might explain your motivations or present the party with a problem that the Pc in question needs the party's help to overcome.

basically, your backstory should not be 100% in play in session 1, but should exist as background to motivate both player and GM going forward.

>>53458508
>They're only sitting in the corner of their own volition.
Are you sure that they aren't sitting in the corner because they feel as though you've given them no reason to care? I know I wouldn't pay attention to a game if I knew that my input mattered less than the rest of the party.
>..I am?
but then you write
>Everyone else is having a fun time.
If "everyone else" is having a good time, it means that you're not making sure that EVERYONE is enjoying themselves.

If I can be frank here, you can't show clear favoritism and then complain when the person you don't focus on doesn't do anything of worth. You can go on about how they should be more proactive but if there's nothing to motivate them to do so, why would they?

>>53458626
>Are you sure that they aren't sitting in the corner because they feel as though you've given them no reason to care?
I'm not a fucking babysitter. It's not my job to force you to play your character.

>If "everyone else" is having a good time, it means that you're not making sure that EVERYONE is enjoying themselves.
The only person not enjoying themselves is the person refusing to enjoy themselves. That's still a win in my book.

>clear favoritism
Eat a dick. I'm not here to spoonfeed you your own character's development, personality, and backstory. If I have to, your character is being turned into an NPC and you're rerolling since I'm basically playing him anyways.

>>53458595
>This isn't fucking grade school.
No, but this is a game, meant to be played with friends, and dedicating some time to making sure that a player is enjoying themselves isn't "babysitting," it's being a good friend, as well as a good GM.
>I've since stopped because I never get a straight answer. and just get "Um"s and "Er"s, or "Oh your game's fine" and "You don't need to change anything" followed by basically doing nothing again next session.
It sounds like they're non-confrontational, lending to the theory that they only do nothing because they don't want to interrupt the rest of the group's enjoyment.
>Cooperative implies everyone's putting in some amount of effort.
And when someone isn't, you spend more time with that person and help them improve so that they are pulling their own weight.

>>53458626
This is fucking stupid, anon. You having input necessitates you take action which means the other anon will pay attention to you as a GM.

You can't have input AND be dead weight at the same time. Are you the fishing autist from before?

>>53458693
If someone doesn't want to get involved, they're more than welcome to stop showing up, they don't have to play a game they're clearly not enjoying. We're all friends, but it doesn't mean I'm going to force them to play.

>>53458681
>I'm not a fucking babysitter.
You are the GM though, which means that you're in a position that's much more important and influential than simply being a player in control of a single PC. If you don't want to take on that responsibility, do yourself and the group a favor and relinquish that position to someone who will.
>That's still a win in my book.
Of course it would be, why put in the effort to making sure everyone has fun when you can just sit back and have the players spoonfeed you with plot hooks?
>If I have to, your character is being turned into an NPC and you're rerolling since I'm basically playing him anyways.
You do know that there's a clear separation between offering some helpful tips to help someone improve and outright making the decisions for them right?

You honestly just sound like a lazy GM.

>>53458741
But what's the point of offering input if I know that it's going to be ignored in favor of someone else's input that the GM is more willing to focus on?

>>53458773
Maybe he's more willing to focus on the other players' input because they are actually providing input.

>>53458748
>You are the GM though, which means that you're in a position that's much more important and influential than simply being a player in control of a single PC.
What the fuck does this even have to do with anything.

>Of course it would be, why put in the effort to making sure everyone has fun when you can just sit back and have the players spoonfeed you with plot hooks?
Did you bash your head on the nightstand rolling out of bed? Because you either have no reading comprehension or I'd get to the hospital to check for brain damage.

>You do know that there's a clear separation between offering some helpful tips to help someone improve and outright making the decisions for them right?
Yes. The sort of player we are currently discussing is the latter, and the sort of player who's soon to be a vacant seat because I don't have time to browbeat people into playing a game they willingly show up for.

>You honestly just sound like a lazy GM.
See my previous comment about dicks and the consumption of one.

>>53458745
They wouldn't necessarily have to leave out of disinterest if you were willing to help them without equating it to "babysitting" and "playing their character for them."

>>53437776
>even for a one shot

Why?

>>53458745
But what they are in fact enjoying it, just not to the level you'd like?

As much as it isn't that much effort to make a few sentences of background, it also isn't much effort to help someone write those few sentences.

>>53458804
When I'm having to fill their backstory out for them, making all their decisions for them, figuring out what their personality is, and deciding how they react to things because any attempt to get them to do any of these themselves just gets met with a blank stare, yes, I am literally playing their character for them.

>>53458796
But then how can he expect input from the dude when it's clear that he's focusing more on the other player's input?

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, they don't provide input, so the GM ignores them, which makes them disinterested, which in turn makes it less likely for them to provide input.

>Why am I even still in this cesspool of a thread?
>Where did we go wrong?

>>53458411
Bich I work 40-50 hours a week if Mr special snowflake can't be arsed to participate in the same stuff that's apparently keeping 80% of the room entertained then I'm under no obligation to take even more time out of my day to guess what this person likes, especially since I take multiple opportunities during the first session to ask people specifically what they think they will want to see during the campaign.

>>53458800
>What the fuck does this even have to do with anything.
Everything really.
>Did you bash your head on the nightstand rolling out of bed?
No, I'm just calling it as I see it based off of your posts and your behavior.
>Yes.
Clearly not.

>>53458829
>it also isn't much effort to help someone write those few sentences.

No, but the fact they can't even put in the effort to write 4 sentences of back story is a huge red flag and usually an indicator of how involved they're going to try to be in the game.

I have time for one 5 hour session a week, I try to get all the players involved, but more time is going to be spent with players who are being active because they give me the most to work with.

>>53458889
I'm definitely going with brain damage on this one.

>>53458839
You wouldn't have to "play their character for them" if you took a step back and offered them suggestions, rather than outright take control of their characters for them.

So in addition to being a lazy GM, you also seem to have major control issues as well, which also lends credence to the idea that the player does nothing out of fear of messing things up for the rest of the party.

>>53458847
What exactly are you supposed to do in the absence of input from the player, grind the game to a halt until he participates? If he wants to do stuff, he needs to /do stuff/.

>>53458875
How exactly can he be a special snowflake if he's not doing anything in the campaign though? Also, if you're that overworked then maybe you should step away from the table and focus on more important facets of your life.

Like, I dunno, stress management?

>>53458890
Then why rant and scream and rage if you ain't bothered to do anything about it?

>>53458931
>You wouldn't have to "play their character for them" if you took a step back and offered them suggestions,

See >>53458448 for the responses I get anytime I do this.

>>53458931
>you also seem to have major control issues as well
>>53458800
>See my previous comment about dicks and the consumption of one.

>>53458949
>Then why rant and scream and rage if you ain't bothered to do anything about it?

Oh I don't. These days lazy players like you just get the ol "boot and replace" treatment.

>>53458890
Not everyone's a strong writer, nor is everyone going to necessarily be as adept at coming up with a good character on their own.

You're basically acting like a shitty teacher who wants everyone in the class to pull out perfect marks without putting in the effort to make sure that they understand the material.

>>53458847
Why is it the GM's responsibility to deal with your crippling autism? The entire problem here is the presumptions of the player, not the GM.

>>53458906
No, I'm quite cogent, it's just that you're too angry to see the problem sitting in front of your face.

File: 1495762353371-tg.gif (2MB, 281x272px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 281x272px

>>53458975
>>53458946
>>53458931
Timmy, pretending you're someone else doesn't make you any less of a shitty troll

>>53458975
>Not everyone's a strong writer

>only a professional novelist can possibly write 4 sentences with a weeks notice

>>53459030
Fair enough, but... at the same time

>Didn't write 4 sentences.

Doesn't immediately mean that they didn't care or think about things.

They just... didn't write those 4 sentences.

At that point you can either bitch and moan about the lack of it, ignore it and have a character without those 4 sentences, or you man the fuck up, and help the lad get or make those 4 sentences so we can continue.

>>53447212
>can't even spell plebeian
Plebeii delendi sunt.

>>53458940
>What exactly are you supposed to do in the absence of input from the player
What I usually do is I usually offer them prompts like "and what about your friend over there?" or "and what's your name" or having the enemy lob an insult at them like "hey tall, dark, and gruesome, hoping to bite a couple of necks after the sun goes down?" or something to that effect.

Then from there, the player can respond in character to what was said, and if they're having trouble, like if they're new or shy or whatever, I make sure that they understand that a) it's not a big deal if they fuck up the roleplay a bit since it's, y'know, a game and b) they should respond in the way that their character would respond.

It also helps that the party is comprised of good friends of mine who are understanding that not everyone is going to be a good roleplayer their first few times (especially since some of them are still new themselves) and usually after about 2-5 sessions, they'll show improvement.

>>53459023
Who the hell is Timmy?

>>53458955
I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if they're afraid to answer clearly because they don't want to accidentally piss you off.

In all my years of playing and GMing I've never seen such autistic screeching over a couple lines of character background.

>>53458978
>Why is it the GM's responsibility to deal with your crippling autism?
Because the GM is the one who ultimately determines how the campaign will go and how much enjoyment the players will feel from participating in their campaign.

>>53459095
Fair enough, but... at the same time

Didn't tailor the campaign to one player who doesnt want to participate.

Doesn't immediately mean that they didn't care or think about things.

They just... didn't dedicate time and resources to someone who wouldn't give them the same.

At that point you can either bitch and moan about the lack of it, ignore it, or you man the fuck up, and participate in the fucking campaign you autistic fuck.

>>53459095
>Doesn't immediately mean that they didn't care or think about things.
>They just... didn't write those 4 sentences.
If you, as an adult, cannot write a 4 sentence backstory for your character for WHATEVER reason in a week, then you do not belong in a roleplaying game. Full stop.

>or you man the fuck up, and help the lad get or make those 4 sentences so we can continue.
This is hilarious. "manning up" is not playing babysitter, you autist. Have you ever even played in a ttrpg campaign? I'm convinced you haven't.

>>53459164
Completely untrue and based on nothing but your own misgivings. The GM is partially responsible for others enjoyment, but this is a collaborative activity, and actively going against engaging is not at all on the point of the GM

>>53459030
Just as you've got shit on your plate to deal with, so too might they have shit to deal with as well. Sometimes it's not even that they don't care, sometimes it's just because they genuinely forgot to come up with something due to factors beyond their control that required their attention.

It also seems weird to shit on a dude for not coming up with 4 sentences when you could've also talked to them out of game and dedicated some time towards helping them developing 4 sentences before the next session.

>>53459153
Welcome to nu-/tg/

Where the campaigns are made up and the levels don't matter.

>>53459151
>I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if they're afraid to answer clearly because they don't want to accidentally piss you off.

You would be the only one with that problem.

That said, I don't actually hit the booting stage until we reach the point where literally nothing would change without the lazy player, if only because they didn't do anything anyways.

>>53459181
>Didn't tailor the campaign to one player who doesnt want to participate.
Even if that was the case, I don't see how helping one player is taking up more time than focusing on three players. Also, are the rest of your players so self-absorbed that they're unwilling to wait a moment as you try helping out the other player figure out what to do?

>>53459217
Basically my point.
But... it seems between his own extreme viewpoint, and the extreme viewpoint he thinks I have, there can be only autistic screetching.

>>53459210
>If you, as an adult, cannot write a 4 sentence backstory for your character for WHATEVER reason in a week, then you do not belong in a roleplaying game. Full stop.
Maybe I want to play but something during the week distracted me so much that I didn't have time to think about what my 4 sentences could be. People do have lives y'know, and just because they're swamped one week doesn't mean that they can't come up with something good later.

>>53459217
I really hope this is the guy I'm thinking of.
If so then this autist is about to start bragging about how he "epic trolled" everyone to bump limit with his "superior intellect" and give some big edgy speech and I really want to see it happen.

>>53459217
>Just as you've got shit on your plate to deal with, so too might they have shit to deal with as well.

I'm able to get enough ready for a 5 hour game each week. If you literally cannot do 4 sentences once with am entire weeks notice, you are not the sort of player I'm looking for. In which case, you know where the door is.

>>53459283
>but what about this super specific situation that prevents me from writing a backstory?
It's time to stop.

>>53459216
How is doing nothing actively going against anything though? At best, you're just kinda sitting there doing nothing positive or negative to anyone else's enjoyment.

>>53440016
Yeah, if all you do are "wacky adventures" full of western tv comedies references.

>>53459258
>You would be the only one with that problem.
Not really.

Maybe I want to make something for the player to get engaged but something during the week distracted me so much that I didn't have time to think about what that scenario could be. People do have lives y'know, and just because they're swamped one week doesn't mean that the player shouldn't get over their autism and participate like an adult holy shit do you have special needs

In the mean time, I am here, without any written background, and it doesn't matter shit, because the DM and all the other players figured out my character based on how I play it, and random bits of musing I make about its concept.

Who gives a fuck?

>>53459294
>I'm able to get enough ready for a 5 hour game each week. If you literally cannot do 4 sentences once with am entire weeks notice, you are not the sort of player I'm looking for. In which case, you know where the door is.

>hey anon, I had to do overtime to meet a deadline at work, I didn't have time to write a backstory
>REE GET THE FUCK OUT

Anyone who can't understand how people can suddenly become much busier than they anticipated being doesn't have a job or family

I've had to cancel RPG sessions because unexpected work or family shit got in the way, both as GM and player. It's a fact of adult life asswipe

>>53459325
I'm sure the other 3 players are just lying then, and totally faking it when they laugh at you.

>>53459332
This happens, and we'll get either no session, or an improvised session, no biggy.

>>53459271
I'm literally the dude that you're screeching autistically at bruh. So what happens now?

>>53459288
You spend too much time on the internet if you're swinging at boogiemen that might not even exist.

>>53447776
>snip, like your balls

Nah, you're a faggot and the dude you were arguing with, while probably a fuckin' phoneposter due to his shitty grammar and spelling, was actually right.

You're so assblasted by shitty GMs who "have a habit of murder-fucking every important figure in my backstory" that you can't even allow yourself real quality. Sad! (Except I have two good GMs who can dynamically work in backstory characters and events without cheap shots, so... not really. It's actually quite amusing that I have something you don't.)

>>53459294
Anyone who says
>I'm able to get enough ready for a 5 hour game each week. If you literally cannot do 4 sentences once with am entire weeks notice, you are not the sort of player I'm looking for. In which case, you know where the door is.
Has neither responsibilities nor a right to tell anyone how to manage their time or whether or not they deserve to be at their table.

I mean, how is it physically possible for you to put your foot in your mouth while lodging your head so far up your anus at the same time?

>>53459305
I never mentioned any specific situation anon, are you feeling okay?

>>53451321
>It is not the player's job to give the GM ideas, it's the players job to participate in the narrative and not be disruptive to the flow of the game.

I'm sorry you only had shitty GMs who ran adventure paths and yelled at you if you didn't use one of the pre-planned solutions, anon.

>>53459344
>hey anon, I had to do overtime to meet a deadline at work, I didn't have time to write a backstory
If your work schedule is so problematic you cannot even take 10-20 minutes out of the 168 hours of a week to write a 4 sentence backstory chances are you won't be able to make time for a game in the first place, sorry

File: 1474249028578.jpg (13KB, 280x272px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 280x272px

>>53459346

>>53459411
No, that's exactly where you're going with this. Any response I gave would be met with
>dude haha ok but what if, like, i got cancer or something and couldnt write my backstory?? what if i got abducted by aliens??
So there's really no point in continuing this discussion.

>>53459371
The GM's I'm currently with respect me as a player enough to not drop a bridge on my PC's family just because "muh drama," which I'm thankful for, but when it comes to GM's that I don't know, you get nothing until you show me that you can work with less.

>>53459450
Ah yes, because there is absolutely no argument without these extremes. No suree, you are completely an idiot, and these examples I just gave show it...

Yeah.... no

>>53459450
Well I mean, what would you do if a player couldn't write up a backstory because of some serious shit going on in their personal life? Are they supposed to accept that you can drop sessions because of work while they're expected to be prepared for every campaign regardless of other responsibilities?

I mean fuck, even retail jobs have contingencies in place for taking time off for medical emergencies and you're not even PAYING your players to show up every session.

>>53459416
I'm sorry that you've only ever come up with an idea when the player spoonfed it to you.

>>53452807
Literally the only one of these I've seen at my table was

>Was rich but now is broke

And the dude wasn't even "rich" to start off with by the setting's standards, just "a little too wealthy and settled in a nice piloting job to be Shadowrunning."

Dude got fucked over by a deniable Azzie T-bird raid against the CAS and was racist as shit against all of them because of that. It was good fun, actually.

>>53459283
I find backstory written before the character has been played is a so so idea at best. Better to have a list of traits or principles that guides the character, then fill the backstory out by session 3. (Usually about the time the dm starts using them.)
Backstory is limiting in behavior . Principles give actionable ideas of how the character behaves. Nobody really knows exactly what the character will be like until the game anayway. And his feelings on concepts like honor and loyalty tell more than where or who raised him.

>>53459423
You're assuming that the average person is going to dedicated 10-20 minutes out of their schedule just to please your autistic ass when something more important than game comes up that requires more of their attention.

I mean what, are you going to tell someone that they can't play because their job needed them to work OT or some shit and they forgot to write out their backstory? I mean, unless there's a oneshot, they could always just submit a backstory later on once they've had a chance to think about it.

>>53459543
>Backstory is limiting in behavior

How the fuck is a couple lines of what your character's been through so far "limiting"?

He needs to have at least SOME ground to stand on or he'll just float in the wind.

>>53459493
>Ah yes, because there is absolutely no argument without these extremes.
That is correct. You have absolutely no argument without these extremes. If you are at a point in your life where taking 10-20 minutes out of a week is too much of a bother, you should not be playing tabletop rpgs.
>>53459498
>Well, i mean, what about this super specific situation haha lmao
Time to stop.

>>53459564
Do you honestly think that someone would show up to a five hour game if they didn't have any free time to play in your campaign?

You're also conflating free time outside of game with time that's being dedicated to playing in said game.

>>53459641
>Do you honestly think that someone would show up to a five hour game if they didn't have any free time to play in your campaign?
You tell me, you're the one trying to claim someone could be so busy 10 fucking minutes is too much time to dedicate to something but simultaneously they are also available and ready to go for five hour sessions

>>53459562
>How the fuck is a couple lines of what your character's been through so far "limiting"?
Not him but judging by how autistic people got from the one guy going on about fishing, I'd say that it's pretty self-evident how backstories can be limiting.

>>53459641
If they have the five hours to play in a campaign, every week, every time, then surely they can free themselves another ten minutes to write down a bit of their characters?

Look, this shit's not just for the DM's benefit. It helps you figure out what your character is all about, too - gives you some groundwork to start with and develop from. I've never benefited from not doing so.

>>53459472
>you get nothing until you show me that you can work with less.

And in turn you get nothing because you're a boring ass shitty player due to your suspicious nature.

Ain't assumptions and actions based on them just so much fun?

>>53459548
>You're assuming that the average person is going to dedicated 10-20 minutes out of their schedule just to please your autistic ass when something more important than game comes up that requires more of their attention.
10-20 minutes is not a "dedication". That's not even a lunch break. There is no humanly normal situation where you do not have 10 minutes of down time. You are trying really hard to make a point here that doesn't exist.

>>53459660
>>53459668
>You tell me, you're the one trying to claim someone could be so busy 10 fucking minutes is too much time to dedicate to something but simultaneously they are also available and ready to go for five hour sessions
Just because I don't have 10 minutes out of game doesn't necessarily mean that I don't have five hours to spend in-game. You're basically saying that your time is more important than mine, even if we're both dealing with the same responsibilities, which is a pretty shitty thing to do as a GM, let alone as a person.

File: whut.jpg (16KB, 161x159px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 161x159px

>>53459717
What?