Anyone Else Tired of Tragic Backstories?

I mean this in the most casual, non-confrontatioal way but I find myself very much tired of tragic backstories.

There is nothing inherently wrong with them but they can get a bit old when every character coming to a tavble has a backstroy that is one tale of woe after another. Such backstories are actually pretty tricky to pull off and still have fun at the table. They require a pretty mature player and a willingness to have the tragic backstroy be the beginning and not the be-all-end-all of the character.

Many people, I feel, make tragic backstories for their characters to lighten the load on both them and their GM or as an attempt to dodge GMs using their backstroy against them. The truth is, however, that neither of these will deter a skilled GM. Even a backstory bereft of any living relatives can be turned into a source of story elements for the GM and that tragedy may not prtotect your PC from their backstory being used against them.

Family killed in a fire? Did you know that there is now a rumor going around that your character, the only survivor, is now suspected of having caused the fire?

Noble family from which you were spawned dead when you were a child? Guess what, one of them survived and is now the BBEG in the game and specifically hates you because they feel like you abandoned them or they were rescued by a rival noble family and raised in that house to be a nemesis for you.

It's pretty easy with just about any tragic backstory.

Some players feel that the tragic backstory is actually the best motivator for their PC to adventure. They have nothing left to lose, no attachments, and every belivable desire or need to accept any old adventure to give their live meaning or purpose but it is here that I like to jump in with an alternative - make your backstory nice or at least not so bad.

Just as it is easy to erase everything from a character's background, it is also a simple thing to just decide to have your character come from something that is still there. It doesn't have to be all sunshine and whispery fields of golden grain but it can be. This is a bit of a personal crusade I have taken upon myself when creating characters for those rare occasions when I, a forever GM (by choice), get to play. Call it leading by example, if you will.

The last three characters i have made have all had backstories where their families were alive, they had varying degrees of good happen in those backstories and they still managed to have motivations to adventure. This is, I think the biggest thing to keep in mind when trying to avoid the tragic backstory - living connections, a life that did not end in tragedy, and a solid reason for adventuring.

While I have always tried to make characters with interesting (but reasonable) backstories, I'll talk about my most recent three for 5E.

Bortino Dal Orendo - This character was a Human Fighter. He was the fifth son of a noble family and stood to inherit nothing more than a room at the family estates and a small allowance. He was loved by his parents, though often overlooked due to his late birth order and allowed to pretty much live as he would. Fortunately, he had a sister with which he was particularly close, who kept him from sliding into debauchery and carousing as so many other "unneeeded" noble sons might. He also had a grandfather whom he loved very much and who returned that love by guidng him to be a good man. To this end, Bortino was enrolled in the finest sword schools and educated as a master swordsman. Bortino, knowing that any fame and fortune and a life of anything but a "spare son" would be made by himself took to the world, seeking adventure and a life of his own.

Dougan of Moorwatch - Born into a peasant family, Dougan grew up with a strong back and arm made for swinging heavy tools. As he grew older, he turned these natural talents toward fighting, joining a mercenary regiment, learning and becoming a leader of men, even if they were sellswords. Success led to some small fortune which led to marriage and children and as family grew, his desire to fight waned. Eventually he became resentful of years of rich men throwing away the blood of men like him on senseless was. Dougan and a small band of men from his unit deserted from a battlefield and took to the land. Now an outlaw, he took up a contract with an expedition company travelling to another land to forge the way for colonization (the campaign). His only requirement in hi contract was that half his wages be sent to his wife and children through a trusted fiend.

Randalmar - Born into a family that had enough to make life comfortable but not enough to make it grand, Randalmar was an intelligent young man who sought knowledge and showed and early interest and aptitude for arcane magic. He was sent to apprentice with a local wizard and was an excellent student until one day he returned, from an errand, to the wizard's tower to find that his master had disappeared without a trace. No note, no message left with servants. Not a single one of the wizard's minions knew of his whereabouts or what had happened to him. Randalmar carried on for some time, maintaining his studies and his tasks, assuming the wizard would return. When he didn't, the young wizard took his faithful familiar Hamwise (a small pig) and ventured forth into the world in hopes that he might discover what had happened to his master.

I have made other characters with non-tragic backstories but all of them seek to create a character who has something to go back to but also has reason to adventure in the current campaign.

I hope you have enjoyed reading this and I would love to hear others' thoughts on the topic of tragic backstories and especially any other ideas for non-tragic, even happy backstories.

PLAYING BAD CHARACTERS IN A GOOD WAY

There are a small number of character concepts/tropes that are generally bad ideas for the gaming table, not because they are inherrantly bad characters but because players tend to play them poorly. These character types often appeal to players because in media they are often very interesting characters but what is often lost on potential player. 

The key to playing these characters is to understand what they are actually about. Most of the unpopular character concepts are designed as starting points and/or vehicles for character growth. As the character is written (played), they are supposed to develop and change. The lone wolf learns the value of friends. The edgelord learns to share the weight of his emotons with others and gain strength from them. The brash lout learns that there is room in his life for caring and sensitivity. Even the villainous character learns the mistakes in the assumptions they have made that led to their villainy. The key to all of these is that the character, as written explores these changes.

As players, it can be tricky to explore these without coming across as disruptive or annoying but it can be done through effort and an attempt to exposit the reasons and rationale behind their actions and how there character is processing things. This can sometimes seem awkward at the table, expressing a characters' internal processes outloud, but it is what makes these characters work in print and on the screen, though in the latter case we see this acted out and don't read it, but it was written down somewhere. Doing so, however, cuts through any perceptions that the player is doing this to be a problem for the rest of the party.

Next, the player of such characters should make an effort to express that changes and character growth are occurring. In moments of role-play it only takes a few little expressions to reflect this. Perhaps the shutdown, closed-up character shares a rare and new moment of openess. The evil character might give pause before committing and act that once came so esily to him. The pilfering thief puts the thing back. these moments don't even have to be made in the form of dialog or moments shared with PCs. they can be narrated as downtime activities or in interactions with NPCs and even monsters. A violent, "kill 'em all" sort of character who has spent the adventure launching into needless combat might show mercy or restraint at the start of combat, but this becomes clear when the reason is given.

Lastly, embrace the changes. Accept that you have made this character to explore the growth and make a conscious choice of when the character finally reaches that point of transformation from who they wre to who they have become. Much in the same way that players absolutely must make a conscious decision to play and adventurer and find the reasons for their character to embrace the aventures put before them, so to must a potentially problematic character archetype make a choice to eventually change. Such changes are not even the end of that character's cool concept and archetype for now the character's concept changes to one of acceptance, redemption, correction, or even mentoring. The player now gets to embrace the changed character and all the new role-playing opportunities that come with their new self taking the rest of the players and their characters along for the ride.

Problem characters are only problems because people play them poorly. Now, some of this comes down to bad players choosing them for the wrong reasons but, if you are a good player who truly wants to play one of these character archetypes then by all means go for it. Just remember to make it fun, embrace the story that those archetypes are meant to tell and accept that at some point for it to work, the character needs to tramsform.

HOW PLAYER-FACING THINKING CAN RUIN THE GM'S FUN

 

It can be difficult to have discussions about the things modern gaming has brought into the hobby that may not be all their cracked up to be. I have long been the sort of grognard that isn't the groggy-est or...um..nardy'est (maybe the wrong way to put that), but even I sometimes run into issues with the new fangled gaming thinking. While I am okay saying some of these new ideas are good and, often, not as new as a lot people thing they are, sometimes there are new concepts that can either be misunderstood or even misused. One such concept is the player-facing or players first sort of game.

As I understand it, these sorts of game place an emphasis on collaboration both in terms of a game's plot, story, themes, even worldbuilding with the goal being greater player buy-in and an increased sense of belonging and participation. this can be great and, to a certain extent, I do enjoy and encourage GMs and players to embrace this. However, this is often overplayed or pushed too far. While the intent may be to give players some say in shaping the game and making sure the game is something they want to play, it is possible for the game's balance between players and GM to fail.

Over the years, I have seen a tendency for players to take this to the extreme - considering themselves in charge of the game and religating the GM to a simple adjudicator of rules and not an active participant in the game. This is a terrible place to put a GM an ultimately will result in the failure of a campaign as much, maybe even more so than a group of poorly invested players. A GM's character really is the game world and creating an running that world is where the joy comes from, for most GMs. 

How this manifests can vary greatly but often takes the form of players expecting that they can just go off and do anything they want in the game as if their agency trumps any consideration for the plot or adventures at hand. If this is the sort of open, ultimate sandbox campaign you have all agreed to play, that's fine, but if everyone has come to the table to play in a world either created by or presented by the GM along with the adventures and plots they wish to run there, then players really do we it to the GM to play along. Chosing not to do so, with the players insisting on doing their own thing regardless of any plans by the GM is inconsiderate and rude.

The GM is often the player putting the most amount of actual work into the game. Players need only show up and play along. Players who want to express their characters selves should find ways to do so that work within the construct of the game world and not disrupt it. Most GMs are going to be very collaborative and considerate of player's desires and generally find it quite easy to find a way to fit it in or figure out a way to let a player player a character they want, in some manner or another.

At the end of the day, players are in charge of their characters but just as they expect the GM to be responsible for presenting a game that is fun for them, so should they also respect the work, time, and the world the GM is putting before t hem.

WHY DO CHARACTERS ADVENTURE?

Let me begin by saying the following is in no way a condemnation of anyone's character back story or chosen motivations for their characters. The intention here is to speak to those earliest reasons for adventure in the core of early editions and how a simple concession explains so much. 

The simplest explanation is that early edition adventurers were generally supposed to represent commoners or folks early in their professions who turned to adventure as a means to advance those careers and make their way in the world. With this in mind, the question of "why would my character go into a dangerous dungeon?" or, in other words, "What's my motivation?" becomes a simple matter of economics. 

Working any trade in the game world is not likely to earn a person more than a few gold pieces a a year, let alone the hundreds or thousands they would need to purchase proper arms and equipment for any advanced career. In old games, PCs started out with barely enough money to get them out the door and on the road and the only way they would afford the things they needed would be to delve into dungeons where ancient forgotten wealth was theirs for the finding and taking. 

Sure they could have stayed on the farm and toiled a way for some lord, or lived in the shadow of the old mage that instructed them. Soldiering is a profession but few men live long enough to make a life of it. Clerics who stayed in their cloisters, while serving their gods in the most mundane and functional ways, would never expand the reach of their gods and the power of their church. While thieves might be one of the easiest character classes to find motivation for, paladins and rangers need somethin to pit themselves against.

All of this leads to dungeons (and dragons) where a lowly adventurer can find the chance to transcend beyond a life of labor and obscurity. In this we have the most basic, yet very satisfying motivation for adventure - desire and objective. Why the character continues to adventure can build off of this or transform, based on their adventures. 

A fighter who seeks his future through adventure for mere money, may discover greater evils that call him to further action. what was just a search for gold and goods can easily change into what is, if not a higher calling, at least a slightly more elevated one. Discovering the mysteries of the world through dungeon crawling is bound to open an adventurer's eyes and either call or force them to rise to the task. 

Going forward, I hope you will perhaps consider taking a deep breath and relaxing some before you plunge into the chore of coming up with complex motivations. Let your fighter be a soldier returned from a recent war who wants for more. Allow you cleric to be a person devoted to their gods and taking up the simple charge of going out into the world and confronting the evil there and spreading the good of religion. Rangers wander and seek the evils of the world and form a outlying bulwark against the monsters of the world. Wizards need stuff and knowledge, bards need stories, and thieves need to improve their skills and steal stuff. 

It doesn't have to be epic or involved to be good.

BE THE ADVENTURER WHO WANTS TO ADVENTURE - BILBO MUST LEAVE THE SHIRE

There is nothing more frustrating than adventuring to a dungeon or being presented with an adventure hook only to have one of the players utter those words that all good players dread, "Why would my character do that?" 

The problem of unwilling players is a pretty common one and can seriously affect the fun and enjoyment of the other players and the DM at the table. Lack of adventuring spirit seems anathema to playing a fantasy adventure RPG and should be avoided at all costs. Keeping this in mind, it is okay to have a character with motivations, concerns, apprehensions and even anxieties regarding the safety of the adventuring lifestyle. So, how do you do this? 

The simplest way goes without saying. Just make an adventurer who is willing to open doors, delve mysterious caves and seek the adventure that is out there. This, however, does not necessary fit all character concepts and if you wish to pursue such concepts, it is important to really give some consideration to why and how your character will still be a useful adventurer that will not hinder the rest of the party and the game. 

When making the reluctant hero, always remember that, in the end, you are a hero, or at least an adventurer. Make sure you build a reason to do so into your concept and come up with a few standard go-to reasons. These can even be catch phrases your character says to themselves or out loud when the situation arises where they are given pause.

These motivations can be as simple as loyalty to your fellow adventurers, duty to your family back home or the kingdom you serve. It could be that your motivations are purely mercenary and while you recognize that the danger to life and limb is great, delving dungeons is how you get paid. As long as you have some reason to motivate your character to proceed with the adventure and contribute in a meaningful way, you have succeeded. 

What's more, your PC doesn't have to always be completely willing. You can still role-play hesitation or a fleeting morale. Your character may run away, or prefer to "keep watch" when the party goes into the dark spooky house. The key to these choices is to make sure that, when it counts, your character rises to the occasion. Even at his most reluctant, Bilbo Baggins still managed to come through for his companions. 

Successfully creating an adventurer who will adventure will greatly improve the enjoyment and success of yours TTRPG fun. You fellow players and your DM will thank you and you should also thank yourself for allowing yourself to have more fun.

WHY NOT BORROW A HERO FOR YOUR NEXT HERO? - USING SUPERHERO TROPES TO YOUR ADVANTAGE

It is safe to say that nearly any concept for a superhero character has been tried, done, and likely done to death. This can often lead to a feeling frustration when trying to come up with a new character to play in TTRPGs but it doesn't have to.

The truth of the matter is that the massive body of comic book work has already provided you with all the character ideas you will ever need. Find yourself a character you like and as the time-honored comic book question of "what if?". This what if can take any form but the idea is that you are going to remake the character in your own way. A new name, and a new take on the theme and Ben's your uncle and you have a new character. Even if you are making a new version of a very iconic character that exists in the game world you are playing in, it doesn't matter. There are plenty of cities, alien worlds, other dimensions, alternate timelines and kingdoms in hidden parts of the world to justify the existence of your character. How do you think the real comics folks do it?

If you're still not sold, just remember that the professionals have been swiping character from each other for decades, even duplicating characters that exist in their own comics universes. If that's still not enough, remember, David Kraft created Demon Hunter for Atlas Comics then recreated the exact same character as Devil Slayer for Marvel and then later Buckler, an artist who worked with Kraft on the previous two incarnations of the character, took the same character to his own own Galaxia magazine as Bloodwing.