"Level Is More Than Just a Number." (Art by Sebastian Leverette)
-
I thought it was im the rule book that players should do so. If i have an epic backstory im playing and ancient old fart that has not battled in centuries and is not used to it anymore
One of the most fun characters I’ve played was a broken-down elite super-science soldier who was so addled by basilisk memes and psychotronic warfare that he needed his intelligent gun to remind him where he was every ten minutes.
-
Yep. Feel like we just had some posts about this. People who write that kind of backstory should just write a book. It’s especially bad in games like D&D where you’re starting out as a level 1 nobody. Some games, even some games of D&D, start at higher power levels, so the story is at least mechanically plausible.
-
I’ve become increasingly convinced that people don’t want to play low level characters. Level 1 characters are neophyte adventurers. Their backstory shouldn’t include significant a mounts of adventure, combat, or heroics, because it introduces a significant amount of ludo-narrative dissonance into the campaign.
Unless there’s a reason they’ve been de-leveled.
Yes. That’s one reason that the Fate system basically disallows characters ever being low level. Low level starts aren’t actually particularly fun, and they can prevent characters from having diverse epic shared backstory.
-
Hence the number one rule: cool stuff should be done in the game, not your backstory.
Hence the number one rule: cool stuff should be done in the game, not your backstory.
I prefer Fate, where the rules practically require having cool stuff in each character’s back story.
-
Yes. That’s one reason that the Fate system basically disallows characters ever being low level. Low level starts aren’t actually particularly fun, and they can prevent characters from having diverse epic shared backstory.
ensignwashout@startrek.website I don’t know, zero-to-hero is one of the best story tropes out there. Totally nullifying it seems kind of wild to me. But you have to know who you’re playing, and if you’re playing a highly skilled veteran with a rich history of great deeds, you need to understand that that is not a Level 1 character.
-
I’ve become increasingly convinced that people don’t want to play low level characters. Level 1 characters are neophyte adventurers. Their backstory shouldn’t include significant a mounts of adventure, combat, or heroics, because it introduces a significant amount of ludo-narrative dissonance into the campaign.
Unless there’s a reason they’ve been de-leveled.
The only time I ever loved an OP backstory for a lv1 was a friend who was a great mage of death and destruction who destroyed anything deemed beautiful out of hatred.
A witch turned him into a diamond, and his necromancy (somehow) allowed him to possess whomever held the diamond.
He was a goblin for 3 levels and then a wolf ate him and the diamond so we had a pet dog for awhile basically.
-
The only time I ever loved an OP backstory for a lv1 was a friend who was a great mage of death and destruction who destroyed anything deemed beautiful out of hatred.
A witch turned him into a diamond, and his necromancy (somehow) allowed him to possess whomever held the diamond.
He was a goblin for 3 levels and then a wolf ate him and the diamond so we had a pet dog for awhile basically.
Possession is a Ghost (the specific monster) ability that works on contact, pretty standard Necromancy shenanigans to imitate undead abilities.
-
Yes. That’s one reason that the Fate system basically disallows characters ever being low level. Low level starts aren’t actually particularly fun, and they can prevent characters from having diverse epic shared backstory.
Counterpoint: I love rugged nobody adventurer types. I love the point in the campaign when you still have to use your brain to solve problems and when wild animals still pose a significant threat. This may be one of the reasons I stopped playing DnD altogether.
It’s not fun at low levels because your characters have absolutely no skills whatsoever and it sucks at high levels because over time you only get a bunch of instant-problem-solvers like Tiny Hut, Fly and Teleport.
-
The only time I ever loved an OP backstory for a lv1 was a friend who was a great mage of death and destruction who destroyed anything deemed beautiful out of hatred.
A witch turned him into a diamond, and his necromancy (somehow) allowed him to possess whomever held the diamond.
He was a goblin for 3 levels and then a wolf ate him and the diamond so we had a pet dog for awhile basically.
empathicvagrant@lemmy.world Backstory is probably the wrong concept for a low-level character. They, instead, have a background. Backstories are prequel fodder, while backgrounds are used to figure out character motivation, and how a character reacts to future events.
Generally speaking, you don’t want to fill in blanks you don’t need filled i, because it’s creatively limiting your future self. If the events that got you to Session 1 are too interesting, you’ve probably written too much.
-
Counterpoint: I love rugged nobody adventurer types. I love the point in the campaign when you still have to use your brain to solve problems and when wild animals still pose a significant threat. This may be one of the reasons I stopped playing DnD altogether.
It’s not fun at low levels because your characters have absolutely no skills whatsoever and it sucks at high levels because over time you only get a bunch of instant-problem-solvers like Tiny Hut, Fly and Teleport.
Good points. I feel like Fate does a better job staying in the interesting in-between for longer, and also supports “epic” stories a bit better (than other systems I have played).
But I haven’t tried to force Fate to support the newbie to epic growth, because the rulebook calls out that the Fate rules intentionally ignore supporting the ability to play as a helpless nobody.
