There's a notable difference between those whose priority is simply discovering whatever emerges in play -- whether death or glory -- and those to whom a backstory is an essential predictor of an unfolding story. If there's sufficient interest in the present state of figure X, then previous states can be of little importance.

Going the other way, it was Darth Vader's activity in the original Star Wars trilogy that inspired whatever interest there was in his back story.

Quote from: Phillip;700471There's a notable difference between those whose priority is simply discovering whatever emerges in play -- whether death or glory -- and those to whom a backstory is an essential predictor of an unfolding story. If there's sufficient interest in the present state of figure X, then previous states can be of little importance.

Going the other way, it was Darth Vader's activity in the original Star Wars trilogy that inspired whatever interest there was in his back story.

The crux of the shift/split nicely stated. Very impressive even.

I prefer for my characters the "blank slate upon which the history is written." approach. Partially because of the mortality rate and partially because I view most of what the character was doing up untill adventuring to likely be alot of boring training and study to get to this point of start.

Aside from the Greyhawk revival event with the TSR staff, I havent ever written up a big character background. Character background was required for that one.

In my experience, D&D characters are typically introduced much as Robert E. Howard would introduce Conan in one of his tales. A few lines suffice to sketch the figure and his attitude toward the present situation. Character gets further expression in his deeds as events proceed.

One thing I have not encountered lately that used to be common was an initial solo adventure. In D&D, that would usually start with the new character at the gate of a town, and get him or her established with potential contacts for expeditions in the pipeline.

The custom of having sessions only for the undertakings of a "monolithic party" has a profound effect on the integration of new PCs.

Again DO NOT ask me to write more than a half page (college ruled) that is only for Mage any Dnd game gets a paragraph at best. For Dnd it's likely 3-4 lines at best because I prefer party interaction beyond said lines to fill in the gaps. Dnd just works like that.

I have only rarely seen players make their characters mere ciphers on account of uncertainty as to the future extent of their careers. That's not usual practice in fiction either; a figure headed for a grisly death is not therefore deprived of personality. It's the personality after all that makes the death significant! It's a desire to make a character's fate not significant that motivates such de-personalization.

The fact that D&D and such are inspired by "pulp fiction," rather than by the modern "slice of life" or introspective portrait of a psyche, may at least partly account for dissatisfaction with such games on the part of people whose tastes run more to Philip Roth than Edgar Rice Burroughs. The dependence upon an enthusiasm for some kinds of fiction was alluded to in the foreword to the original D&D booklets.

Quote from: Omega;700475I prefer for my characters the "blank slate upon which the history is written." approach. Partially because of the mortality rate and partially because I view most of what the character was doing up untill adventuring to likely be alot of boring training and study to get to this point of start.

Aside from the Greyhawk revival event with the TSR staff, I havent ever written up a big character background. Character background was required for that one.

And that's cool - but I can understand why someone doesn't want to play A Man With No Name, especially if they feel they'll probably make him more like Nobody.

Quote from: Marleycat;700466... there must be a balance ...

Which is sometimes achieved by wildly swinging from one extreme to another.

I just had a good adventure idea: Imagine a tontine between players who are powerful people like a CEO of Megacorp, Fleet Admiral, Subsector Duke or Duchess, etc. Very old with stats reduced, but super rich and such. Then simultaneously run a campaign where they are young; the trick would be to dovetail the two timelines, but without actually knowing the ending at the adventure start.

I don't need more than five minutes to come up with a background, personality and be ready to roll. It usually is done at the same time as rolling the dice and choosing race, class, equipment and the like.

Likewise, I come up with backgrounds and personalities for NPCs on the spot all the time.

I think the idea that you can't have a BG and/or personality until level X is bullshit.

Plain, total bullshit.

The actual issue is way more likely to be that some people want their one character with that one particular faux-Baudelaire background story to be a special snowflake in the campaign and can't take it if the character dies in the first few game sessions, whereas other people just play for the sake of determining which of these personalities will actually make it, and how far, with many other people besides being able to enjoy -GASP- BOTH approaches depending on the game and session they are playing at the time. Weird! I know. . .

Quote from: dragoner;700488Which is sometimes achieved by wildly swinging from one extreme to another.

I just had a good adventure idea: Imagine a tontine between players who are powerful people like a CEO of Megacorp, Fleet Admiral, Subsector Duke or Duchess, etc. Very old with stats reduced, but super rich and such. Then simultaneously run a campaign where they are young; the trick would be to dovetail the two timelines, but without actually knowing the ending at the adventure start.

I had a plan to try to do something like that, not the being old part though, with a war that they were on the losing side of, and switching back and forth from their experienced versions who were dealing with a east/west germany type situation in their country, and their younger versions dealing with a failing war effort.

The idea was to use the people they meet in the younger version adventures to then appear in the older version adventures as allies/enemies etc. The problem was trying to prevent railroading in the younger version part.

Quote from: dragoner;700488Which is sometimes achieved by wildly swinging from one extreme to another.

I just had a good adventure idea: Imagine a tontine between players who are powerful people like a CEO of Megacorp, Fleet Admiral, Subsector Duke or Duchess, etc. Very old with stats reduced, but super rich and such. Then simultaneously run a campaign where they are young; the trick would be to dovetail the two timelines, but without actually knowing the ending at the adventure start.

Sounds like either a typical....

a. Mage  the Ascension game
b. Mage the Awakening Archmage game or with a hidden master as a npc.

Hll     

Quote from: Benoist;700489I don't need more than five minutes to come up with a background, personality and be ready to roll. It usually is done at the same time as rolling the dice and choosing race, class, equipment and the like.

Likewise, I come up with backgrounds and personalities for NPCs on the spot all the time.

I think the idea that you can't have a BG and/or personality until level X is bullshit.

Plain, total bullshit.

The actual issue is way more likely to be that some people want their one character with that one particular faux-Baudelaire background story to be a special snowflake in the campaign and can't take it if the character dies in the first few game sessions, whereas other people just play for the sake of determining which of these personalities will actually make it, and how far, with many other people besides being able to enjoy -GASP- BOTH approaches depending on the game and session they are playing at the time. Weird! I know. . .

I enjoy both but prefer one and lower my expectations and risk take to the extreme with NO investment in the other. Both are fun but I assume you're intelligent enough to figure out which one I prefer and will be invested in?

io my first Dnd game is 1e 3d6 straight. I roll only good enough for a fighter because I wasn't ready for a wizard. I hate fighters....so I go gonzo not giving a shit as I successful wishing I would die making up backup characters all the time. Thank God that fighter died and 2e came out 2-3 months later. Fact is I prefer something YOU may call special snowflake but isn't. But can't be arsed to explain to someone so behind the curve given it doesn't affect  
you.

That's not meant as an insult given we prefer to run and play completely different versions of Dnd.

Quote from: Benoist;700489The actual issue is way more likely to be that some people want their one character with that one particular faux-Baudelaire background story to be a special snowflake in the campaign and can't take it if the character dies in the first few game sessions, whereas other people just play for the sake of determining which of these personalities will actually make it, and how far, with many other people besides being able to enjoy -GASP- BOTH approaches depending on the game and session they are playing at the time.

I think that is quite right. One reponse I've seen is players who turn one figure after another into Snowflake Baudelaire #N until at last one survives long enough to satisfy what they want from that.

Quote from: Marleycat;700491Sounds like either a typical....

a. Mage  the Ascension game
b. Mage the Awakening Archmage game or with a hidden master as a npc.

Interesting.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;700490I had a plan to try to do something like that, not the being old part though, with a war that they were on the losing side of, and switching back and forth from their experienced versions who were dealing with a east/west germany type situation in their country, and their younger versions dealing with a failing war effort.

The idea was to use the people they meet in the younger version adventures to then appear in the older version adventures as allies/enemies etc. The problem was trying to prevent railroading in the younger version part.

I was thinking the actions of the older group would be more of an influence, but one would still probably have to drop clues, both adventures would play into each other in an open way. Random encounter tables would be especially fun here, so you could watch the game unfold on the roll of a die as well.

Quote from: Rincewind1;700486And that's cool - but I can understand why someone doesn't want to play A Man With No Name, especially if they feel they'll probably make him more like Nobody.

Certainly.
If I know a RPG or setting isnt instantly lethal or a longer backstory is asked for. I am fine with providing it. I just personally lean to the idea of the story starting with the first adventure.

Tekumel was one of the rare diversions into an in depth background since the Adventures set gave you the option to really flesh out your characters backstory. And you could easily die before you made it out of chargen since the solo adventures were part of chargen if you so desired to brave them rather than continuing school and training.