7 Critical Mistakes When Thinking About Player Character Backstories

Player character backstories are crucial to running a great roleplaying game! But we often make mistakes when we think about incorporating these backstories into our adventures. In this video, I go into the 7 most common and very critical mistakes that both players and Dungeon Masters/Game Masters make when thinking about player character backstories.

Dungeon Fog is our mapmaker of choice! Find them here:
Use the code GREAT GM for a discount when signing up for their monthly updates (Well worth it!).

▶ Get more GM resources and information here:

▶ The Goblin Bell
If you enjoy our content, click the bell icon and you will receive notifications of when a new video is up!

Guy has written some books that might help your next grand campaign!
▶ Find our Complete Guide to Creating Epic Campaigns here:

▶ Or support us by buying your RPG stuff at Amazon:

[HowtobeaGreatGM]

*Thanks for watching!* Let us know in the comments below your thoughts on your player character backstories and whether you feel they are important in your RPG or not.

[MrFleem]

Player: My character has amnesia, so I don't have a backstory.
GM: Your character doesn't know his backstory. Doesn't mean you haven't got one.

[patbou_jdrs]

For the first time, I don't agree completely with you. If you, as the GM, "change" too much the backstory of character, you're taking a chance that the player won't care anymore about his character. (hope it's clear enough, english is not my first language).

[alexwaddington]

Whenever Guy got snarky you could tell he was having some PTSD

[GoodEatsFan]

Just want to say I started GM'ing my first game about 2 months ago and your video series has been incredibly helpful. Cheers.

[MegaMawileTheNommer]

I challenge the "Make it up as we go", so long as skills are not given for it, this can lead to fun story building among talented RPers. I have seen sparse backstories turned into great fleshed out stories over play, because the player was consistent and we kept track of their aspects they made up.

[papallegatepoope]

I had an issue with a GM just editing my backstory in a battle mech game.

The main idea behind my character was he was a sorts of knight like character, one who elected to join the ongoing campaign of this military unit. He was using the stats of this one mech but his suit was more bespoke. The whole unit was basically this battle suit from the book, but I wanted the suit to have a personalized feel given that his whole venture was privately financed. He also had his own retinue of engineers for his maintenance crew. His contribution was only a fraction of the military contribution, but the idea was that he was doing this of his own desire to serve.



The gm agreed to all of this before hand and it seemed everything was ok. Yet, session one he literally changed everything. The suit was just normal from the factory, he didn’t have his own crew, and he was just a pilot like everyone else. Like I wouldn’t be opposed to this if he didn’t agree prior and then flip it as if there was no prior discussion about it.

[Exail]

As a player I’d prefer the DM to collaborate with me and change things in my backstory so it better fits their world and the story.

[panda]

I made the mistake of forcing backstories on all of my players in my first campaign. It was fun for those that enjoyed the extra role play but was just a chore for my players that just wanted to roll dice and not really be the center of any sort of attention. For the second campaign, I told my players that if they wanted to have a backstory, they could and that I would incorporate it into the story, but if they didn't want to have a backstory they could just give me a reason they would be looking to join in on an adventure. It went much smoother than the first campaign and was--in general--a lot more fun all around.

[Rajaat]

As a DM, my favorite backstories are bullet pointed.

Edit: Reasons: 1. I don't have time to read a novella for every character in my group. 2. It's easy to reference.

[MrEcae]

5:30 This is a tough example in particular because languages in D&D are so varied in usage between DMs. Sometimes a character will be an expert in Abyssal, for example, and that will simply never come up in a campaign unless the DM specifically makes it so. If the DM decides to put an obscure language the character knows in front of them, then its basically the same thing as the character deciding they know the language on the spot (with suspension of disbelief *potentially* making it seem more plausible). Allowing players to use their toys feels good for everyone and helps the campaign flow, which is why its generally a good idea to look at your players' characters to see what skills/languages/spells they have and build encounters with those in mind.

That being said, the difference between the DM deciding what language is relevant and the players deciding is a matter of agency. In my games I let players leave language choices unpicked until they decide, in the moment, where their character picked up a certain language. If they encounter something in the world that is written in Draconic, a player with an unpicked language can declare they know Draconic so long as they can plausibly explain HOW and WHY they learned it. This encourages the players to be more engaged with the secondary world, acting like DMs for a minute to do some on the fly worldbuilding for their character. Not only do players LIKE being empowered in this way, it prevents the forward motion of the game from being slowed or halted by a silly thing like not knowing a language. Obviously if the language is an obscure dialect of Primordial only known to a few scholars in the world it would NOT be plausible that a character could have learned said language; they wouldn't be able to use their language pick that way. But for the most part allowing players to unlock content is a GOOD thing and encourages engagement whereas putting barriers between players and content is sometimes frustrating. There's nuance here with pacing and narrative structure that requires careful mediation by the DM to maintain the integrity of their game, but I've had positive responses to letting players have a greater amount of control over my games (makes it easier for me to run as well).

[XDFFBXD]

I think one thing that I'm taking away from this is that players should intentionally leave holes in their backstories. As one quick example, my current PC got in trouble with the town and was kicked out of it. A few days later he snuck back in and discovered that his sister got some mysterious illness, that he ASSUMES was related to the event that got him kicked out. He then leaves to become an adventurer to try to find some money to pay for a cure or find a cure. By not saying the source the DM is free to make the real cause for his sister's issue to be whatever it wants and not have it contradict anything in the backstory.

[laner.]

My first GM helped me come up with a short back story outline so he would have the relevant details he needed, then told me to go ham and write that 37 page backstory for me to get to know my character and get in her head. It was a really good compromise for a new player who loved writing. I was joining a pre-existing campaign, so I came in as a level 4 and he helped me work in how I was already proficient at some things.

[timberwolf]

I have tried so many times to include the charecters backstories and they did not care at all. Most of the problem is that they wont come up with specifics. Say they fell in love with someone in their backstory, they WILL NOT come up with who that person was. Makes it nearly impossible to include backstories without taking control of them which is something i dont want to do. Some of them are starting to come around after seeing me make backstories, so maybe there is hope

[samuelhagberg]

My view on PC backstories is that, though you can play and have fun without them, they heavily enhance the game and your enjoyment of it.

[FunLovingPotato]

"Sit down, shut up, and listen to your mother!"

Gold.

[christiantaylor]

3:25 Guy... I don't know the details but I understand your pain so well.

[ilpregno]

I couldn't keep watching your videos in the last months, I come back to this one and the first thing I thought is "who the hell did make Guy angry?!?!" :D
I just feel this video comes from a specific event happened in the past days.
Anyway, months have passed but your videos are still great. Hope you're doing well, keep going!

[MegaMawileTheNommer]

I get the desire of a one page backstory, a summary, but then you go on to punish that player for not including a specific detail in that one page summary. I have to say, that seems very absolute of an attitude and ignores different play styles, GMing styles, etc.

For example, our group does longer backstories, and tapers them to match our level. We create cliffnotes for easy reference for the GM. Remember, there is often not a bad player, just often a bad fit for the group.

[boris]

played a game of D+D we were in a cave and the thief (the DM's Wife) climbed up a ledge with a rope and hook the dm asked her do you leave the rope hanging or pull it up again? she pulls it up. got attacked by spiders paralyzed and killed. Of course none of us could climb up to save her and without the rope can't reach the exit. DM days well there is no food or water in cave so you all wonder aimlessly till you starve to death. My fighter did not even get 1 attack in the whole module. I Never went back